Shame on both parties

I thought it was shameful that Pritzger would host a group of Texas Democratic lawmakers who fled their state so that they could not hold a vote to further gerrymander that states votes in favor of the Republicans. His comment in the article said they were cheating the public. Did he not just preside over a gerrymandering of Illinois districts to cut out two Republican seats in favor of Democrats?

This is politics today, and is why the majority of the voters in the U.S. are being disenfranchised. Over 80% of all congressional seats in the U.S. are determined in the party primaries where it only takes 6% to 10% of the electorate to win an election. Independents don’t get a vote and voters for the party not in power in that state are wasting their time. Shame on both parties.

Ken Maltas

Prospect Heights

Acting like children

I am trying to figure out why it is only OK when Democrats use gerrymandering. Illinois Democrats have been using it for years, even under our current governor. When a Republican state uses it, the Democrats are upset. Why?

What is good for one should be just as good for the other. I hope the governor of Texas imposes a fine on all the politicians who fled the state to avoid doing their job. I also, hope that he sends the Texas state police here to arrest them in order to bring them back.

These politicians are like children who did not get what they wanted so they throw a temper tantrum

John Billis Sr.

Prairie View

Laughable

I had to laugh at JB Pritzker’s threat to redistrict Illinois’s Congressional Districts in response to Texas’s plan.

Haven’t the Democrats already gerrymandered Illinois to the tune of 14-3 representatives in a state that is basically Republican once you get out of Chicago and Cook County?

Mark Flodin

Huntley

Focus on our own state

I am offended by Gov. Pritzker’s involvement with the state of Texas’ redistricting process. The governor and his party were very vocal about the individual states’ rights to determine election laws within the individual states, as written in the Constitution, yet he feels it is appropriate to become involved in another state’s affairs on the same subject.

The Democratic Party, currently led by Gov. Pritzker, has successfully squelched the conservative voice and opinion to a disproportionate level within this state and its representation in Congress through gerrymandering. While still a minority, 43% of votes cast last November were for the Republican candidate yet because of gerrymandering, only 18% of Illinois’ Congressional representatives are Republican. Now Gov. Pritzker threatens to make this imbalance even greater in response to another state’s actions?

Gov. Pritzker — stop worrying about another state and try focusing on the issues in Illinois — that’s enough to keep you busy. Grandstanding on the national stage only serves your own egotistical political ambitions and provides little benefit to the citizens of Illinois, to whom you swore an oath to serve.

Roger Machut

Elgin

Playing games

I find it funny how the Texas Democrats pulled a page out of the Wisconsin Democrat playbook by running away for their jobs and taking a vacation when they don’t get what they want.

In a big press conference, Pritzker with his permanent foot-in-mouth disease then said Illinois may redraw our districts. I find this funny since Illinois has the most gerrymandered map in the country.

As one political pundit put it, the Illinois map looks a like an elementary school student drew it, but he didn’t want to insult an elementary school student. All one has to do is look at 3rd Congressional District, which is unconstitutional by the Democrats own words. They drew it to have a suburban Hispanic district.

So, yes, I find it funny when the Democrats have to face up, they run away, call names and play word salad games.

Tony Atkins

Wheaton

Illinois’ own king

I realize the Republicans broke with tradition in wanting to redistrict midterm. But there is no law against it. The Democrats are just angry that they didn’t think of this maneuver first. They just couldn’t accept a loss in the future.

And putting a race factor in is again crying wolf. Their antics may just turn around and bite them in the butt. Crybabies usually lose the battle.

And they can take our notoriety-seeking governor with them. He was on a talk show with Colbert, the most bigoted and biased person on TV. Great pair.

It’s time for Illinois citizens to stand up and depose this monarchy. No king for Illinois. Or does that term only apply to Trump?

Marie Kreuser

Schaumburg

Word choice and a leader’s loyalty to America

Re: “I'm a proud Guatemalan…”

I can say that “I’m a proud Italian before I’m an American” since my father emigrated from Italy and I was born in America, but I would blemish the pride he exhibited as a U.S. citizen who assimilated in his adopted country. He had no formal education and always followed the direction offered by the local Democrat precinct captain visiting our home with instructions on “pulling” the Democrat lever at the polling machine in voting straight Democrat regardless of office. But today this country is “flooded” with illegal immigrants who expand the population of blue states and give these states increased government representation, not their legal vote, only more districts based on population.

Recently, Democratic Rep. Delia Ramirez of Illinois made a controversial comment in saying “I'm a proud Guatemalan before I'm an American.” She was born in Chicago to illegal immigrant parents and became a birthright citizen after they came to the U.S. from Guatemala. Also, she is “the sole member of Congress who openly shares that her husband is an undocumented immigrant” and a legal permanent resident.

I’m not attacking Rep. Ramirez, but her choice of words in the public domain casts doubt of her loyalty as a federal official taking an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution before starting their job. If she isn’t “American Pride,” then will she represent all Illinoisans or only Guatemalans?

Should we not hold all government representatives to the required presidential standard of no person except a natural-born citizen, of the United States?

Robert Meale

Crystal Lake

Finally, some balance

Thank you, Jeff Robbins, for writing my next letter to the editor. Finally someone took on the AP and the Gaza Health Ministry with facts and some forethought.

Then Debra Saunders exposed the total idiocy of conferring statehood on Gaza. Be still my heart.

Finally, Shannon Osaka tells about the big error in the climate calculations. The culprit was Uzbekistan, who could have anticipated that?

Good job, Daily Herald, getting balance on the opinion page. Next target, the news pages.

Bill Blaine

Glen Ellyn

While there i’s so much to be concerned about in the recent news, I want to remember for myself and remind others of the ramification of the big bill that was passed last month.

During my mother’s later years, she was in a wonderful facility that my father’s investments covered for a majority of her time. However, due to her longevity, eventually the money ran out and she went on Medicaid. My parents worked hard throughout their careers as teachers and proudly paid their due throughout their lives. We were very much pleased that the facility accepted her switch to Medicaid and that she was able to remain there for the remaining two years of her life.

Through that experience, I learned that there are a great many seniors with similar productive lives who eventually end up on Medicaid. What will happen to all the grandparents out there in two years when the impact of the cuts takes effect and becomes real for all those affected? The fact that they put into the bill that these will not occur until after the midterm elections tells me that they know many more people will have a negative experience.

Please remember this going forward. There was a great deal in that bill that not everyone (including me) really knows about and how lives will be effected.

Beth Elliott

Woodridge

Reflecting on the article “They roll right over,” the Democratic Party is perceived as “weak” and “ineffective” in thwarting the growing power and influence of the current White House Administration. Conversely, I would like to offer a different perspective while offering a blueprint for the Democratic Party.

Protesting, holding rallies, conducting filibusters in the Senate, or unrelenting criticism of the current President is not a formula for sustained success. It further divides disillusioned Democratic voters while alienating moderates, independents and Republicans not enamored with the current administration. Instead, the Democratic Party needs to promote a platform that appeals to both its loyal core and disillusioned voters.

The Democratic Party needs to focus on issues that unequivocally resonate with its base. A robust economy that prioritizes the middle-class while providing aid and economic opportunities for the poor. They need to reprioritize clean energy (solar and wind) while providing job training for coal miners and other workers whose jobs will eventually be obsolete.

They need to focus on rebuilding and modernizing our nation’s infrastructure and aggressively promote mass transportation to curtail traffic gridlock. They need to promote an objective and fair immigration policy that encourages immigrants to emigrate to America legally while humanely addressing illegal immigrants already living here. They need to promote a foreign policy that proactively reaches out to and works collaboratively with our allies in addressing unprovoked aggression. They need to embrace a trade policy based on laissez-faire principles and eradicate punitive and erratically enacted tariffs.

Most importantly, the Democratic Party needs to actively reach out to and listen to its constituents and disillusioned former supporters.

The upcoming 2026 congressional elections are a golden opportunity for the Democratic Party to sway the current political climate toward a kinder, empathetic atmosphere. The American people are seeking solace and inspiration from its leaders, not pettiness and skulduggery.

Lawrence E. Bonk

Roselle

Hunter Biden needs to learn how to be right. You can be noble-right or bitter-right. In his recent YouTube series Channel 5 interview, he seemed to embrace the latter. The younger Biden dropped so many F-bombs that I wondered if he taught his dad to cuss instead of the other way around.

Remember, he was defending his father, former President Joe Biden, against critics, some of whom Hunter considers traitors. In fairness, Hunter was correct about Joe Biden’s legislative successes during his White House stay, helping the Democrats overachieve in the 2022 midterms, and legitimately defeating Donald Trump in 2020. Being grumpy doesn’t automatically make him wrong about everything.

In 1992, the popular TV series Murphy Brown aired an episode where the female lead, a newscaster, has a baby out of wedlock. Then-Vice President Dan Quayle gave a speech that mentioned the episode saying that the Murphy Brown character was “mocking the importance of fathers by bearing a child alone and calling it just another lifestyle choice.” Quayle’s broader point was that the 1992 Los Angeles riots were due to disintegrating family values. Quayle wasn’t necessarily wrong; he was just bad at being right. All anyone remembered was the Murphy Brown reference.

Conservative commentator Pat Buchanan once said. “it would be easier to assimilate 1 million Englishmen into Virginia than 1 million Zulus.” That may be true, but the wording puzzled some listeners.

There’s an apt description for people like Hunter Biden: “right message, wrong messenger.” But that designation applies to officeholders too.

Voters yearn for leaders of both parties who know how to be right, and dutifully course correct when they’re wrong. America needs a Commander-in-chief who can do both with transparency and honor — not a national scold.

Jim Newton

Itasca

When longtime Congressman Danny K. Davis decided not to run for a 16th consecutive term, he had to decide who to endorse. In the end, he endorsed state Rep. La Shawn Ford because of his track record of passing legislation over the years, according to news reports.

While that is a valid reason for the endorsement and for voting for him, another is his work for fathers, which has largely been done without attention from the media.

I can attest that the Chicago Public School teacher-turned politician is a great father who has proudly co-parented his daughter with her mother. In fact, Ford has done such a great job with his own family that in 2012 he was recognized by being appointed to the Illinois Council on Responsible Fatherhood.

The ICRF was established as a state board in 2004 to promote paternal involvement — particularly by single and divorced fathers — in the upbringing of their children. I had the honor of being appointed by the governor of Illinois in 2004 to serve as chairperson of the ICRF and have remained there ever since. Thus, I have seen the dedication, hard work and pride that Ford put into his ICRF membership.

Not to take the luster off of any bills that he had passed, but unlike a bill that can be changed or superseded in the future, the work of great fathers cannot be undone because it creates impressions on children that last a lifetime.

Because of that, I am urging voters to take a long look at him both as a politician and as a man because I believe doing so will result in a much deserved vote for La Shawn Ford for Congress.

Jeffery M. Leving

Chicago

How ironic that Texas Democrats “flee” the low-tax, growing Republican-led state to “seek refuge” in high-tax, population-losing Democrat-led states like Illinois, New York and California.

Tom Murray

Barrington

Texan Republicans cannot convincingly argue that those Texan State House Democrats who left the state are abandoning their offices as state representatives, when, by their actions, they are defending the interests of their constituents from an unfair and unrepresentative new districting map. Texan Republicans cannot provide evidence that these representatives and their staffs ceased all functions of their offices, or any intent by these representatives to no longer act as representatives.

They cannot prove that these offices are abandoned.

Texan Republicans cannot argue that the constituencies these representatives continue to represent are abandoned, without first asking those constituents. Do you think a constituency which elected a Democrat in Texas would feel that their representative, taking drastic action to preserve their right to continue electing the representative of their choice, was acting against them?

It’s hard to imagine they would think so, but that hasn’t stopped the Republican-controlled Texan government from issuing warrants for the arrest of their political opposition. This is despotic behavior, and Illinois is under no obligation to return political refugees to a regime that would punish them for adequately representing the will of those who elected them.

Edwart Moritz

Warrenville