Does Chicagoland's huge population kill democracy for downstate IL? (Peoria: construction, live in)

[edsg25]

MOD EDIT: RUDE AND OFF TOPIC


I have no answers for how to fix the structure of the state of Illinois, but I know that that structure, through no evil force, has become exceedingly undemocratic. Demographics did that.

And I don't know what you or others may be looking at, but this nation of ours, basically on life support, has become a train wreck. It doesn't work. And keeping structures in place, like the structure of our state which began in the early 19th century, just for the sake of "we've always done it that way" won't work.

Yes, we all like to see the familiar and comfortable continue. It's built into our DNA. But it doesn't work as change is constant.

Very little works in America today. Certainly not the government. The US Senate is the most insanely undemocratically structured legislative body in the world. Because in 1787 when the Constitution was written, a mere decade after the Revolution, the Senate was included to placate smaller states because those state still saw themselves as "Delaware" or "New Hampshire" or "Georgia" far more than as the USA which was a mere 10 years old.

But we don't organize ourselves by states today. Their borders have no relationship to real politics or cultural or economic interests. And 35,000,000 million Californians having two senators and 600,000 or so North Dakatans having two makes no sense and is a slap in the face of democratic rule.

And there are consequences. You may be for or against health care reform. Nobody has a monopoly on the right answers. But the structure of the US Senate changes the dynamics of this critical issue immeasureably. Support in many of our smaller states in regions like the south, the great plains, and the mountain west, are given an amplified voice in this debate, far greater than their numbers deserve. These are frequently the states most heavily opposed to health care reform, something that in polls taken from when the issue once again got on the table during the 08 campaign showed the vast majority of Americans want reform. And these states, due to their small size, are the ones that lobbyists and the corporations can so easily put their money into the candidates who they want in office....a North Dakota senatorial campaign costs a mere fraction of a California one. ND gives bang to the buck. And urbanized black or hispanic America is given little voice in North Dakota with a demogrpahic, like so many other small states, that does not reflect the composition of this nation.

Nothing is going to stay the same just because we want it, too. The Soviet Union fell apart, to everybody's surprise, because it simply didn't work. Without reform, the US is lot long for the world; the age of "surpises" is over. It may not be anyway due to its unmanageably large size and the radical changes we are and are going to experience in this new century, a transformational era if eve there was one. The old concept of nation state is weakening because it cannot get the job done.

Simply put, the glue is coming off of American connectiveness. Watch the news or more aptly the news battles every night and it would be hard to be convinced otherwise.

If you think we have a ghost of a prayer of surviving united without reform, you are dillusional. As America withers and dies on the vine nationally, take a look at what happens within its regions:

Miami & South Florida pull to the Carribean and the rest of Latin America beyond. the Mexican border from California to Texas on both sides is an economic and cultural region of its own, not Mexcian or American but a Mexam or Ammex hyred. Oregon and Washington with their strong stand on environmental issues share far more with British Colombia than they do with much of the US. Seattle-Vancouver is a unit; Seattle unites with Miami in nothing but an artifical idea. California is a nation state, it's a cultural and economic powerhouse that is built on ties to Latin America and the Pacific Rim, Asia writ large, that is so much a part of its sphere. The Golden State has already pulled away from the US in significant ways and its constant quest for innovation makes it one its own a major player in what the 21st century will look like. New England has been going its own way for decades, totally disconnected from the cultural wars in America today, far more thinking like Europe than Alabama. The mountain west is ruggedly individualist and uncomfortable with the rules of a nation far more densely populated than it is where economy and technology brings in a governmental role not to their liking. The Great Plains wither and die, feeling a little part of the US that surrounds them and virtually doesn't know they exist. The Great Lakes states share a commonality with the nation that lies across from four of those lakes that it doesn't share with other sections of America itself.

And megacities like New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles are entities on their own. Their playing field is global and they relate more to the major players on that stage...the global cities that ring the world...than they do with their own country or state. Chicago has more in common with London and more dealings with it than it does with southern Illinois.

None of the above is going keep us joined at the hip of what a small group of white rich men created during a hot Philadelphia summer well over two centuries back...no matter how good that document may have been and, in some regards, still very much is today.

I'm not advocating here. If you want a US to continue as it has or a state of Illinois to have today's structure, that's your business. Just don't kid yourself about it working. It won't. Powers far beyond our control and which don't come from people making a conscious decision to change overpowers us. Trends and the conditons that generate them are not the province of human decison making. They organically have a life of their own.


[mod cut]

[doll lady]

I will add that I am a downstater. I think that downstate Illinois is very well represented and I seriously doubt that we lose out on much except for road maintenance in downstate. Our highways are always in more disrepair than in Chicagoland. But as one poster said....we take care of ourselves. But, our needs are different than those of Chicago.

I guess you could say we are a more laid back group. Analyzing a downstater may be a subjective experience. We are a hard bunch to categorize because there are different ways of life from the top of the downstate line to the bottom of the state. But I bet each of us could survive a crisis and most could do without a lot of things because that's the way we're made.

For a lot of people down here, going to a high school basketball or baseball game and eating a ballpark hot dog with no trimmings will take precedence over a night out at a fancy restaurant. I personally don't like the commuting and the high volume of day in and day out traffic in Chicagoland. I like to smell the earth and the corn fields and watch nature every day of my life. We have fewer highways and asphalt roads. I think it's hard to grow plants in asphalt.

[Maintainschaos]

Originally Posted by edsg25

It's just in the case of Illinois, the inequality is far more glaring than most as downstate literally has no voice in what happens in the state. If Illinois were a nation and not a state, it would not last: downstate...or is it downnation...would pull out.

I'm not talking about Chicagoland losing power. In fact, if downstate were to becomes its own state, Chicagoland wouldn't lose a thing.

Look at it this way: much of Iowa is like downstate IL but it has a real voice on its concerns with its state government. much of Indiana is also like downstate IL, even more so than Iowa, but it, too, has a strong voice in state politics since Indy does not control its state like Chicago does its.

I'm not trying to belabor a point here. I would be interested in knowing if downstaters themselves feel their needs are poorly addressed due to Illinois demographics. Or maybe they are not. That's possible, too.

I'm hoping some people from downstate who know would respond....even if it is to tell me I'm way off base and their representation creates no problems.

I am originally from downstate IL (specifically Peoria and Spfld), and I agree that the politics of the state are dominated by Chicago, but I still say it's rightfully so. Maybe I didn't feel so jipped by it because my political views tend to fall in the same direction that Cook county votes. But I would argue that 1) again this situation is NOT unique to IL (think MA, WA, GA, OR, MI, IN, NY, etc...) and 2) I do think that Chicago would lose out if downstate were separated, as the rest of the state holds the vast majority of agricultural and natural resources (sans the lakefront).

In short, I never saw it as a problem, because I was never politically polarized in a separate direction than Chicago proper (note: not necessarily the suburbs).

[04JETTA]

Originally Posted by Maintainschaos

The entire rest of the state isn't red, and this situation isn't unique to IL. There are many other states (Georgia, New York, Washington, Michigan, etc.) where the same situation exists. In any event, it would be nice if Chicagoland were more aware of other parts of the state, but if Chicago existed anywhere else in the state, it would be the same old song and dance. Personally, I think IL is lucky to have Chicago, and Chicago is lucky to have the rest of IL.

Couldn't have said it better myself

[Manigault]

Originally Posted by doll lady

I will add that I am a downstater. I think that downstate Illinois is very well represented and I seriously doubt that we lose out on much except for road maintenance in downstate. Our highways are always in more disrepair than in Chicagoland. But as one poster said....we take care of ourselves. But, our needs are different than those of Chicago.

It is noted that rural states receive more in tax benefits than they cough up in tax revenue. The same could be said for our compatriots in the more rural sections of the state of Illinois. Isn't about 75% of the population north of I-80?

As to if the situation is unfair, let everyone in IL take a vote!

[Lookout Kid]

The State Sentate, with it's fixed number of senators per district, actually gives downstate residents a larger measure of representation in state government than their proportion of the population (much the same way that Wyoming has a larger representation in Congress per capita than California). Chicagoans are actually the ones who should be complaining about their reduced level of representation per resident.

[doll lady]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

The State Sentate, with it's fixed number of senators per district, actually gives downstate residents a larger measure of representation in state government than their proportion of the population (much the same way that Wyoming has a larger representation in Congress per capita than California). Chicagoans are actually the ones who should be complaining about their reduced level of representation per resident.

Shhhhhhh don't tell anyone!

[linicx]

Before statehood the greatest portion of Illinois Country was in Fulton County. The first State Capitol was in Vandalia. It would still be there if were not for the lobbying of a circuit rider named Abraham Lincoln.

Illinois is a farming state. It is the number two corn producer behind iowa. It is also a large prodcer of soybeans, popcorn and pumkins in 1000+ acre fields. It leaves little room for suburbs.

Peoria is the oldest settlement on the Illinois River. The MSA is third largest behind Chicago and East St. Louis. There are only four pockets of 50.000 -150,000 population downstate: Peoria, Bloomington, Springfielld and Champaign. And in the middle between Chicago and the Confluence there are many beautiful state parks and nature preserves including a 200,000 acre area called the Illinois Ozarks and the next developing wetlands that will rival the Everglades.

There has been more than on food fight over the diversity of the north and south. All state income tax money goes to Springfield before it is dispersed. If you want Chicago and downstate to ever agree, then you need to get people in Chciago to investigate the rest of the state.

Illinois is not like any other state. The sooner people figure it out, the sooner the state will unify.





.

[Avengerfire]

Originally Posted by Avengerfire

Oh god not again.

Have we not done this whole discussion before???

This is why I said oh god not again:

http://www.city-data.com/forum/chica...g-chicago.html

http://www.city-data.com/forum/illin...inois-2-a.html

[aus10]

Originally Posted by Maintainschaos

I am originally from downstate IL (specifically Peoria and Spfld),

Forgive me... this whole topic, while interesting, is a mute point till everyone in the state can finally figure out just where downstate is. I grew up in the northern most part of Little Egypt, and hardly consider Peoria and Springfield downstate. Peoria to me is north, and Springfield North Central. I always thought that downstate was south of Hwy 50 or I-64.