CONGRESSIONAL RUMORS

posted by Andrea Kelly

The Arizona Republic reported this weekend that State Sen. Ron Gould, a Republican from Lake Havasu City, is considering running for Congress in what will likely be the new district 4.

If the districts don't change, Gould could end up in a primary race with Paul Babeu, Republican Sheriff of Pinal County. It's worth noting that neither of the men have formally filed an exploratory committee, according to online Internal Revenue Service records. Once a person is officially a candidate for office, their financial accounting is done through the Federal Election Commission. While considering a run, potential candidates must create an exploratory committee through the IRS.

Keep in mind the puzzle of redistricting is not yet fully put together. The draft maps are still the subject of public hearings throughout the state, and need final approval from the U.S. Justice Department. Then there's the other issue of contention about whether the mapping process has been fair and legal, which is also still playing out.

REDISTRICTING INDEPENDENT? HARDLY

posted by Michael Chihak

Independence for the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission is being threatened from all sides.

Republicans are complaining -- and taking legal action. Democrats are complaining -- and hanging on to the reasoning from legal action they took years ago, resulting in 2009 case law that helped define the commission's role and activities.

Today -- Monday, Oct. 31 -- is the deadline that Republican Gov. Jan Brewer set for the commissioners to submit in writing responses to her inquiries about the commission's actions. Failure to do so is tantamount to an admission of wrongdoing, the governor said.

Whatever happened to the Fifth Amendment?

Brewer's demand is that the commission explain how it didn't violate the state's open meeting law and how it didn't violate the state constitution in the draft maps it drew up.

Attorney General Tom "this is not a partisan inquiry" Horne, a Republican, on Friday was bounced from investigating the commission by a Superior Court judge who said Horne has a conflict of interest because he once represented the commission on open meetings issues. He quickly turned the matter over to the Republican Maricopa County attorney.

Has anyone connected to this bothered looking at the state open meeting law? It exempts the legislative body in political caucus and conference committee and allows an open-to-interpretation exemption in other instances.

That applies to the Legislature, of course, and work in the Legislature often occurs privately, with the results made public upon floor debate and votes. Just look at this year's budget negotiations for an example.

What's the point? you ask. In 2009, the Arizona Supreme Court in a ruling regarding the Independent Redistricting Commission opined that the commission is doing legislative work and therefore acts as a legislative body, subject to the state's provisions for the Legislature.

It needs further legal exploration, but that would seem an appropriate starting point for determining if what some are saying the commission did is a violation of the open meeting law.