Roberta Voss, Barbara Klein and I wrote an Op Ed for the Arizona Republic this week. 

Want to know HOW people go about trying to manipulate the redistricting process, exactly? Have a look at this Op Ed, which ran in the Arizona Republic on November 1st. If this does not get you hot under the colar, I don’t know what will. See the full, pre-edited version below.

Opinion Editorial
The Secret Abuse of “Community of Interest”

Ken Clark, Co-Chair, Arizona Competitive Districts Coalition
Roberta Voss, Co-Chair, Arizona Competitive Districts Coalition
Barbara Klein, President, Arizona League of Women Voters of Arizona.

In this year’s redistricting process, code words abound. 

The most significant coded phrase right now is “community of interest.” The communities of interest criteria is one of six of the Redistricting Commission’s criteria for redistricting. It is not at the top of the list of importance, nor is it at the bottom.  Like the criteria of competitiveness, it must be weighed against respect for geographic boundaries and compactness. 

However, of all of the six redistricting criteria, this is the one that creates the biggest loophole for manipulation. Because the term has no definition, politicians of both parties use the criteria to organize speakers to go before the commission and support “communities of interest” that happen to protect incumbent politicians. 

It happened in 2001 and it is happening again.

The concept of communities of interest has been in use for a few decades. It originates from election integrity groups like Common Cause and the League of Women Voters. The purpose is to make certain that people with similar interests share representation. 

For instance, a farmer in rural Arizona should not be lumped in to a district with urban dwellers. However, it is impossible to meet the needs of all communities of interest, particularly in denser areas. In these areas there are more types of communities of interest to compete with each other.

When it was put in to our redistricting law, it was meant to serve as a guide and to force the commission to seek public comment. The drafters of the law understood that you couldn’t define it any further. 

But, this is where politicians are abusing the law. They are bringing out their people to support craftily defined communities of interest. This is not because they are concerned about giving voters choices. It is because they fear being put in to districts where they must (a) run against each other and (b) give voters an actual choice.

To be clear, we have had our complaints about the IRC. Most of all, it has not yet created enough competitive districts. 

To those politicians who say that competition is a code word for “Democratic districts”, consider that the Democrats actually lost seats in the legislature as the number of competitive seats increased (due to population growth) since the 2001 redistricting process.

In the end, competition is the best guarantor of voter choice, it not meant to be considered as the last option and the Arizona Supreme Court agrees. Competition is to be balanced with 4 of the 6 criteria. This is especially important if you are a registered Independent.

Don’t be fooled by politicians selling rain. Ask the question: who does this “community of interest” actually help? One politician or true voter choice?

Former state Reps. Ken Clark (Dem) and Roberta Voss (Rep) co-chair the Arizona Competitive Districts Coalition. Clark served in the Arizona House of Representatives from 2003-2005; Voss served from 1997-2003. Dr. Barbara Klein is a former health care provider and the current president of the League of Women Voters of Arizona.

–END–