I Take It You Haven't Been Following the News

Saw this (via Real Clear Politics) at USAToday.com, dated 1-Nov-04:

More than 20 years ago, the Iowa legislature pioneered a system of turning redistricting over to technocrats instructed to create districts that are compact in shape and respect county lines as much as possible. They are barred from considering voting patterns or incumbents' political interests. It has led to more competitive races in Iowa.

Now an initiative pushed by outraged voters has forced Arizona to go that route.

I have to assume that no one at USA Today reads a newspaper. It is amazing to me how many things they can get wrong in one sentence.

• The Arizona initiative in question was passed 4 years ago.
• It did not put technocrats in charge. The redistricting commission is partisan by design, and its rules are guaranteed to create a majority of left and far-left among commissioners.
• It did not bar the commission from considering voting patterns nor political interests, but rather commanded the commission to consider them.
• It was not passed on the basis of outrage, but rather by a privately-financed campaign of misleading advertisements. The financier himself was the newly-selected chair of the Arizona Democrat Party, Jim Pedersen.
• After writing the rules, packing the commission and running the proceedings according to their own tastes, Democrats sued because they were displeased with the outcome.

Yes, it is unfortunate that we have widespread incumbent protection. It is also unfortunate that the USA Today has a policy of protecting misinformed, intellectually-lazy editors.

EDIT: Fixed the chronology. Jim Pedersen became chairman of the ADP before personally financing the initiative which created the redistricting committee.