AIRC Update: ‘Independent’ redistricting is the opposite of incumbent protection

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Redistricting in most states involves legislators sitting down and tweaking the lines of their districts to protect as many incumbents as possible in the majority party and even members of the minority party with whom they have a good working relationship. It is a status quo, incumbency protection game.

Arizonans said "the hell with that!" in enacting Prop. 106 in 2000, creating the Independent Redistricting Commission. Arizonans voted for a system that every ten years wipes the slate clean and is not to take incumbency into consideration as a factor in drawing new district lines. It's sort of like shaking up the dice and rolling them in Yahtzee.

Unfortunately, the political media does take into consideration the real world consequences of new district lines in its own version of the incumbency protection game. This past weekend, the Arizona Capitol Times (subscription required) reported in IRC fills ‘doughnut’ hole, but finds trouble with Mesa:

The congressional map being debated already lumps two congressmen, U.S. Reps. Ben Quayle and David Schweikert in the same district as Kirk Adams and Matt Salmon, who are battling for the GOP nomination for the Mesa-based seat being vacated by U.S. Rep. Jeff Flake.

The commission sought to break off a sizeable portion of west Mesa that would result in Adams and Salmon being in another district. But no final decisions were made.

Oh, the horrors! Republicans having to run against one another in districts not specifically drawn for them! That's really the whole point of "independent" redistricting. It is the opposite of incumbent protection.

That particular map has since been revised and somehow this clustering of Republican incumbents and candidates has magically disappeared. Did the AIRC improperly consider incumbency in making its revisions? Did they cave under pressure from the GOP redistricting organization FAIR Trust? No one knows for certain but them.

The Arizona Republic continues the incumbency protection game today in this report, New map may alter races for Congress:

The final draft didn't put any two U.S. House incumbents in the same district, but it might as well have. Freshman U.S. Rep. Ben Quayle, R-Ariz., who now represents a Phoenix-based district, has found himself in a competitive new district that also would include Tempe and parts of Scottsdale, Mesa and Chandler. Fellow freshman U.S. Rep. David Schweikert, R-Ariz., lists his residence in Fountain Hills, which is now part of a sprawling district that includes most of western Arizona and very little of the Scottsdale-centric district he currently serves.

Schweikert on Tuesday sent an e-mail to supporters announcing that he will run in a new Republican-leaning district that includes much of Scottsdale and other northeast Valley communities. That is the same district that Quayle plans to run in, according to a GOP official and another person familiar with his thinking.

* * *

The potential of a Quayle vs. Schweikert slugfest is just one problem Republicans have with the map, which one political observer said generally has left those on the right "flummoxed." Republicans, who now control five of Arizona's eight U.S. House districts, are concerned that some of their incumbents generally have gotten a raw deal, complaining that GOP U.S. Rep. Paul Gosar's swing district also would tilt too Democratic under the new map.

Once again, "independent" redistricting is the opposite of incumbent protection. That is what Arizonans voted for in 2000. Prima donna politicians with a perverse sense of divine entitlement to their office hate this.

That's why Arizona's Republican Caucus has formed the redistricting organization FAIR Trust to pressure, to intimidate, and to sue the AIRC if necessary to preserve their incumbency. Steve Muratore has a lengthy post I recommend that you read, The Arizona Eagletarian: Redistricting — how much will they change draft maps?, but I want to focus just on the email from FAIR Trust that he reports:

An email being circulated on behalf of UNfair Trust lays naked its entire raison d'etre, promoting Republican incumbent protection by hook or by crook.  And David Cantelme still has both hands. One tactic has been to have a snake of an attorney do his best to obscure the facts as they relate to the interests of everyday citizens and to co-opt minority coalitions. Cantelme has blatantly endeavored to do both.

Note that in the email copy (posted below), anything and everything UNfair Trust doesn't like about maps adopted (already or in the near future) will be characterized as gerrymandering. Expect professional prevaricators like Cantelme to make lots of money trying to subvert the efforts of the Arizona INDEPENDENT Redistricting Commission. This will take the form of propaganda and litigation (including Tom Horne's partisan witchhunt in Maricopa County Superior Court).

—–

The UNfair Trust email:

Time:  12:00 – 1:00 p.m. 

Note (by the Arizona Eagletarian):

This explicitly shows WHO the group is and that it's bald-faced intent is INCUMBENT Republican protection.

As I have explained previously, members of Congress who are raising soft money for redistricting groups had to first obtain a waiver from the House or Senate Ethics Committee under the National Democratic Redistricting Trust ruling by the FEC last year. See, Redistricting draws unregulated cash – POLITICO.com. I have no idea how much information, if any, is contained in these waivers. Who our members of Congress have raised soft money from is not required to be disclosed. It is yet another example of money corrupting our political system.

One final thought. There was another headline in the Arizona Republic today, Poll finds new low in approval of Congress: "Just 14 percent of the public approves of the job Congress is doing … Only 3 percent of Americans said they "strongly approve" of the performance of lawmakers on Capitol Hill, essentially as low as possible, given the poll's 4 percentage point margin of error." This should weigh heavily against any incumbent protection scheme — throw these bums out!