Demand Competition

It’s been a quiet summer at the IRC, punctuated by partisan posturing about investigations, complaints and lawsuits.

However, we are seeing the early outlines of maps, even now. The commission is in the stage of the process where they are considering “what if” ideas about what the first draft maps will look like.

While it seems very early in the process, it really is not. What happens in the next two weeks will directly inform the final maps.

The first draft maps will set the agenda. They will be the benchmark from which all parties will engage in the tough debates. If you’ve ever been involved in negotiations, you know that where you start the debate dramatically influences the outcome.

We are not exaggerating when we say things are going to happen very quickly from here on.

We have spent the last year building awareness through Gerrymandering, the movie, then speaking all over the state and finally hosting a contest to demonstrate just how much power you can have in this process.

All of that work will culminate in the next few weeks.

Its now or never for truly competitive districts!

So, we need you to get involved today in three ways:

1) Advocate for “competition first”.

Ten years ago, the commission waited until the very end of the process to consider competition. They did not pay attention to the many objective measurement tools for competition that are available. The result was disastrous.

We can’t make that mistake again. We are asking you to attend any of the upcoming commission hearings and specifically request that the commission:

a. prioritize competitive districts at the beginning of the process and not to wait until the end.

b. use objective measurement tools, such as Judge-It*, to allow all of us to scrutinize whether each district is competitive.

As an aside, partisan activists are running around saying that we have had competitive districts over the last decade “because they changed hands between the political parties.” They point to the fact that a couple districts changed party control in 2006 and 2010. This is a last-ditch argument to maintain the status quo. Help us fight this myth. In reality, the data does not support that these districts are competitive in terms of party registration or performance.

The definition of a competitive districts is simple: the registration percentage between both parties must be close enough such that the district could change hands in any given election –not just when there is a political tidal wave one way or another, as there was in 2006 and 2010.

2) Scrutinize the Maps

Partisans did not want the commission to use Redistrict Arizona, which many of you became familiar with during our contest, because they don’t want public scrutiny.

However, we can’t be stopped so easily. The Commission has provided a free on-line mapping tool for your use. Please, please use it to scrutinize every map that comes out!

This is where your power lies. The on-line mapping tool will show you the data behind the maps: Are they competitive? Are they compact? Do they protect voting rights? Are partisans or incumbents playing games with the districts?

As the draft and pre-draft maps are created, they should are put on line for you to analyze.

Go to this link to use the mapping tool.

The Commission is having a free on-line training session on how to use the mapping software on September 20th. There are only 600 spaces available. So, please register here today.

Frankly, we don’t think they did enough outreach to let the public know about this webinar. Please help us ask for another one. This process belongs to you and they should honor your need for training on the software.

3) Make a contribution

All of this organizing, analysis and work costs money. We are all volunteers, but we do have overhead costs. Please make a contribution at our website.

*”Judge-It” is one of many tools that is used to measure whether a district is likely to be competitive. It have been used in previous decades and in many states. The commission cannot simply rely on previous election outcomes. They must consider competitiveness at the very smallest census block and trace level, using sophisticated measurement tools.