Fact Check
One of the nagging issues in the 3rd District battle between Jason Chaffetz and Rep. Chris Cannon is the fact that Chaffetz actually lives in the 2nd District. Now, as we explained in a story last month, there's nothing legally wrong with that, but it could pose political problems for GOP voters who wonder why he didn't run against Democratic Rep. Jim Matheson in the district where he lives.
But Chaffetz' campaign and his supporters have put forth an argument that needs a fact check. In a letter to delegates sent before the Republican State Convention, Rep. Craig Frank, a Chaffetz supporter, appears to try to clarify the situation, but instead muddies it with pretty overt misinformation.
"Some of you have expressed concerns to me about the fact that Jason lives in Alpine -- two miles outside the Third District," Frank writes in the letter. "Let me assure you that this is not a problem. As a legislature, we have already approved a new boundary for the Third Congressional District which wil include Jason's home in Alpine after 2010. In reality, Jason lives closer to you than either Mr. Cannon or Mr. Leavitt and can certainly relate to the issues that matter most to all of us."
This is the same logic that Chaffetz has offered.
But Chaffetz knows better and Frank certainly does.
After all, Frank was one of the legislators called into special session last year to adopt the four-district map in a frantic effort to get Congress to buy off on Utah's fourth seat in exchange for a representative from Washington, D.C. -- a proposal that Chaffetz opposed.
But there are two reasons the old four-district map will never take effect: population and politics.
First, population trends mean the districts will have to be changed after the 2010 Census if for no other reason than to account for the population growth.
Second, and this is the big one, politics will rule.
Re-drawing political boundaries is one of the goriest exercises around, fueled by boundless ambition and giant egos, not to mention vendettas and self-preservation, as politicos try to squeeze out opponents and stack the electorate in their favor. Last time around, The Wall Street Journal called Utah's map one of the worst, most politically craven exercises in the country -- a Republican scam.
So, when legislative leaders and GOP operatives meet with new Census data to redraw the 2012 map, you can bet anyone with political ambitions through 2022 will want to have a hand in it, there will be some creative lines drawn, and the map will look very, very different.
There is no telling if Chaffetz will ever end up back in the 3rd District, and it won't be until 2012 if it does happen. That is the fact, and if it's not an issue, as Chaffetz and Frank claim, they should be honest with voters about it.
-- Robert Gehrke
But Chaffetz' campaign and his supporters have put forth an argument that needs a fact check. In a letter to delegates sent before the Republican State Convention, Rep. Craig Frank, a Chaffetz supporter, appears to try to clarify the situation, but instead muddies it with pretty overt misinformation.
"Some of you have expressed concerns to me about the fact that Jason lives in Alpine -- two miles outside the Third District," Frank writes in the letter. "Let me assure you that this is not a problem. As a legislature, we have already approved a new boundary for the Third Congressional District which wil include Jason's home in Alpine after 2010. In reality, Jason lives closer to you than either Mr. Cannon or Mr. Leavitt and can certainly relate to the issues that matter most to all of us."
This is the same logic that Chaffetz has offered.
But Chaffetz knows better and Frank certainly does.
After all, Frank was one of the legislators called into special session last year to adopt the four-district map in a frantic effort to get Congress to buy off on Utah's fourth seat in exchange for a representative from Washington, D.C. -- a proposal that Chaffetz opposed.
But there are two reasons the old four-district map will never take effect: population and politics.
First, population trends mean the districts will have to be changed after the 2010 Census if for no other reason than to account for the population growth.
Second, and this is the big one, politics will rule.
Re-drawing political boundaries is one of the goriest exercises around, fueled by boundless ambition and giant egos, not to mention vendettas and self-preservation, as politicos try to squeeze out opponents and stack the electorate in their favor. Last time around, The Wall Street Journal called Utah's map one of the worst, most politically craven exercises in the country -- a Republican scam.
So, when legislative leaders and GOP operatives meet with new Census data to redraw the 2012 map, you can bet anyone with political ambitions through 2022 will want to have a hand in it, there will be some creative lines drawn, and the map will look very, very different.
There is no telling if Chaffetz will ever end up back in the 3rd District, and it won't be until 2012 if it does happen. That is the fact, and if it's not an issue, as Chaffetz and Frank claim, they should be honest with voters about it.
-- Robert Gehrke
5:06 PM
| 
10 Comments:
Frankly the main issue at hand is a non-issue here and that is that the Utah State Constitution allows you to live anywhere in the state and run for Congress in any district you want. Why? Because they knew and understood that gerrymandering was a reality of politics and that being represented by a good man or woman was more important than the exact physical location your house happed to be located at. Additionally, The proximity of Jason's home to the voters in the district he wishes to represent is just as pertinent as Mr. Cannon's. But for some other astute politician's meddling with the bounderies, Mr. Cannon could just as easily be out of bounds smack dab in the middle of the district! Those who insist on making this an issue are probably worried that they can't win on real issues that matter to the district.
You're absolutely right about it being legal for someone to represent a district other than the one where they live (although it's the U.S. Constitution that sets requirements for who may serve in Congress).
But telling voters that there's this map that will move Chaffetz back into the 3rd District, could give voters the mistaken impression that the map actually means something. It doesn't.
Just let voters decide whether it matters or not based on the actual facts of the situation.
Jason lives so close to the 3rd congressional district, when we redistrict in a couple of years he will likely end up back in the 3rd congressional district. Anyway, Jason has been living closer than Cannon for the past many years (since Cannon spends so much time in DC these days, thousands of miles away).
The trends that Rep Frank mentioned in his letter will only increase over the next many years. The 2nd congressional district will consolidate into Salt Lake and Summit counties. The 3rd congressional districts will once again encompass the entire Utah county. The 4th congressional district will include Dixie. The growth in Utah is not happening on the east bench of Salt Lake county. It's happening almost everywhere else.
I've lived in Utah county all of my adult life, including in Alpine. I now live in the Manila area of Pleasant Grove. I have no problem with Jason Chaffetz living in Alpine and representing me. He DOES represent me! I also received Rep. Frank's letter and took it to mean that he would LIKELY end up back in the third congressional district, following the next redistricting. I'm sure there was no intent to mislead anyone. Like the first commenter, it's a non-issue in my mind. Jason represents my views much more closely than the incumbent - THAT is what matters to me.
Um, is it just me, or does the above story not make any sense? What the Chaffetz campaign has put out on this issue is neither false nor misleading. The probablilty that the Utah Legislature will gerrymander again is extremely high, but the fact remains that the new map WAS approved, and that is all that has ever been maintained by Chaffetz et al. This story just proves even further that you shouldn't be too terribly concerned about where your Representative lives in relation to your district's boundary lines, because the lines are very likely to be moved again...and again.
The end of the day - Craig Frank misrepresented the facts in the letter. He said that the 3rd District "will include" Jason. You can't make that argument guys!
let me lay this out there...
In 2012 each district around the country will include roughly 690,000 people in them. Utah County will be WELL under that number. And southern Utah doesn't have the numbers to make it its own district. It's a highly probably that Utah County will again be split in some way and the northern end will go someplace else while the southern end will HAVE TO HAVE SOME URBAN AREAS. That's just the way that the numbers work.
What's hilariously ironic is that Jason couldn't vote for himself at the convention and won't be able to in the election(s). Although the U.S. Constitution allows him to run in any Utah Congressional District, election law limits his voting rights to the district of his residence.
I've heard Jason speak and I've seen Cannon's acceptance speech at the MALDEF awards. While some may disagree with the way I characterize it, MALDEF is an organization that supports the people who have come here from Mexico illegally. In his acceptance speech Cannon said that in Utah we don't distinguish much between legal and illegal immigrants.
When he said that he certainly wasn't representing me.
Really, what difference does it make if the guy lives inside the boundaries of the third district? If he isn't representing me he should be voted out.
The current districting map isn't the one for the next census. To assume that is misleading in itself. But why would someone run outside of their own district, and handpick a district when they can pick one that would REALLY make a difference--where they could build some GOP clout for Utah by running and defeating a Democratic seat? The only Democratic Congressional seat--the thorn in Utah's side is the place where Chaffetz could really have done some good if he really believes in those Reagan and Republican principles he claims to be converted to. And it's right in his very own district! That's what's so offensive. Too many stories for me...It is not a fact that the present map will be the future map or that Chaffetz will be inside the boundaries. The assumption is rediculously weak--like all of his insinuations and fantastic claims of heroic remedies he makes in his lovely speaches.Part of the problem with this boundary issue is that it is symtomatic of all his other misrepresentations. One of the comments made said that it doesn't matter about the boundaries and that one making that an issue probably can't win on "real issues". This person misunderstands the symptoms of "real issues". With all due respect: Chaffetz has made a habit of saying things misrepresentationally in such a way to make himself look good but the facts of what he says are not real. This is disturbing. Using every "buzz word" and popular sound byte imaginable to get a vote Oh, brother. And where's his history? His experience? Nobody is standing up to vouch for him. This reminds me of some other very well versed National politicians we have had over that last few years and currently with the gift of gab but no substance. I'll go with the humble workaholic, who's nearly the best performaing Congressman we've ever had (second to Howard Neilson--check Library of Congress) and the Congressman who continues to be the top producer of substantive bills (check out Library of Congress folks on the record of ALL your Congressmen)-- those bills would be called CHANGES...Really check the facts...
No flash in the pan from someone elses kitchen for me... I'll stay with Cannon.
I understood the various issues of where Jason lives, the Constitutional requirements, and the possibility of a 4th District, long before I decided to support his candidacy. For me it comes down to this--Jason more closely represents ME than any other candidate, which is what I want. Moreover, he has done his homework, is clear on the many upcoming issues, and is willing to speak openly and knowledgably about them. By the way, he lives closer to me than C. Cannon.
Post a Comment
<< Home