Article

2011-11-23 Home Front: Politix

2 GOP legislators propose separating Cook County from Illinois

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2011-11-23 09:08|| || Front Page|| [11129 views ] Top

#1 Why not make it a Federal District, like Washington?

Posted by Pappy 2011-11-23 11:48|| 2011-11-23 11:48|| Front Page Top

#2 ...Or put a fence around it and declare it a lawless entity such as the northwest of Pakistain. Perhaps use drones on it.

Posted by JohnQC 2011-11-23 12:25|| 2011-11-23 12:25|| Front Page Top

#3 That's actually something of a better idea. Make Cook county an "autonomous county" within Illinois, so it has "self rule", and is no longer part of Illinois politics.

They can offer them a deal. No more State taxes or regulations, in exchange for no more State money or control.

It would probably be a success as these things go, and could give several other states ideas.

Posted by Anonymoose 2011-11-23 12:25|| 2011-11-23 12:25|| Front Page Top

#4 We already have a 'home rule' provision in the Illinois constitution. That's how Chicago and a couple other big cities get away with what they do.

Posted by Steve White 2011-11-23 12:52|| 2011-11-23 12:52|| Front Page Top

#5 Even better, because it just means modifying an existing situation to cut Cook county out of the loop. Basically saying that, "Since you rule yourself, rule yourself. Not us."

Posted by Anonymoose 2011-11-23 12:58|| 2011-11-23 12:58|| Front Page Top

#6 I like the NW Pakistain approach. Making it a state gaurantees 2 more senators and at least 1 congressman for the Dems and they don't even have to pretend to be honest.

Posted by AlanC 2011-11-23 12:59|| 2011-11-23 12:59|| Front Page Top

#7 Or put a fence around it and declare it a lawless entity such as the northwest of Pakistain

The Chicagoland Tribal Territories?

Posted by Rob Crawford 2011-11-23 14:45|| 2011-11-23 14:45|| Front Page Top

#8 Caponestan?

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2011-11-23 16:11|| 2011-11-23 16:11|| Front Page Top

#9 Really no need to go that far. There are some other things that can be done to dilute the skewed impact of a large metro in a state:

1. Eliminate winner take all primaries and divide delegates according to their percentage of the vote in the state. That allows candidates favored by rural areas to collect some delegates and prevents the candidate favored by the primary metro from carrying the entire state.

2. Change the way presidential electoral votes are distributed. You get two electoral votes for the candidate that carries the statewide majority (corresponding to the two electoral votes representing the at large Senate seats held by a state) and one electoral vote per US House district carried by a candidate. That way rural districts can see electoral votes go to their candidate. I believe Pennsylvania was contemplating such a system, don't know if they enacted it. It would also make the electoral vote system more closely match the popular vote and make it much more difficult for a candidate to win the popular vote but lose the electoral vote.

Posted by crosspatch 2011-11-23 16:26|| 2011-11-23 16:26|| Front Page Top

23:31 DarthVader
23:02 Anguper Hupomosing9418
23:00 Anguper Hupomosing9418
22:42 Frank G
22:41 Frank G
22:39 Frank G
22:24 Warthog
22:17 OldSpook
22:06 SteveS
21:59 Lionel Hatrack3498
21:13 Creregum Glolump8403
20:17 Procopius2k
20:17 Fred
20:15 Procopius2k
20:09 SteveS
20:04 Nimble Spemble
20:01 SteveS
19:37 USN, Ret.
19:28 USN, Ret.
19:24 USN, Ret.
19:16 newc
19:14 newc
18:44 Ebbang Uluque6305
18:38 Anguper Hupomosing9418