Redrawing of the the Chicago Wards and Racial Politics
Every ten years, the City Council of Chicago sets out to redraw the ward boundaries to comply with latest U.S. Census results. Under the municipal law, each ward must contain exactly the same number of people. And, since the population changes constantly, ward borders have to be redrawn to balance the numbers out.
Most of the city is still heavily segregated along racial/ethnic lines, and most wards are either majority-white, majority-black or majority-Hispanic. Chicago has the total of 50 wards. As of the last redrawing, 20 of those wards were majority black, 13 were majority white, 11 were majority Hispanic. and the remaining six didn't have a clear majority.
For much of the city's history, white aldermen represented every ward - even the ones where whites weren't a majority. It wasn't until the 1960s, when the Civil Rights movement made inroads in Chicago, that aldermen actually started to reflect the racial make-up of their wards. But even then, white aldermen rarely gave up their wards without a fight. Since 1960s, every redrawing has been a prolonged, contentious struggle that often resulted in lawsuits that left the borders unsettled for years.
The Voting Rights Act adds another wrinkle to the process. Under its provisions, the aldermen are specifically prohibited from diluting minority-dominated wards. The wording is vague enough to make the diluting open to interpretation - which is a major reason why the process gets tied up in lawsuits.
Over the last 10 years, Chicago lost population. Looking at the overall statistics, the number of African-American residents dropped significantly, the number of white residents dropped, but to the lesser extent. Hispanic residents were the only ones who actually increased in numbers.
At the moment, the members of the City Council's Latino Caucus are trying to create at least six new Hispanic wards. The Black Caucus is trying to maintain as many wards as possible. So far, they have been willing to give up one ward, but they are determined to keep the remaining 19 as intact as possible. And when you look closely, even the one ward they're willing to let go of isn't much of the sacrifice. While the 2nd Ward was majority-black at the time of the last redrawing, the massive redevelopment in previously working-class areas, the demolition of the ABLA public housing super-complex and a few other public and subsidized housing developments led to a significant increase in white population. It's current alderman, Robert Fioretti, is Italian-American. Under the Black Caucus' proposal, the ward would lose portions that lie in African-American neighborhoods, effectively turning it majority white.
The Latino Caucus argues that the Black Caucus should give up at least two more wards. And, again, looking at the numbers, it is hard to argue that they don't have valid point.
While it hasn't been discussed much in the news, the white aldermen will have to give something up as well. And that's where the redrawing has a potential to get really contentious. A significant portion of the white aldermen belong to what would be best described as the Old Guard. They are what remains of the traditional Chicago Democratic Machine - aldermen who either have been in power for decades or owe their position entirely to the guys who've been in power for decades. Their wards are spread throughout the city, with most of them located on the Northwest Side, Southwest Side and Far South Side. This group includes aldermen who, while not as powerful as they were in their heyday, still retain significant power within the City Council. Alderman Ed Burke, who represents the 14th Ward, chairs the Finance Committee. Ald. Richard Mell of the 33rd Ward chairs the Rules Committee, which is ultimately responsible for submitting the redrawn map for Council approval.
Over the past ten years, a decent number of the Old Guard wards saw a significant increase in Hispanic population. This is especially true in the traditionally ethnic white working class communities along the Southwest and Calumet industrial/shipping corridors. Most notably, Ald Burke's 14th Ward saw the white population drop by 57 percent and Hispanic population increase by 20 percent. This was enough to overshadow the already slim white majority, turning the ward majority-Hispanic.
At the moment, Burke is too powerful and too well-connected to face any serious opposition. But hat may change if the ward is altered. In all likelihood, he would do everything in his power to keep his ward is intact as possible, and he's going to try to make sure the rest of the Old Guard won't be significantly affected, either. This would not please the Latin Caucus, which would rightfully complain about representation. The Old Guard's power is not absolute, but anyone who wishes to challenge them has their work cut out for them.
Another thing that hasn't been discussed much is that, while Hispanic aldermen have the most to gain from the redrawing, they also have something to lose. Looking at the community-level census data, it becomes apparent that most of the population gain occurred in community areas that were majority-white during the last redistricting. For example, Archer Heights, a long-time Polish American community, saw it's Hispanic population increase by 52 percent. Meanwhile, some of the more established Mexican and Puerto Rican community areas actually lost Hispanic population. Little Village, a long-time Mexican immigration hub, lost 16 percent of the Hispanic population. West Town, Wicker Park and Bucktown, which were predominantly Puerto Rican as recently as mid 1990s, lost 36 percent of their Hispanic population. Lower East Side, which contains Pilsen, Chicago's oldest Mexican-American neighborhood, lost 22 percent.
The census data on ward level is only somewhat less stark. The 25th ward, which is represented by the Latino Caucus chairman Danny Solis, lost 23 percent of its Hispanic population. The 22nd Ward, which is represented by Ald. Munoz, lost 16 percent. Ald. Maldonado's 26th Ward lost 27 percent, while Alderman Colon's 35th Ward lost 24 percent. Most significantly, Ald. Moreno's 1st Ward lost 40 percent. The remaining three Latino Caucus members saw their wards either gain Latino population or suffer losses so small they pose no statistical significance.
It is worth noting that while the wards lost Hispanic population, they gained population overall. It's just that much of this population is white.
None of this means that any members of the Latin Caucus are in any danger of losing their seats. However, this does mean that they may not be able to keep their wards intact. Just as the Latino Causus may try to establish Hispanic wards out of the portions of majority-Hispanic Old Guard wards, the Old Guard has demographics on their side if they want to dig into traditionally Hispanic wards.
There is also the matter of the Reform Caucus. This group isn't a formal caucus and thus a bit more nebulous than the other factions. What brings them together is the desire to make the City Council more fair, more progressive and more transparent. While this group is frequently accused of being a white faction, it does have black and Hispanic members (so there is some overlap between caucuses). They represent wards on the North, Northwest and South sides. Most of those wards are either mixed-race or recently underwent at least some degree of gentrification (which, it is worth pointing out, is not necessarily white gentrification - Ald. Dowell's 3rd Ward, for example, saw a significant influx of middle-class African-Americans). During the 2011 City Council elections, the Reform Caucus grew as several reform-minded candidates won elections in what was previously considered safe Old Guard territory. They were able to win elections thanks to complex coalitions that don't quite fit conventional racial and income divides. Any alteration to the ward map will shift the voter dynamics, putting their ability to get re-elected into question. The leader of the Reform Caucus, Ald. Joe Moore, went on record saying that the caucus will work to protect the wards of all reform-minded aldermen. It is not yet clear how this will effect the redrawing, but I would be surprised if it doesn't put them in conflict with at least one of the council factions mentioned in the preceding paragraphs.
So what does this all mean? It is hard to say. With all aldermen trying to preserve their wards and every faction trying to maintain its power, there will be some reluctance to make the changes that are too drastic. But given how much the population has shifted, something drastic will have to happen. I would assume that there will be a pitched battle over every ward undergoing demographic transition. Every community area and every neighborhood that makes them up will be placed under a microscope. The African-American aldermen would try to consolidate their power by drawing in as many black areas as they can. Hispanic aldermen would try to expand into long-time ethnic white strongholds, and white aldermen would try to expand into gentrifying areas even as they try to hold on to as many traditionally white wards as they can. As for the Reform Caucus... They will probably be looking carefully at who voted for them last time around and try to make sure those people are still in their wards.
Whatever happens, expect lots of scrutiny, research, accusations of racism and other isms... And probably a lawsuit or two.
Addendum:
Finally, there has been some discussion about creating the city's first Asian ward, which would be centered in Chinatown neighborhood. Since the last redrawing, Chicago's Asian-American population grew from 4 percent to 5.5 percent. That's 148,258 people - enough to form at least two wards. However, this assumes that Asian-Americans are concentrated in the same area, which is hardly the case. The city's Asian-American community is still heavily divided along ethnic lines, and ethnic enclaves are scatted throughout the city. Korean-Americans are concentrated in Albany Park, North Park and Mayfair neighborhoods. Indian and Pakistani immigrants are largely found in Rogers Park and West Ridge. Chinese-Americans are found in Chinatown, while Vietnamese, Cambodian and Hmong immigrants and their descendents are found throughout Uptown, Edgewater and Rogers Park. Filipinos are largely found in West Ridge and the nearby North Side neighborhood. Japanese-Americans are scatted throughout Chicago.
If one was to create a ward centered around Chinatown, it would have to be largely Chinese-American ward. Chinese account for 1.6 percent of the Chicago population, or 43,130 people. If we assume that all of them live in Chinatown (which is almost certainly not the case), we wouldn't have enough residents to fill the ward, but it would be enough to form a solid majority. Over the past two decades, Chinese-Americans have expanded beyond the traditional Chinatown borders, settling in the nearby Bridgeport and Armour Square neighborhoods. Together, this population is split between four wards. Chinatown itself lies in the Alderman Solis' 25th Ward, while the rest lies in the 2nd Ward, the 3rd Ward (which is represented by African-American Reform Caucus member Ald. Dowell) and 11th Ward (which is represented by the Old Guard Ald. Balcer) So, while Chinatown community leaders have some ground to ask for their own ward, they face very steep challenges. The fact that there are no Chinese-American aldermen doesn't help. The City Council does have an Asian-American Alderman - the Indian-American Ald. Ameya Pawar. However, he represents the 47th Ward - a former Old Guard stronghold where most Asian-Americans are Koreans (and even their numbers are fairly small). It will be interesting to see how the situation plays out, but personally, I don't think we'll see an Asian ward until at least the next redrawing
References/Sources:
Chicago Community Area 2010 Census Data
2010 Demographic Chicago Ward Map
Chicago Tribune Interactive Ward Map
Most of the city is still heavily segregated along racial/ethnic lines, and most wards are either majority-white, majority-black or majority-Hispanic. Chicago has the total of 50 wards. As of the last redrawing, 20 of those wards were majority black, 13 were majority white, 11 were majority Hispanic. and the remaining six didn't have a clear majority.
For much of the city's history, white aldermen represented every ward - even the ones where whites weren't a majority. It wasn't until the 1960s, when the Civil Rights movement made inroads in Chicago, that aldermen actually started to reflect the racial make-up of their wards. But even then, white aldermen rarely gave up their wards without a fight. Since 1960s, every redrawing has been a prolonged, contentious struggle that often resulted in lawsuits that left the borders unsettled for years.
The Voting Rights Act adds another wrinkle to the process. Under its provisions, the aldermen are specifically prohibited from diluting minority-dominated wards. The wording is vague enough to make the diluting open to interpretation - which is a major reason why the process gets tied up in lawsuits.
Over the last 10 years, Chicago lost population. Looking at the overall statistics, the number of African-American residents dropped significantly, the number of white residents dropped, but to the lesser extent. Hispanic residents were the only ones who actually increased in numbers.
At the moment, the members of the City Council's Latino Caucus are trying to create at least six new Hispanic wards. The Black Caucus is trying to maintain as many wards as possible. So far, they have been willing to give up one ward, but they are determined to keep the remaining 19 as intact as possible. And when you look closely, even the one ward they're willing to let go of isn't much of the sacrifice. While the 2nd Ward was majority-black at the time of the last redrawing, the massive redevelopment in previously working-class areas, the demolition of the ABLA public housing super-complex and a few other public and subsidized housing developments led to a significant increase in white population. It's current alderman, Robert Fioretti, is Italian-American. Under the Black Caucus' proposal, the ward would lose portions that lie in African-American neighborhoods, effectively turning it majority white.
The Latino Caucus argues that the Black Caucus should give up at least two more wards. And, again, looking at the numbers, it is hard to argue that they don't have valid point.
While it hasn't been discussed much in the news, the white aldermen will have to give something up as well. And that's where the redrawing has a potential to get really contentious. A significant portion of the white aldermen belong to what would be best described as the Old Guard. They are what remains of the traditional Chicago Democratic Machine - aldermen who either have been in power for decades or owe their position entirely to the guys who've been in power for decades. Their wards are spread throughout the city, with most of them located on the Northwest Side, Southwest Side and Far South Side. This group includes aldermen who, while not as powerful as they were in their heyday, still retain significant power within the City Council. Alderman Ed Burke, who represents the 14th Ward, chairs the Finance Committee. Ald. Richard Mell of the 33rd Ward chairs the Rules Committee, which is ultimately responsible for submitting the redrawn map for Council approval.
Over the past ten years, a decent number of the Old Guard wards saw a significant increase in Hispanic population. This is especially true in the traditionally ethnic white working class communities along the Southwest and Calumet industrial/shipping corridors. Most notably, Ald Burke's 14th Ward saw the white population drop by 57 percent and Hispanic population increase by 20 percent. This was enough to overshadow the already slim white majority, turning the ward majority-Hispanic.
At the moment, Burke is too powerful and too well-connected to face any serious opposition. But hat may change if the ward is altered. In all likelihood, he would do everything in his power to keep his ward is intact as possible, and he's going to try to make sure the rest of the Old Guard won't be significantly affected, either. This would not please the Latin Caucus, which would rightfully complain about representation. The Old Guard's power is not absolute, but anyone who wishes to challenge them has their work cut out for them.
Another thing that hasn't been discussed much is that, while Hispanic aldermen have the most to gain from the redrawing, they also have something to lose. Looking at the community-level census data, it becomes apparent that most of the population gain occurred in community areas that were majority-white during the last redistricting. For example, Archer Heights, a long-time Polish American community, saw it's Hispanic population increase by 52 percent. Meanwhile, some of the more established Mexican and Puerto Rican community areas actually lost Hispanic population. Little Village, a long-time Mexican immigration hub, lost 16 percent of the Hispanic population. West Town, Wicker Park and Bucktown, which were predominantly Puerto Rican as recently as mid 1990s, lost 36 percent of their Hispanic population. Lower East Side, which contains Pilsen, Chicago's oldest Mexican-American neighborhood, lost 22 percent.
The census data on ward level is only somewhat less stark. The 25th ward, which is represented by the Latino Caucus chairman Danny Solis, lost 23 percent of its Hispanic population. The 22nd Ward, which is represented by Ald. Munoz, lost 16 percent. Ald. Maldonado's 26th Ward lost 27 percent, while Alderman Colon's 35th Ward lost 24 percent. Most significantly, Ald. Moreno's 1st Ward lost 40 percent. The remaining three Latino Caucus members saw their wards either gain Latino population or suffer losses so small they pose no statistical significance.
It is worth noting that while the wards lost Hispanic population, they gained population overall. It's just that much of this population is white.
None of this means that any members of the Latin Caucus are in any danger of losing their seats. However, this does mean that they may not be able to keep their wards intact. Just as the Latino Causus may try to establish Hispanic wards out of the portions of majority-Hispanic Old Guard wards, the Old Guard has demographics on their side if they want to dig into traditionally Hispanic wards.
There is also the matter of the Reform Caucus. This group isn't a formal caucus and thus a bit more nebulous than the other factions. What brings them together is the desire to make the City Council more fair, more progressive and more transparent. While this group is frequently accused of being a white faction, it does have black and Hispanic members (so there is some overlap between caucuses). They represent wards on the North, Northwest and South sides. Most of those wards are either mixed-race or recently underwent at least some degree of gentrification (which, it is worth pointing out, is not necessarily white gentrification - Ald. Dowell's 3rd Ward, for example, saw a significant influx of middle-class African-Americans). During the 2011 City Council elections, the Reform Caucus grew as several reform-minded candidates won elections in what was previously considered safe Old Guard territory. They were able to win elections thanks to complex coalitions that don't quite fit conventional racial and income divides. Any alteration to the ward map will shift the voter dynamics, putting their ability to get re-elected into question. The leader of the Reform Caucus, Ald. Joe Moore, went on record saying that the caucus will work to protect the wards of all reform-minded aldermen. It is not yet clear how this will effect the redrawing, but I would be surprised if it doesn't put them in conflict with at least one of the council factions mentioned in the preceding paragraphs.
So what does this all mean? It is hard to say. With all aldermen trying to preserve their wards and every faction trying to maintain its power, there will be some reluctance to make the changes that are too drastic. But given how much the population has shifted, something drastic will have to happen. I would assume that there will be a pitched battle over every ward undergoing demographic transition. Every community area and every neighborhood that makes them up will be placed under a microscope. The African-American aldermen would try to consolidate their power by drawing in as many black areas as they can. Hispanic aldermen would try to expand into long-time ethnic white strongholds, and white aldermen would try to expand into gentrifying areas even as they try to hold on to as many traditionally white wards as they can. As for the Reform Caucus... They will probably be looking carefully at who voted for them last time around and try to make sure those people are still in their wards.
Whatever happens, expect lots of scrutiny, research, accusations of racism and other isms... And probably a lawsuit or two.
Addendum:
Finally, there has been some discussion about creating the city's first Asian ward, which would be centered in Chinatown neighborhood. Since the last redrawing, Chicago's Asian-American population grew from 4 percent to 5.5 percent. That's 148,258 people - enough to form at least two wards. However, this assumes that Asian-Americans are concentrated in the same area, which is hardly the case. The city's Asian-American community is still heavily divided along ethnic lines, and ethnic enclaves are scatted throughout the city. Korean-Americans are concentrated in Albany Park, North Park and Mayfair neighborhoods. Indian and Pakistani immigrants are largely found in Rogers Park and West Ridge. Chinese-Americans are found in Chinatown, while Vietnamese, Cambodian and Hmong immigrants and their descendents are found throughout Uptown, Edgewater and Rogers Park. Filipinos are largely found in West Ridge and the nearby North Side neighborhood. Japanese-Americans are scatted throughout Chicago.
If one was to create a ward centered around Chinatown, it would have to be largely Chinese-American ward. Chinese account for 1.6 percent of the Chicago population, or 43,130 people. If we assume that all of them live in Chinatown (which is almost certainly not the case), we wouldn't have enough residents to fill the ward, but it would be enough to form a solid majority. Over the past two decades, Chinese-Americans have expanded beyond the traditional Chinatown borders, settling in the nearby Bridgeport and Armour Square neighborhoods. Together, this population is split between four wards. Chinatown itself lies in the Alderman Solis' 25th Ward, while the rest lies in the 2nd Ward, the 3rd Ward (which is represented by African-American Reform Caucus member Ald. Dowell) and 11th Ward (which is represented by the Old Guard Ald. Balcer) So, while Chinatown community leaders have some ground to ask for their own ward, they face very steep challenges. The fact that there are no Chinese-American aldermen doesn't help. The City Council does have an Asian-American Alderman - the Indian-American Ald. Ameya Pawar. However, he represents the 47th Ward - a former Old Guard stronghold where most Asian-Americans are Koreans (and even their numbers are fairly small). It will be interesting to see how the situation plays out, but personally, I don't think we'll see an Asian ward until at least the next redrawing
References/Sources:
Chicago Community Area 2010 Census Data
2010 Demographic Chicago Ward Map
Chicago Tribune Interactive Ward Map