The Case for Independent Redistricting: Academics Weigh In
In an op-ed in the April 6 Chicago Tribune, three University of Illinois at Chicago professors made a strong case for taking Chicago ward redistricting out of the hands of politicians. In the past, maps drawn by the City Council were the norm.
“The backroom division of the city’s neighborhoods doesn’t just make for ugly maps tilted toward incumbents, it also makes for a worse city,” wrote Chris Kanich, professor of computer science; Dick Simpson, professor of political science and a former Chicago alderman; and Kathleen Yang-Clayton, professor of public administration and research fellow at the Great Cities Institute.
“For anyone who has seen the current ward map of Chicago, it is hard to believe that it was drawn to benefit the residents of Chicago,” they continued. “While it was technically legal, it kept power bases of clouted incumbents within their wards, thus maximizing their chances of reelection.”
Chicago must redraw the boundaries of its 50 wards every decade to conform to federal census results. Data from the 2020 US Census are expected later this year.
The authors came out in support of the Chicago Advisory Redistricting Committee created by good-government groups to design an alternate map. Map proposals that get the support of at least 10 aldermen will be put before voters in spring 2022, and voters’ decision will be final.
“We can’t let this once-in-a-decade opportunity slip through our fingers,” the UIC professors concluded.
Among the points made in the op-ed:
Redistricting is the most important political event of the decade because it shapes the political fates of every alderman and every community.
The conversation about gerrymandering is different in one-party Chicago than in congressional districts and states where it revolves around both major parties. In Chicago, “it is between the body of 50 incumbents and the 2.7 million Chicagoans who just want fair representation.”
The consequences of gerrymandering are not only political. When communities are split, it is difficult to coordinate efforts to deal with gang violence and other problems. In Little Village, for example, the eastern section, which is split among three wards, has a far higher crime rate than the western section that is represented by a single alderman.
Although changing who gets elected won’t change the “winner-take-all system in a one-party city,” it can be “a crucial first step” toward achieving “a 21st-century government that punishes graft and corruption and elevates innovation and inclusion.”