Political Districting Update

I would like to thank everyone that has helped out over the past several weeks in getting signatures for the petition to district Winfield into six separate neighborhood voting areas.

Up until this point the petition has been brought door-to-door by people that have been selected because of their leadership rolls in their neighborhoods. We have one month to get as many signatures as possible and we need help. I would like to ask you, the concerned citizen of Winfield and reader of Winfield411.com to download the petition to your computer, print out a copy Winfield Ballot Initiative and walk around your neighborhood and get as many signatures as you possibly can.

Not only would additional signatures help our movement to bring FAIR REPRESENTATION to all parts of our village but it would also help the cause by starting very important dialogs and conversations about the desperate need for local representation among your neighbors. If you don’t feel comfortable in asking your neighbors for their signatures on their petitions, then please, just have a conversation with them if you see them out cutting their grass or tending their gardens. At the end of this month we are going to have a Barbeque and Ice Cream Social where you can turn in your signatures and have them notarized. Keep reading Winfield411.com for details.

Districting is probably the most important political change that can happen to this town. It will make for more accountable politicians and give you and your neighborhood a voice in village government.

If you have any questions or would like to get involved with a group that is walking the streets for signatures, please contact Tim Allen @ 630.344.9354 or email me at TimAllen57@gmail.com

Why I Like Districting

Editors Note: Readers were encouraged to briefly explain why they like ‘Districting.’ Following is a representative collection of the many fine responses we received.

Districting brings more power back to the people.

Districting allows the people to choose their own representatives — rather than the representatives choosing who gets to vote for them.

Districting is a step towards getting the responsibility for government into the control of the residents and its true public servants and out of the hands of the self-serving special interest.

There should be some representation for all people in town — not just the one group that could turn out the most votes.

Campaigns ought to be issue-driven by the residents and not money-driven to capture the most votes. We are becoming a monolithic tyranny of special interest.

Voter apathy stems from feeling unrepresented and that real change can’t happen. With Districting, voters will see the possibility of change.

Districting will encourage more people to become active voters and believe in the politicians because a range of views could be represented.

Districting gives everyone representation. It is representation based on issues and beliefs, not arcane geographic representation.

Districting allows everyone to participate in the political process, not just those with enough money and clout to sway voters.

Districting will encourage greater voter turn-out and in the long run our village will be closer to equal representation, for the people, meaning all the people.

Districting allows all members of the town to be fairly represented. A winner-take-all system, like we have now, will never produce a village board that is truly representative — politically or otherwise.

Districting offers all voters equal representation and a real stake in making Winfield succeed and is an essential step in building a sane Winfield where all are respected.

Districting would decrease the power of special interest political organizations, such as Winfield United. The voice of all resident would be heard.

Districting offers a pro-active and common sense solution to the ills that have plagued Winfield’s elections.

Districting can increase participation, not just in election, but in politics in general. It will increase the integrity of the political discourse. It is a real solution to past election bad blood.

When Districting is used, better qualified candidates run. Also better qualified candidates get elected.

The winner-take-all system guarantees that at least some and possibly 49% of the people go unrepresented. Districting forces the village board to be much more representative of the people.

Districting decreases the dominance of moneyed interests in our elections. It also gives a voice to committed residents who otherwise feel alienated, and thereby encourages more resident participation in village government.

Districting is a method of voting which most effectively reflects the wishes of the voters.

Districting gives me a chance to have a voice in village government and I know my vote will count — it’s a chance to choose the candidate I believe in rather than the lesser of two evils.

Districting is more democratic in that very few votes are wasted — all votes go to elect someone. It provides We the People with justice, not the status quo’s just us.

I like Districting  because it more adequately represents the needs and hopes of the people of the community. I feel wider representation would make for a more honest village government and a more flexible village government.

Districting will allow for political representation of areas which our presently excluded. Also, it will encourage voter participation among the majority of Winfield residents who presently feel they have no reason to vote.

Districting can help change the dynamics of electoral politics to concentrate on the issues as opposed to trivialities and mudslinging.

Districting makes it much more likely that most voters will have representatives who represent their most important interests. Many more people will vote, “Fat Cat” special interest will have much less influence over our community and public policies will meet the needs of many more people along with promoting the common good. We will be much more closer to having a village government of, by and for the people.

I would be represented in village government by a person that holds the same views as I do. It would be someone I could hold accountable on specific positions.

Districting allows the greatest number of people the best opportunity to elect a representative that best represents their views. The winner take all system is inherently unrepresentative because they exclude so many people from representation.

Districting can give every potential voter the hope that they can have some representation in village government.

Districting encourages voters to vote for candidates whose beliefs and values are like their own.

Districting allows everyone’s vote to really count for something meaningful.

Districting is the fairest method known under which people may vote. It unifies, rather than divides the electorate and it ensures a diverse leadership representative of all the people who vote. It encourages voting — the one thing which makes a community work.

The current system encourages an ignorant populace that can be easily manipulated by the best controller of their image.

Districting would allow for an election that allows more ideas to be represented as well as more sections of town. It is time for our village to consider an elections alternative that better represents all the people.

Fair Representation

51% of the Vote Should Not Mean 100% of the Power

A simple, winner-takes-all system seems so normal to us because it is what we are used to. Many cities and villages have moved to some system of proportional representation of representing voters. The reason they have moved to alternative election systems is because they have learned, the people want a greater voice in electing the representatives that affect their daily lives.

Our current election approach allocates power collectively across town. It fails to group people together based on where they live and assign them a single representative. We then have an election, people vote, and whoever gets the most votes in that particular election gets all of the power.

Technically, then, 51% of the people in the community can get 100% of the power. The assumption is, the 51% of the people who have the most votes and therefore, elect the representatives, are going to elect individuals who will represent all of the residents in town, including the 49% who did not vote for him or her. That assumption is based on the “golden rule,” or principle of reciprocity, which says whoever is in the majority today will not be permanently in the majority but has to worry about potential defectors who may join with today’s minority to become the next governing coalition. Therefore, in order to ensure the members of the current majority will be treated fairly when they are in the minority, the current majority treats the current minority fairly. Of course this isn’t the case in Winfield today.

However, there are other ways in which you can justify simple majority rule if you think about the town as a geographic unit which is simply one unit within a much larger area. If the area is subdivided in a way that is “representative,” then presumably (and the simple majority, winner-takes-all rule rests upon this presumption), the 49% in one part of town may be a majority in another part of town. It is therefore assumed this group gets direct representation of its interests from people who are elected by like-minded voters.

There is a second assumption: that the 49% in our hypothetical sample is treated fairly by the governing majority, and is directly represented by majorities that were elected by like-minded voters. The group that is in the minority does not have to wait for a time when it becomes a majority in the town in order to be treated fairly. But it is essentially a principle of virtual representation, or vicarious representation, to claim the present minority is represented or has surrogate representatives who, though not elected by it, are responsive to its interests.

A third assumption that supports simple, winner-takes-all majority rule is the town itself represents some kind of group that is cohesive or has enough similar interests that a single representative can fairly provide constituent service. Certainly not the case in Winfield over the last six years. However, for arguments sake, I live in Illinois and I am assumed to be represented by two Senators even if I did not vote for them because, as a resident of this state, I have certain interests that they are going to represent regardless of our respective politics.

Now those three assumptions about simple, winner-takes-all majority rule, are flawed when you have a permanent majority or a majority that monopolizes power. Such as what is present in Winfield today with the special interest group Winfield United. If you have a system in which the majority in power is furthering only their interest, then the 49% minority is not really represented. It is represented on the hope or promise of “the golden rule,” but it is not represented in terms of that second assumption I described as the virtual or vicarious representation principle.

The problem in Winfield today is the political action committee, Winfield United. Winfield United does not apply the “golden rule” and exists solely to further its’ own self-serving agenda. Based on this evaluation, ‘Districting’ of Winfield is the only way for the residents to receive true representation and remove Winfield United’s undue influences from the community.

Please let us know your thoughts on why you would be in favor of ‘Political Districting’ in Winfield. All correspondences should be sent to www.seventurnsproductions@live.com – No names or email address will be used, just your comments. Thank you.

Debate Club Tonight at John’s 7 PM

Big kudos to Winfield resident Tim Allen for his quest to make “Political Districting” and “Equal Representation” a reality in Winfield. We should have learned a lot from our last election in Winfield. Our campaigns are too long, too expensive, and too nasty. There is no greater threat to our democracy than the runaway costs and ’special interest money” involved in getting elected in Winfield.

Our elected officials no longer represent us but, rather, the conflicting special-interest group, to which they have become beholden via their need to raise huge sums of money to attain the elected office they so badly covet. Not only do they march to the drum that funded them, but they can no longer achieve the compromises required to bring our community together. They are required to go after the opposition, which leads to bad blood, and a dysfunctional board badly out of touch with the real issues facing the town.

And the problem is not fixable by any current or future elected official as the special-interest group, Winfield United wants to continue the status quo. They like the current level of influence they have and will not give it up.

In short, if we do nothing, we are doomed to fail again. The enemy is us. The golden age of Winfield has been here and we are now in the downward trend, unless we take our fate and put it back in our own hands.

Tonight Tim Allen will hold a Debate Club meeting at John’s at Winfield and Jewel Rd. at 7pm on the topic of ‘Districting Winfield into 6 Separate Political Voting Districts.’ Please see if you can make the time to come out and listen to the pros and cons of “Political Districting” and give your opinion.

Your opinion is the most important!

The residents are going to have the opportunity to vote on the question of “Political Districting” come November. Being informed will ensure everyone is making the right decision for our neighborhoods.

Hope everyone can make it and while you are there you can try one of John’s many fine beers.