Sen. Sue Rezin isn’t the only GOP lawmaker crying foul over take two of the Democrats' redrawn version of legislative maps. | Facebook
Sen. Sue Rezin isn’t the only GOP lawmaker crying foul over take two of the Democrats' redrawn version of legislative maps. | Facebook
Republican state Sen. Sue Rezin wants voters to be clear about Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s role in shaping state politics.
“It’s not déjà vu you’re having,” Rezin recently posted on Twitter. “Gov. Pritzker did sign politician-drawn legislative maps. He has now broken his promise to the people of Illinois twice.”
Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed new legislative district maps on Sept. 24, and these are a second attempt, MyStateLine.com reported. A previous version passed earlier this year led to legal challenges from Republicans and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, claiming the maps were unconstitutional because they were based on numbers from the American Community Survey rather than the 2020 census, which had been delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic.
By moving ahead before official numbers were released, the Democratic majority retained control of the process rather than risk a bipartisan committee taking over.
Rezin isn’t the only GOP lawmaker crying foul over take two of the Democrats' redrawn version of legislative maps, with state Rep. Jackie Haas (R-Kankakee) also deriding the 'sham' process early in September.
"Instead of shifting responsibility to a bipartisan commission, Democrats have fallen back on the same disingenuous process that produced the initial flawed maps last spring that now need to be re-done,” she posted on Facebook. “Hearings were held that were nothing short of a sham, a disingenuous effort that was intended to merely check a box, not to collect any real input from community groups on what the new map should look like.”
Republican state Rep. Jeff Keicher has also taken exception to the process.
"Politicians should not be drawing maps. Period," he said, according to the DeKalb County Times, following a scathing Facebook post in which he asked, "If there was no issue with the map viability...why the revision???"