Debunking the "Forced" Primary Myth

The biggest common myth being thrown around during the AIRC (Arizona INDEPENDENT Redistricting Commission) drama is that the AIRC has (willfully) forced first term Congressman Ben Quayle (R-AZ 3^rd) and Congressman David Schweikert (R-AZ 5^th) into a primary battle in 2012.  This is the meme that the Arizona Republican Party, their “tea party” movement adherents and the Arizona Republic would like you to believe.  This dovetails nicely with the meme that the AIRC is being unfair to Republicans by (in the draft redistricting maps) only creating 4 “safe” districts for Republicans, the exact same number of “safe” districts they currently hold.

The problem with this myth that the AIRC is forcing two Republican congressmen to face off in a primary is twofold:

1.            In the eyes of the AIRC, by mandate of the voters, the Arizona 3^rd and 5^th Congressional districts ceased to exist as they are currently mapped the day the volunteer members of the AIRC took their positions.  In point of fact, the members are specifically forbidden to consider where a potential candidate lives.

2.            The United States Constitution provides no requirement that a person running for a particular congressional district has to reside in that district.  This means that a candidate for congress chooses which congressional district they want to run in, even they don’t live in that district.

Neither Congressman Quayle nor Congressman Scweikert is required to run against the other in a primary in any reformulated district.  They just both (at least publicly) desire to run in a district that includes north Scottsdale, a very affluent area.  Currently, only Congressman Schweikert currently represents all of Scottsdale as part of the Arizona 5^th Congressional District, including all of north Scottsdale.  Both candidates (as all incumbents, I would presume) want a “safe” district to run in.  Under the draft district map approved by the AIRC, all of the 3^rd CD and parts of the 5^th CD, including Scottsdale, would become the new 6^th CD.

The “new” 6^th CD would become a fortress for Republicans and that is why both Congressman Quayle and Congressman Schweikert want to run in that district, as formulated under the AIRC draft map.  To give you an idea of how “safe” this proposed new district will be, just look at the current 3^rd CD.  Even though Congressman Quayle’s Democratic opponent, John Hullburd, ran to the right of Mr. Quayle, Mr. Hullburd still lost.  Add in the very Republican northern areas of the current 5^th CD and no Democrat will be able to win the district, which is a shame, because I live in the current 3^rd CD and what is drafted to be the new 6^th CD.

Neither Congressman Quayle nor Congressman Schweikert wants to run on substance.  In fact, neither of them actually want to “run” an election campaign as they would both rather be assured a victory, preferably an easy one.  They just want to run in separate “safe” districts and are more than happy to demonize the AIRC for not “giving” them what they want.  Too bad only bloggers, such as myself, are pointing out the myth that the AIRC is somehow “forcing” Congressman Quayle and Congressman Schweikert to run against each other in a primary.

The Republican Conspiracy Against the AIRC and the Voters of Arizona

After all that has gone on in the last eleven months, especially the last week, does anyone doubt that there is has been a conspiracy (of possibly criminal magnitude) by the Republican Party in Arizona in general and Republican elected officials specifically thwart the will of the voters?  Does anyone doubt that in their zeal to protect the Republican super-majority in the Arizona Legislature that these Republicans conspired to destroy the Arizona INDEPENDENT Redistricting Commission (AIRC) by lodging false claims against the AIRC’s non-Republican members?

Of course, with Attorney General Tom Horne having already launched a witch hunt investigation into the AIRC, don’t look for him to hold his fellow Republicans accountable.  Don’t look to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate this conspiracy either.  With A.G. Holder under fire from Congressional Republicans on many different fronts, he will wimp out of doing what is right to protect himself.

So, that leaves the Arizona voters to fix the mistakes they made in 2000 when they voted to create the AIRC.  In order to take the Legislature completely out of the redistricting process, I propose the following changes to the law constitutional amendment that created the AIRC:

1.  Expand the AIRC from five to nine with three registered Democrats, three registered Republicans and three registered independents to better reflect the party registration percentages of the state.

2.  All members are chosen randomly from a pool of eligible registered voters whom have voluntarily placed themselves into the pool.  The members will be chosen during a live broadcast.

3.  No person may be considered eligible for the pool if they have changed their registered party affiliation within the last three general election cycles.

4.  No person may be considered eligible for the pool if they have held a post in any political party within the last three general election cycles.

5.  The creation of an independent AIRC Inspector General to field and investigate all complaints made against the AIRC and its members.  The Inspector General shall upon finding clear evidence of a law or laws being broken by the AIRC and/or its members bring the matter before the State Supreme Court for prompt adjudication.

I truly feel that if the voters were to approve all five of these recommendations, the AIRC can truly be independent of the Legislature and the political establishment.  Without these recommendations being approved, the voters will forever be powerless against the manipulations and conspiracies of the party in power.  In this case, it is the Republican Party.

The Quest To Protect The Republican Super Majority

The Republicans have a stranglehold on Arizona politics.  This is an undeniable fact.  Republicans control all state wide elected offices including Governor, Attorney General and Secretary of State.  They have a super-majority in the Arizona Legislature.  They also hold six of eight seats in the U.S. House of Representatives and both seats in the U.S. Senate.  A pretty good feat considering Republicans make up only 36% of registered voters in Arizona.  Democrats make up 33% and independents (those with no party affiliation) make up 30%.

In a state where even most Democrats are moderate to conservative, party affiliation does mean a lot.  To be a Republican means you are almost guaranteed a seat at the table of power.  To be an ultra-conservative Republican improves those odds even more.  Independents are deemed to be the deciding factor in close races and even they tend to vote Republican when push comes to shove.

In a state with a registered political make up that is split almost evenly between Republicans, Democrats and independents, you would think that the Republicans couldn’t enjoy such success.  In steps the affect of redistricting:  The process of creating congressional and legislative districts that is mandated by the U.S. Constitution.  Before 2000, the Arizona legislature was tasked with creating the various districts and it did everything possible to secure a permanent Republican majority in the state legislature as well as congressional representation.

In 2000, voters were so fed up with the protection of incumbents that they stripped the legislature of its authority to redistrict and put that authority into the newly created Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC).  The AIRC isn’t tasked with simply redrawing existing districts to meet its charge.  It must start from scratch, thus ensuring that the state’s congressional and legislative district maps change dramatically decade from decade.  To give a quick example of the dramatic change: I currently reside in what is Congressional District 3, but under the draft map, I would be in Congressional District 6.

Now, the AIRC is composed of 5 members.  Two are Democrats, each of who were nominated by the respective Democratic leaders in both houses of the legislature.  Two are Republicans, each of who were nominated by the respective Republican leaders in both houses of the legislature.  The registered independent is picked by the other 4 members of the AIRC.  In my opinion, there should be 3 Democrats, 3 Republicans and 3 registered independents, but that will require a voter modification that could turn very messy.

Throw into the redistricting mix the fact that Arizona is one of the states required to receive “pre-clearance” of their efforts by the U.S. Justice Department before the new districts can go into effect.  The 2001 AIRC was actually rebuffed by the Bush Justice Department for not protecting minority voters and had to reconfigure their maps to meet the requirements of the Voting Rights Act.  We are all hoping that the 2011 AIRC doesn’t repeat the same mistake.

Now that I have some of the background laid out, let’s fast forward to 2011.  The AIRC members were chosen in great controversy, some with court challenges, all due to the machinations of state Senate Majority Leader Russell Pearce and Speaker of the House Andy Tobin.  After the members of the AIRC were formally seated, the “tea party” movement tried to call into dispute the AIRC’s legitimacy, even getting Attorney General Horne to open an “investigation” into accusations of the AIRC violating Arizona’s open meetings law.

Through all of this, the five members of the AIRC have done their job and have approved draft maps of congressional and legislative districts.  Now that the draft maps have been adopted, the public has 30 days to comment and recommend changes.  In steps the Republican elected officials and their bold claim that the draft maps represent too much competiveness and threaten their respective incumbencies.  They are hell bent on protecting the Republican super majority in the legislature and the Republican majority of held seats in the House of Representatives.  Of course, they are bitching about draft maps, not the final product.  And like it or not, they will probably bitch more after it the final maps go through pre-clearance.

 I myself am not happy with the draft maps because they allow for safe districts for both Republicans and Democrats while only proposing three competitive districts.  I think every district should be competitive, giving anyone running a real chance to win.  No district should be “safe” for one party or for an incumbent.  No one party or incumbent should feel they are entitled to their elected seat.

I think the goals of meeting the requirements of the full mandate of the AIRC can be done with full competitiveness and without gerrymandering.  The AIRC just has to have the will do so and I don’t think they do.  I think, they will bend to Republican political pressure and adopt final maps that won’t be pre-cleared by the DOJ.  I am hoping the AIRC does the right thing.  I just don’t think it will, which will be a huge disservice to the voters of Arizona.

For more information about meetings of the AIRC, please take a look at The Arizona Eagletarian and his great work.

Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne's Crusade Against the 1965 Voting Rights Act and His Hope for Conservative Judicial Activism

Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne (former Canadian)

It has been a long standing core view of conservatism that the courts have usurped the role of the various legislatures and the "will of the people".  Conservatives view many decisions by the various courts to be "judicial activism" (unless they agree with the decision), especially in areas of social policy.  Of course, we have seen conservatives be hypocritical in their core views, especially in their concept of limited government.  So, it doesn't come as much of a surprise to find out that Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne is using the courts to "legislate from the bench" in his efforts to secure the Republican Super Majority in Arizona.

At issue is the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and its protections for minority voting.  Arizona, in particular, must receive pre-clearance before any laws affecting voting may go into affect.  This tenant includes the restructuring of congressional districts and legislative districts, which in Arizona falls to the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission.  Conservatives across the nation have made no qualms about their disdain, if not their hatred, for the VRA1965.  That disdain/hatred is even stronger in the states, such as Arizona, that are required to receive pre-clearance.  They see it as an encroachment of "state's rights".

Arizona has a long history of suppression of the voting rights and even the late Chief Justice, William Rehnquist was involved when a young lawyer.  Those suppression efforts have only intensified as the various minority populations have grown larger in recent years and "illegal immigration" has become a major focus of state and local politics.  They include the requirement for proving one's right to vote when they register and when they show up at the polls (this requirement is not in affect for mail in ballots and absentee ballots).

As has been noted by Steve Muratore over at The Arizona Eagletarian, it has come to light that there were concerted efforts by Republican members of the 2001 AIRC to suppress the voting power of minorities.  In fact, the Department of Justice even required changes to the final districts to ensure those rights before approval was given.  As the 2011 AIRC is proving to be very conscious of protecting minority voting rights while creating competitive districts.  It is this "independence" that AG Horne and other conservatives are scared of and why AG Horne has gone to court to get Arizona out from under the VRA1965.

The way the 2011 AIRC is proceeding, the Republican Super Majority in the state is being threatened.  In fact, even a Republican majority in both chambers of the legislature may be a thing of the past.  AG Horne and other conservatives in Arizona can't let that happen so they are hoping to have VRA1965 declared unconstitutional, specifically the pre-clearance requirements.  He hopes to achieve through the courts what conservatives have not been able to do through Congress: Eliminate VRA1965.  In short, they are hoping for some conservative judicial activism.