Once again, the Tribune Editorial Board has urged Illinois Democrats to engage in unilateral disarmament by changing district boundaries to give Republicans more representation in the Illinois General Assembly and in Congress (“Illinois Supreme Court, it’s time — finally — to act on gerrymandering,” March 5). Meanwhile, Republicans in Texas, North Carolina, Ohio, Iowa and other jurisdictions controlled by Republicans go their merry way, gerrymandering to minimize Democratic representation and maximize Republicans’.
The problem won’t be solved until Congress and/or the U.S. Supreme Court finally require all states, not just Illinois, to fairly draw legislative boundaries. It’s really an equal representation problem.
It won’t change until Congress or the Supreme Court makes it change.
— Frank L. Schneider, Chicago
Why single out Illinois?
Although I agree that gerrymandering is an insult to the citizens of Illinois whose votes are being diluted, why does the Tribune Editorial Board single out our state when gerrymandering in other states is far worse?
The answer to the problem is a federal law that stops this practice, so that other states with Republican majorities cannot disenfranchise their Democratic citizens just as unfairly.
— Burton Pinchuk, Naperville
Op-ed is hypocritical
The hypocrisy of the Feb. 27 op-ed by Ray LaHood and Jim Nowlan is staggering (“Extreme gerrymandering as bad as old white-only primaries”). The tirade about gerrymandering in Illinois boggles the mind when it is being done on an epic level in many red states across the nation as well as through voter suppression actions.
What happens in Illinois if it changes and Republicans gain the majority? More gerrymandering in their favor? Undoubtedly.
I would suggest to LaHood and Nowlan that they get their Republican peers in legislatures across the nation to support eliminating the Electoral College and implement a simple one-person, one-vote process so the majority actually does win, but we know that won’t happen.
— Mary Peterson, Riverside
Change Electoral College
I’m in strong support of the bold statements offered by Ray LaHood and Jim Nowlan in their op-ed, in which they write: “Our old friend Barack Obama has declared that ‘we’ve got to end the practice of drawing our congressional districts so that politicians can pick their voters, and not the other way around. Let a bipartisan group do it.’”
This is a great idea, as long as it becomes a serious and enforced part of a federal law. Illinois is not the only state cheating like this.
But there’s not much hope of that happening as long as the current ruling “pseudo” party presides. It’s literally how the party plots to win crucial state Electoral College votes.
And while we’re changing gerrymandering rules at the federal level, let’s also look at getting rid of the Electoral College system. Folks have learned how to unscrupulously and effectively game that outdated system. It’s time to change that up too.
— Tim Warriner, Roscoe, Illinois
Only OK for GOP to do?
It was a certainly a joy to read Ray LaHood and Jim Nowlan’s op-ed about the gerrymandering of Illinois’ state House and congressional districts. I am looking forward to their condemnation of the gerrymandering occurring in West Virginia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Texas and North Carolina, among the most gerrymandered states in the country, as well as Salt Lake City, Utah, and Nashville, Tennessee.
If they truly believe Illinois should change to a fairer drawing of districts, they must also believe that these other states should do the same. Or is it just that Illinois is doing it on behalf of Democrats, but it is permissible for Republicans to do so?
— Kathleen Hernandez, Munster, Indiana
Housing ordinance flaws
While aiming to address the city’s housing affordability crisis, Chicago’s Northwest Side Preservation Ordinance is a misguided attempt that may ultimately harm the very communities it seeks to protect. This ordinance, which took effect on March 1, introduced an unrealistic opportunity for tenants to purchase their building when it is up for sale. This measure creates more problems than it solves.
The right of first refusal provision creates a period of up to nine months for tenants to contemplate the purchase of their building — delaying its sale on the open market. This measure directly harms people who have spent their lives building up equity in their building. When they need to sell — perhaps because of increased interest rates or property taxes — they will be delayed for months. We are already seeing prices in the affected area falling by as much as 25%. This measure depresses activity in the real estate market, potentially deterring investment in these neighborhoods and limiting the availability of affordable housing.
My company invests in and rehabilitates neglected buildings in order to provide better service, while keeping rents affordable. Not only does this measure stymie the creation of new housing, but it also will make it harder for folks like me to invest in the existing housing stock. Its unintended consequence will result in lower quality of existing affordable housing.
A critical flaw in the ordinance is its lack of clarity. Ambiguity creates a legal minefield for property owners, tenants and real estate professionals alike, potentially leading to increased litigation and market paralysis. Lenders and title companies indicate that they are wary of supporting transactions subject to this uncertainty — making it even harder to invest in the affected area.
The ordinance does nothing to address the root causes of housing affordability issues — which are overwhelmingly due to the simple need for more housing. Instead of engaging the people who already provide affordable housing to seek solutions, ordinances like this risk stifling the very neighborhoods it aims to protect by creating uncertainty, potentially reducing housing quality and discouraging investment.
Now that this ordinance is in effect, the city needs to work with housing providers on solutions that truly address Chicago’s housing challenges without undermining the real estate market or the rights of property owners and residents alike.
— Jeff Weinberg, president, Drexel Properties
Rahm Emanuel’s plans
An FYI to Rahm Emanuel: In politics, the goal is to move upward and forward from one office to the next, not backward.
If Emanuel is considering another run for mayor of Chicago, he should rethink his plans. Being the mayor proved to be Emanuel’s political undoing and his Waterloo — it banished him to Japan.
— Bruce R. Hovanec, Chicago
Will blame game work?
I found it ironic when former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel unloaded on the Democratic Party for the recent elections. Last time I checked, the former ambassador was and always has been a Democrat.
I wonder if Emanuel has a mirror handy. As the mayor of Chicago, he covered up one of the most despicable cases of police misconduct in recent memory: a video of a Chicago cop shooting Laquan McDonald 16 times. Emanuel wasn’t thinking about the Democratic Party when he did all he could to keep that video from being made public. He was thinking about himself and his reelection.
Deflecting blame and hoping voters have short memories are nothing new in politics, but Emanuel can only hope the blame game works for him.
— Bob Angone, retired Chicago police lieutenant, Austin, Texas
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.