The Putback amendment is comprehensive and so I did three separate posts on it. It includes a mechanism to allow the rank and file within the legislature to get their bills to the floor. With this amendment, any legislator would need to get 25 legislators to sign off on a discharge petition and that would get any bill onto the floor. Currently, it only goes through the rules committee and the rules committee is manned by the leadership. It also removes so called “shell bills” which are blank bills that filter through the legislature and allow the legislature to write the meat and bones in private and quickly have it voted on.

The amendment also has language that helps with ballot access. It limits challenges to those that are rooted in fraud and/or deception or ineligibility. It also allows for a more transparent and open process for redistricting. (That’s only the beginning of course so please visit the links for a comprehensive analysis of the amendment)

Over the last month or so, another amendment has been introduced to the public to compete with the Putback amendment. It’s called the Fair Map amendment. The first major difference is that this amendment only deals with the question of redistricting. Currently, the way the law is structured is this: First, a bill has to come out of both chambers and survive a gubernatorial veto. In each time, the Democrats controlled one and the Republicans the other, so that’s never happened. Next, the leadership each pick four people from each party. Then, five of those eight have to agree on a map. Of course, if there’s 4 partisan Republicans and four partisan Democrats on said committee, the chances are slim that any such agreement will be formed. In fact, it’s never happened. The third step is to pick either Democrat or Republican out of a hat (Lincoln’s hat, by the way) and have their map enacted.

The Illinois Fair Map amendment changes this process slightly. The leadership would still have to pick four people, but now they can’t be legislators, staff, lobbyists, etc. Furthermore, the committe must choose a ninth person up front. The map must be drawn based on specific criterion, something the Putback amendment also requires, so that partisanship is eliminated.

According to Bambenek, the first problem here is that this amendment wouldn’t pass constitutional muster. Any amendment to the State of Illinois’ constitution must contain two different things: a structural change and a procedural change. In the Putback amendment, a structural change is that the bicameral legislature becomes unicameral. A procedural change is that now a legislator can bring their bill to the floor with 25 votes in a discharge petition.

The Illinois Fair Map amendment only has a procedural change. There is no structural change. So, according to Bambenek, this won’t survive constitutional muster. Yet, the Fair Map amendment, only a month old, is the one receiving all the attention. The Chicago Sun Times has already given it their seal of approval.

Illinois voters, prep your John Hancocks. Citizen petitions began circulating Thursday to fix the perverse way Illinois draws its state legislative districts — a way that stacks the deck in elections in favor of incumbents.

Don’t be shy about signing on the dotted line.

The goal is 500,000 signatures by April, enough to put a constitutional amendment on the November ballot asking voters if they want to strip from legislators the power to draw legislative districts and give that power to an independent, bipartisan commission. Nine other states already do it this way.

The  Tribune is probably not far behind. What has the Sun Times said about the Putback amendment? Nothing and ditto for the Tribune. In fact, there’s been scant reporting of the Putback amendment in any of the Chicago media. Bambenek held a press conference in Chicago’s posh Union League Club and the only member of the Chicago media to show was the local Fox affiliate and they didn’t even use the footage in a broadcast.

That almost certainly has everything to do with who’s backing each of the two amendments. The Fair Map amendment is backed by Tom Cross, Illinois House Republican leader, and it’s being helped by the powerful and respected New York law firm, the Brennan Group. That gives the Fair Map amendment credibility the Putback amendment doesn’t have. After all, John Bambenek, the leader of the Putback amendment, is a relative political unknown.

In fact, in the establishment, the issue of constitutionality is dismissed. After all, a respected law firm like the Brennan Group would never get something like that wrong. So, it appears that the Putback V Fair Map amendment will wind up much like everything else here in Illinois politically, the establishment versus the outsiders.

By its design, the legislature in Springfield consolidates all power in the hands of four people: Tom Cross, Christine Radogno, Mike Madigan and John Cullerton. Those are the Republican and Democratic leaders in the House and Senate. Power is consolidated through the process by which bills see the light of day. In the Illinois legislature, there’s only one way for a bill to be heard and debated: the rules committee. Not surprisingly, each of those four folks are head of the rules committee for their side in the House and Senate. As such, the head of the two rules committees have carte blanche over what bills will and won’t see the light of day. So, if any legislator wants their bill to get a hearing in the House, Michael Madigan must approve. You can see how such a process could corrupt, and does.

Second, there’s absolutely no transparency. At the beginning of each legislative session, the legislature is allowed to pass any number of “shell bills.” These are bills that literally are blank, or shells. Then, when leadership, Madigan et al, feel it’s time for that bill to become law, they go into a backroom somewhere, negotiate, and come out with a full bill. They wait no more than 24 hours and force a vote. Even if a legislator wanted to read the bill, they wouldn’t have time. So, bills become law and then media scrutinizes them and leaks all sorts of embarrassing details, only by then it’s still law. We’re seeing a similar process playing out in the current national health care legislative process.

This process played out to a “T” in the campaign finance reform legislation. After Blago’s indictment, public pressure was so extreme that Madigan et al’s hands were forced. They brought a campaign finance reform bill to the floor. Then, at the last minute, they went into a back room, cut a weak compromise, and took a watered down version to the floor. This should have come to no one’s surprise. The four people in charge are the main beneficiaries of the current campaign finance structure and they are the ones in charge of “reforming it”.

This process also played out in Emil Jones’ last term. (he was head of the Senate until this latest term) He was allied with Blago. Meanwhile, Madigan opposed Blago. As such, legislation literally came to a halt. All Blago proposed bills were killed in the House and all Blago opposed bills were killed in the Senate. So, nothing got done.

The problem of course was that the power struggles of three pols played out for the entire legislature. That’s because the power of the legislature is centered in only four people.

So, what’s the solution? Illinois activis, John Bambenek, has proposed the Putback Amendment. Here’s what the amendment would do. First, it would create a unicamarel legislature. Each district would be represented by three Representatives. There would still be primaries but a minimum of two candidates would come out for each party. Second, it would impose a term limit of four terms. Each term would last two years. It also eliminates the “shell bill” process and forces only texted bills to the floor. Beyond this, it would create a discharge petition process. If leadership refuses to give a bill a proper viewing, the sponsor can get 25 of 177 legislators to sign a discharge petition and this would force said bill to the floor. Finally, it would create a mandatory seven day period between when a final bill is finalized and voted upon. That way the public would have time to digest it and embarrassing details would come out before it passed not after.

Currently, Bambenek is collecting signatures. He needs 500,000 by May to get the amendment on the ballot in November. If it’s on the ballot, it would either need 50.1% of all the voters or 60% of those that vote on the amendment. Typically, far fewer people vote on amendments than vote in total.

Citizens can in fact add amendments to the Illinois constitution as long as they are “structural and/or procedural” in nature. Because that’s a vague description, all potential amendments wind up in front of the Illinois Supreme Court. In fact, only six such amendments have been attempted in history and five have been ruled unconstitutional and never passed that stage.

Beyond having its constitutionality challenged, Bambenek expects the validity of each and every signature challenged. There are 102 counties and 110 voting jurisdictions in Illinois. As such, the amendment could be challenged in the Illinois Supreme Court and in 110 separate election jurisdictions all simultaneously. If it happens to pass, but passes in a close vote, you can also bet that a vote recount will be requested. All of this will have to adjudicated as well.

The Illinois political machine is the one to challenge this amendment and it will be the machine and its lawyers that will challenge each and every phase of the amendment though Bambenek tells me he’s prepared for each and every litigation phase.

Here’s the full text of the bill.