Ousted Arizona redistricting panel chair turns to state's high court

17 comments:

• phxvato1202 posted at 6:49 pm on Wed, Nov 2, 2011.

  Posts: 123

  well it's the same crooked GOP politicians who could care less about the citizens of Arizona.

  • Link

   

• abimopectore posted at 7:30 pm on Wed, Nov 2, 2011.

  Posts: 168

  The governor's and legislature's action doesn't pass the smell test. Hopefully, the court will be able to step in to stop the political shenanigans and restore some integrity to the Independent Redistricting Commission. If they had legitimate complaints, they should have taken it to court to a non-bias body instead of deciding it among themselves.

  • Link

   

• Masterrogue666 posted at 7:54 pm on Wed, Nov 2, 2011.

  Posts: 1797

  If either of you actually did some checking, the way that it's planned out makes no geographical sense. However, I realize how hard it is to find liberal that can make any sense of anything...

  • Link

   

• abimopectore posted at 9:01 pm on Wed, Nov 2, 2011.

  Posts: 168

  Masterrogue666,

  I'm going to give your intelligence the benefit of the doubt. Read slowly again:

  "If they had legitimate complaints, they should have taken it to court to a non-bias body instead of deciding it among themselves."

  I wasn't commenting on whether what the commission did was appropriate, inappropriate, good for Democrats, bad for Republicans, good for Independents, etc., etc., etc... The usurping of the commission's independence without "proper legal vetting" from a non-bias entity is what is disturbing. Hopefully, you can see clearly that this is what has happened.

  • Link

   

• Rational Human posted at 6:08 am on Thu, Nov 3, 2011.

  Posts: 613

  abi it was the governors and senates right and duty to step in and stop the obvious gerrymandering democratic power grab that the voters of Arizona tried to prevent with the new redistricting law they passed. Colleen Mathis, a democrat in disguise as an Independent has the right to take it to court, but the government was well within their right and duty to oust her. Now perhaps we can get someone a little less biased to chair the commission.

  Actually, the basis for the suit is that the Constitution prohibits the commission from gerrymandering the districts—yet that’s exactly what the commission did. The Constitution requires the districts to be compact, respect communities of interest and respect natural boundaries. Once these requirements are met, the commission can make the districts competitive. In this case, the commission sacrificed those requirements in order to create competitive districts. NO ONE denies that the districts are gerrymandered. This is a clear violation of the Constitutional requirements.

  You say If the Republicans are unhappy, they should go to court? Democrats sued, without success, over the maps produced in 2001. Why did the Democrat’s suit fail? Because the courts understand that the courts should be deferential when dealing with the commission's decisions. That being said, however, the commission’s maps ignore the constitutional requirements so blatantly that the courts would have to side with the Governor anyway. However, the key is that the Constitution gives the responsibility to police the commission to the Governor and Senate and specifically NOT to the courts.

  And the democrats will never be happy in a republican state. You should all move to The Peoples Republic of California where they cater to such socialistic principles of an unpatriotic immoral state that lacks spirituality.

  • Link

   

• Dale Whiting posted at 6:24 am on Thu, Nov 3, 2011.

  Posts: 3705

  Help us! Someone out there, please start a Jan Brewer Recall campaign!

  • Link

   

• Diogenes Lantern posted at 9:04 am on Thu, Nov 3, 2011.

  Posts: 65

  FACTS not emotions:

  Independent Chair donated to Obama's campaign then gets job in Tucson distributing Obama Stimulus Dollars (million to Uof A to study ant colonies) even though she is an engineer.. In return, Chair Mathis Bid Rigs, Vote Trades, destroys the ballot to get Strategic Telemetry elected as a mapper. St had no prior mapping experience, double the cost, and needs 3 sub-contractors to show them what to do.

  Why ST? ST's main clients are Obama, Wisconsin Recall, various state progressive parties, Move.on.org, SEI, AFL-CIO and other mob-controlled unions. ST's Mission Statement is "to convert non-progressives to progressivism".

  MoveOn org's created maps:

  Created ultimate in gerrymandering that US AG will not approve: Mixes rural with urban, splits counties and stretches Yuma, Colorado City, Flagstaff, Mesa, Casa Grande, to Mexican border-just to help Dem Kirkpatrick return to office.

  Solidifies Dem Grijalva by removing the conservative area of Yuma

  Solidifies Dem Giffords by removing conservative Cochise County

  GOP Quayle and Schweikert lost their districts

  Carved out another gerrymandered district of Tempe, Ahwatukee, and Biltmore Arcadia (check that out on map ) to provide a special district for Naoplitano gal pal, Dem Sinema, to run unencumbered by any incumbents

  Mesa has one district packed with 6 incumbents-GOP- of course (Pearce, Crandall, Ash, Court, Olson, Pierce).

  Gilbert has one district packed and smashed with Biggs, Farnsworth, Urie, Forese.

  Lewis has been trashed by the progressives that designed the new maps. If Lewis won, he would have to run against Rising Dem Star Schapira from ASU. The Guilty 3 gerrymandered the maps so that Lewis has to run next year in the ASU-controlled corridor-85k students and 50K staff. Pearce will run against Crandall-an easy win since the Dems are now recalling Crandall. So Schapira trounces Lewis next year and Pearce trounces Crandall. Lewis used for the Recall and then thrown on the progressive garbage heap. Sweet.

  
  

  • Link

   

• abimopectore posted at 9:09 am on Thu, Nov 3, 2011.

  Posts: 168

  Rational Human,

  I guess I'll give you the benefit of the doubt as well. Please read the following article where it clearly displays the opinion of the original authors of the Independent Redistricting Commission law regarding the governor's and legislature's action:

  http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2011/11/03/20111103brewer-gop-blasted-redistrict-panel-ouster.html

  You'll see if you read the above article that the action taken by the state government falls far short of the original intent of the law. Again, I'm not stating that what the commission has done is correct, but the manner by which the state government has sought to address this matter does not pass the smell test regardless of your position regarding the Independent Redistricting Commission's position. This is what is troubling and hopefully will be addressed by some court in order to restore integrity to original intent of the Independent Redistricting Commission law.

  • Link

   

• Rational Human posted at 6:09 pm on Thu, Nov 3, 2011.

  Posts: 613

  abi, I don't read the Republic for the same reasons you do. It's a socialist propaganda machine that spews lies daily, and I wouldn't read it if they handed it out free. I could care less what the so called original authors of the redistricting law think. I read the law itself and understand full well what it most clearly states. Now if you wish to read the law for yourself and leave the propaganda rags interpretation out of it you can see it here: http://azredistricting.org/docs/Meeting-Info/AZ-Independent-Redistricting-Commission-Legal-Overview-070811.pdf After reading the law carefully you will see that what I said is the truth.

  • Link

   

• Rational Human posted at 6:16 pm on Thu, Nov 3, 2011.

  Posts: 613

  "Help us! Someone out there, please start a Jan Brewer Recall campaign!" Someone tried that already Dale. They couldn't get enough signatures. Heck why don't we have a recall election for all elected officials every year for no other reason than the losers don't like the winners. Let's see now, how many millions per year do ya thunk that'll take Dale? lol

  • Link

   

• abimopectore posted at 6:50 pm on Thu, Nov 3, 2011.

  Posts: 168

  Rational Human,

  The link you provide is not the law. It is a comment about the law. Here's the law's link:

  http://azredistricting.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Proposition-1061.pdf

  The section you need to read is below:

  (10) AFTER HAVING BEEN SERVED WRITTEN NOTICE AND PROVIDED WITH AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A RESPONSE, A MEMBER OF THE INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMISSION MAY BE REMOVED BY THE GOVERNOR, WITH THE CONCURRENCE OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE SENATE, FOR SUBSTANTIAL NEGLECT OF DUTY, GROSS MISCONDUCT IN OFFICE, OR INABILITY TO DISCHARGE THE DUTIES OF OFFICE

  Although Mathis, who was ousted, responded to Brewer's list of complaints about the commission as a whole, her attorney said she wasn't given a chance to defend her individual actions. This likely will be an argument in a legal challenge from Mathis and the commission. Your arguments about the merits of the commission's actions are not what is going to be argued but whether Mathis was given due process as required by the statute. Again, you need to be intellectually honest about what's going on here. The fact you won't read other folk's opinions regardless of whether you agree with it or not demonstrates beyond the pale that you don't understand what's going on.

  I'm not a liberal, as you so easily accuse other folks of being just because they don't agree with your view of the world. I use rational thinking something you don't quite do since your emotions are all over your writing unlike your user name. You need to stop buying the propaganda from either side of the aisle.

  • Link

   

• Rational Human posted at 8:53 am on Fri, Nov 4, 2011.

  Posts: 613

  Oh right abi sends us to http://azredistricting.com which is a democratic group that advocates competitive districts during the 2011 Arizona redistricting process. Their stated goal: To advocate for competitive and fair districts in the 2011 Arizona redistricting process and to maximize the number of districts in which either political party, or even independent candidates could win. Mathis is one of their stooges. She DID commit a substantial neglect of duty and is guilty of gross misconduct in office. All one has to do is look at the maps to see how blatantly gerrymandered they are. That IS gross misconduct in office when you circumvent the constitution to make a power grab for your party. She used competitiveness above all other concerns in gerrymandering these maps to favor democrats even though she pretends to be an independent. Do you really think there is such a thing as an independent? Everyone has political views and agendas. Independents just aren't registered as democrats or republicans, but they almost all vote for one or the other. In this state they vote primarily for republicans.

  The website I posted is not just a view. http://azredistricting.org/docs/Meeting-Info/AZ-Independent-Redistricting-Commission-Legal-Overview-070811.pdf

  If you go to http://azredistricting.org/ you will see that it is a Arizona official website and not a biased website like yours that advocates circumventing the letter of the law by using competitiveness first when the law clearly states that is to be used only after

  1; Districts shall comply with the United States Constitution and the United States voting rights act;
  
  2. Congressional districts shall have equal population to the extent practicable, and state legislative districts shall have equal population to the extent practicable;
  
  3.Districts shall be geographically compact and contiguous to the extent practicable; District boundaries shall respect communities of interest to the extent practicable; To the extent practicable, district lines shall use visible geographic features, city, town and county boundaries, and undivided census tracts.

  Only then

  4. TO THE EXTENT PRACTICAL, COMPETITIVE DISTRICTS SHOULD BE FAVORED WHERE TO DO SO WOULD CREATE NO SIGNIFICANT DETRIMENT TO THE OTHER GOALS.

  Now abi, are you going to try to tell us that what I wrote above is not the law?

  Mathis never considered the first three goals when she made her maps up. She basically broke the law. I would like to see her criminally charges as well as ousted for the obvious power grab she attempted.

  • Link

   

• abimopectore posted at 9:15 am on Fri, Nov 4, 2011.

  Posts: 168

  Rational Human,

  You DID NOT post the law. Here's another link, albeit the government link, to the law:

  http://www.azleg.gov/const/4/1.p2.htm

  You apparently don't understand English since I'm not arguing the actions of the commission. The immediate issue at hand, if the court decides to take the case, is whether Mathis' ouster was legal or not. This is the only question that matters until a court case is established, if at all, into whether the Governor's and legislature's movement to oust Mathis was legal or not. You're way beyond the horizon into the issue and your bias of liberal or conservative blinds your ability to reason at all. What you wrote does not matter if it never reaches a court or legal body that can respond to these allegations.

  • Link

   

• Rational Human posted at 9:42 am on Fri, Nov 4, 2011.

  Posts: 613

  Your website:

  A. Districts shall comply with the United States Constitution and the United States voting rights act;

  B. Congressional districts shall have equal population to the extent practicable, and state legislative districts shall have equal population to the extent practicable;

  C. Districts shall be geographically compact and contiguous to the extent practicable;

  D. District boundaries shall respect communities of interest to the extent practicable;

  E. To the extent practicable, district lines shall use visible geographic features, city, town and county boundaries, and undivided census tracts;

  F. To the extent practicable, competitive districts should be favored where to do so would create no significant detriment to the other goals.

  There is very little difference between this and the overview of the law that I posted.

  • Link

   

• TeaPartyPatriot posted at 10:13 am on Fri, Nov 4, 2011.

  Posts: 207

  (14) The independent redistricting commission shall establish congressional and legislative districts. The commencement of the mapping process for both the congressional and legislative districts shall be the creation of districts of equal population in a grid-like pattern across the state. Adjustments to the grid shall then be made as necessary to accommodate the goals as set forth below:

  A. Districts shall comply with the United States Constitution and the United States voting rights act;

  B. Congressional districts shall have equal population to the extent practicable, and state legislative districts shall have equal population to the extent practicable;

  C. Districts shall be geographically compact and contiguous to the extent practicable;

  D. District boundaries shall respect communities of interest to the extent practicable;

  E. To the extent practicable, district lines shall use visible geographic features, city, town and county boundaries, and undivided census tracts;

  F. To the extent practicable, competitive districts should be favored where to do so would create no significant detriment to the other goals.

  abi, I defy you to find districts of equal population in a grid-like pattern across the state in the gerrymandered districts created by this commission, or have you even looked at the maps compared to the original district maps?

  • Link

   

• abimopectore posted at 12:51 pm on Fri, Nov 4, 2011.

  Posts: 168

  TeaPartyPatriot and Rational Human,

  I'm not arguing whether what the commission has done is right or wrong. Can you guys read English or is their a disconnect in your brain?????

  The Governor and the Legislature have acted and their action of removing Mathis is what will be under consideration if a court DECIDES to step in. Otherwise all this to and fro from both of you will be moot because the state government's action will stand as given.

  The article was about the attorney for Mathis attempting to overturn the state government's action of removing her. Do you understand now?????

  This is the only issue that is currently relevant until a court either decides to step in or not. In the meantime, all your blustering is besides the point and silly.

  • Link

   

• In_God_We_Trust posted at 10:45 am on Sat, Nov 5, 2011.

  Posts: 219

  Mathis failed to conduct the IRS’s business in open meetings and failed to adjust the grid map utilizing the goals set forth in the Constitution. It's an open and shut case of dereliction of duty.

  • Link