By Kevin Lee   Illinois Statehouse News

SPRINGFIELD  — Lawmakers are preparing for a contentious debate on a hot-button issue that could last the remainder of the legislative session.

The state is scheduled to redraw its legislative districts in 2011. The process – known as redistricting – occurs every ten years and relies on data collected through the federal census the year before.

But the current redistricting procedure has been encumbered by drawn-out partisan battles, legal challenges, and arbitrary draws from a hat.

This session, Democratic and Republican lawmakers have introduced five proposed Constitutional Amendments that would change the redistricting process.

Proposals from both parties share a number of planned changes, such as the de-coupling of Senate and House districts and the establishment of public hearings on redistricting.

But lawmakers are locked in a partisan conflict over who ultimately decides how the state's legislative map is drawn.

The lone Democrat-backed proposal sponsored by state Sen. Kwame Raoul, D-Chicago, would allow lawmakers several attempts to redraw the map.

If initial efforts to redraw a map fail, each legislative chamber could try and pass its own district map, without needing approval from the governor.

A Special Master would be appointed by the state's Supreme Court to finalize a map, in the case of a drawn-out deadlock. But if the Master cannot complete the task or if there are legal challenges involved, lawmakers would still have the final say on a legislative map.

Eric Madiar, Senate President John Cullerton's top lawyer, called the scenario of using lawmakers as a last-ditch option "remote."

"I would imagine that the person, any person that the Court would pick as the Special Master would get the job done by October 5," he said.

Top Republicans claim Raoul's proposal gives lawmakers too much influence on the redistricting process.

In past redistricting attempts, lawmakers have failed to agree on a map, leading to the state Supreme Court stepping in and picking a name out of a hat to help break a partisan deadlock.

Senate Republican leader Christine Radogno, R-Lemont, criticized the Raoul plan.

“By allowing legislators to continue to draw their own districts, this proposal violates the first basic principle of reform. The new Senate Democrat proposal continues the current practice in Illinois that allows politicians to pick their voters instead of the other way around. It’s a practice that allows friends to be rewarded, enemies to be punished and voters to be short-changed," she said in a statement.

A proposal sponsored by Radogno would have a redistricting commission, appointed by legislative leaders from both parties and chambers, to have first shot at drawing the districts.

Commission members cannot be lawmakers and cannot run for a legislative office for ten years after the commission completes its work.

Lawmakers would get to vote on any plans approved by the commission.

Much like Raoul's plan, a Special Master appointed by the state Supreme Court would provide a finalized map if any deadlocks occurred.

But unlike the Raoul plan, Radogno's proposal does not allow lawmakers to re-enter the redistricting process once a Special Master has been appointed.

Eric Madiar, legal counsel for Senate President Cullerton, said the process of forming a commission was not realistic.

The Republican plan would require a majority of the eight members to select a ninth person to serve as chair, which Madiar said could halt the process entirely because of partisan interests.

"The likelihood that they'll pick a ninth member is not going to happen, I feel very confident about that," he said. "So what you end up…having is a redistricting commission that…will not be independent by any stretch of the imagination, and (they) won't be able to draw a map because there will not be any agreement."

But Mark Gordon, a spokesman with the Senate Republicans, said a commission of non-legislators would provide a fairer legislative map.

"That's really the fatal flaw, that's the thing that you're going to see time and time again. This issue of: Is it done by an independent commission that takes it out of the hands of the politicians, or do the politicians get to pick their own voters and draw their own district lines?" he said.

Another Republican plan would follow the Iowa redistricting process, which relies on a computer system to formulate a legislative map. Lawmakers would then vote on the computer-created plan.

On Monday, a state Senate redistricting committee, headed by Raoul, will consider Raoul's and Republicans' redistricting proposals.

Mark Gordon, a spokesman for the Senate Republicans, feared that the Democratically-led committee would dismiss Radogno's proposal by a party vote.

"That is a nonpartisan, fair map proposal. It's pretty clear I think what you're seeing here is that the Democrats intend to kill it. It's unfortunate but that's what they intend to do," he said.

A redistricting proposal, if passed, would amend the state's Constitution. In order to pass, a proposed Constitutional Amendment would require extraordinary majorities in both legislative chambers as well as voter approval in November's general election.

The proposals state senators will discuss on Monday:

Senate Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment 14: http://bit.ly/SJRCA14

Sponsored by Republican state Senator Chris Lauzen, R-Aurora, the proposal would use a computer program to redraw the legislative map every ten years. T

he computer program's map would have the force of law and would not be contingent on approval from lawmakers or the governor.

Senate Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment 69: http://bit.ly/SJRCA69

Sponsored by state Senator Dale Righter, R-Mattoon, the proposal would have the four legislative leaders appoint one individual to a redistricting commission, and a majority of the commission would choose a fifth individual as the commission's chairman.

Four out of five members would have to approve of any redistricting plan to pass on to a legislative chamber for approval.

Each chamber would need a two-thirds vote to approve of a plan.

The state Supreme Court could approve of a plan by a two-thirds vote if the commission and lawmakers cannot come to an agreement.

Senate Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment 96: http://bit.ly/SJRCA96

Sponsored by state Senator and gubernatorial candidate Bill Brady, R-Bloomington, this proposal is similar to SJRCA14 in that a computer program would redraw the legislative map every ten years, and the map would have the force of law.

Senate Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment 104: http://bit.ly/SJRCA104

Sponsored by senate Republican Leader Christine Radogno, R-Lemont, the proposal, dubbed the Fair Map Amendment, would have the four legislative leaders appoint two individuals to a redistricting commission, and a majority of the commission would choose a ninth individual as the commission's chairman.

A majority of members would have to approve of any redistricting plan to pass on to a legislative chamber for approval.

Each chamber would need a two-thirds vote to approve of a plan.

If a chamber could not agree on a plan, two members of the state Supreme Court, one from each party, would select a Special Master, who would finalize a map for that chamber.

Senate Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment 121: http://bit.ly/SJRCA121

Sponsored by state Senator Kwame Raoul, D-Chciago, the proposal, dubbed the Citizens First Amendment, would have lawmakers pass a map plan that redistricts districts for both chambers.

Much like the typical legislative process, if lawmakers in both chambers pass a plan by simple majority and the governor signs, the plan becomes law.

If lawmakers cannot pass a plan, then each chamber can embark on its own redistricting process, where a three-fifths majority is needed.

By a certain deadline, if a chamber has not finalized a plan, a commission for the chamber must be created to formulate and vote on a map.

If a commission could not agree on a plan, two members of the state Supreme Court, one from each party, would select a Special Master, who would finalize a map for that chamber.

In the case that the Special Master does not meet a deadline or a legal conflict ensues, the General Assembly would retake control of the redistricting process.