Politics & Elections

A corrupt process from the core, Rhode Island redistricting wraps up

The process of redistricting and the myriad, spiraling issues it reveals does not tell a story. Instead, it expresses itself as a list of symptoms – symptoms, to carry the metaphor forward, of a diseased pseudo-democracy gasping for its last breaths.

Rhode Island News: A corrupt process from the core, Rhode Island redistricting wraps up

February 10, 2022, 12:25 pm

By Steve Ahlquist

As House and Senate committees vote to approve the 2022 redistricting maps this afternoon, putting together a story on the process has proven difficult. The process of redistricting and the myriad, spiraling issues it reveals does not tell a story. Instead, it expresses itself as a list of symptoms – symptoms, to carry the metaphor forward, of a diseased pseudo-democracy gasping for its last breaths.

1. Tonights vote to approve the redistricting legislation comes after two hearings in the House Committee on State Government and Elections. The public had ample opportunity to express their displeasure with the bill (in fact, not one person testified in favor of the bill or the process). However, the bill being approved by the House Committee, H7323, is not the bill the public took the time to comment on. Instead, they will be voting on an amended bill, H7323A. No public comment will be taken on this version of the bill.

In the Senate Judiciary Committee, the situation was worse. The Senate held on hearing on the redistricting bill, S2162, that allowed for no in-person testimony and even cut off testimony from Republican Senator Thomas Paolino when he objected to a land grab excited by the Chair of the Redistricting Commission, Senator Stephen Archambault. Note also that the version of the bill the public was afforded a limited opportunity to comment on is not the bill the Senate Judiciary Committee will be voting on this afternoon. That bill is S2162A.

2. At the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the Redistricting bill, Senator Jessica de la Cruz attempted to position herself as leading the charge on more fair redistricting and concentrated on the Senator Archambault land grab.

Let me explain the Archambault land grab. The maps of the Senate districts were revealed in a series of maps, each updated with minor changes over time. The final maps were introduced 30 minutes into the final hearing of the Redistricting Commission, and approved before anyone from the public, and even most commission members, had a chance to go over them in any detail.

The final map showed that a significant portion of Senate District 17 had been incorporated into Senate District 22, a portion of land that just so happens to have land owned by Senator Archambault, who represents District 22.

Archambault addressed the issue at the Senate Judiciary Committee, which he co-chairs, but he mostly kept his comments to the end of the hearing, guaranteeing himself the last word and making it impossible for the public to challenge him:

But getting back to Senator de la Cruz: Though she led the charge against the Archambault land grab at the Judiciary Committee hearing, one wonders why, as an actual member of the Redistricting Commission, she didn’t do more.

Senator de la Cruz boycotted Redistricting Commission hearings held in places where masks were required, essentially declaring her anti-mask position as more important than redistricting and ceding the commission discussions entirely to Democrats. One meeting of the commission didn’t happen at all and needed to be reschueled in part because Senator de la Cruz held a fundraiser rather than attend.

In other words, it’s hard to take Senator de la Cruz’s objections seriously if she never took the process seriously. In fact, Senator de la Cruz’s one defining moment at the redistricting hearings was taking a strong stand against prisoner reapportionment, and betraying her lack of basic math skills to boot.

3. The Rhode Island Republican Party has expressed minor quibbles with the final maps and detailed the following three complaints in a press release:

  • [T]he proposed Senate map placed a small portion of the Town of Lincoln into Senate District 22. The only reason this part of Lincoln was placed in Senate District 22 is because Senator Stephen Archambault, who represents District 22, owns property in that part of Lincoln.
  • [T]he proposed House map puts a portion at the center of East Greenwich into House District 24, thereby creating a district that is non-contiguous by land. The reason this is being done is to placate Representative Justine Caldwell, who represents the adjacent House District 30. Caldwell, who narrowly won reelection in 2020, is afraid to lose the Harbor area of East Greenwich to District 24.
  • [T]he proposed House map breaks up the Meshanticut neighborhood in Cranston so that a portion of the neighborhood is not included in House District 17. Cranston officials made repeated requests and proposals to the Reapportionment Commission to avoid the break-up of local neighborhoods, but their requests were ignored as to the Meshanticut neighborhood. As a result, an odd-shaped district has been created which includes no locally elected Republicans who could challenge Representative Jacquelyn Baginski, a close ally of Speaker Joseph Shekarchi. District 17 was designed to protect Baginski.

Note that the Republican Party complaint has to do with final maps and not the redistricting process itself. It is hard to know, of course, but one reason Republicans may not be complaining is that ultimately, the redistricting process benefitted them as well.

Every single General Assembly incumbent benefited from a process that was built to guarantee that no incumbent would be redistricted out of their seat. Every member of the General Assembly had the opportunity – and all but a handful of legislators took advantage of the opportunity – to essentially draw their own districts. See: Redistricting in Rhode Island: Grand Theft Democracy

This was a secret process, conducted in a State House sub-basement office. No records were kept of these meetings and the existence of these meetings was not made known to the general public. The Republican complaint is really that some Democratic legislators – Archambault, Baginski and Caldwell – benefited a little too much from the process, not that the process overall was corrupt or un-democratic.

In redrawing their districts, members of the General Assembly – Republican and Democrat – strengthened their hold on power. Senate President Dominick Ruggerio, for instance, got rid of all the Providence neighborhoods that went for his opponent Lenny Cioe last election. Others removed potential challengers by moving them out of their old districts.

What this means is that the establishment has literally consolidated its power – making it that much more difficult for political change to occur.

4. At the Senate Judiciary hearing, there were several things to note that were difficult to appreciate without some experience of General Assembly committee hearings. For instance, early on in the hearing, Senate President Dominick Ruggerio and Senate Majority Leader Michael McCaffrey sat down and attended the committee as members. They did so in their ex officio capacity.

When General Assembly leadership attends meetings in their ex officio capacity, it’s usually to put their thumb on the scale of the process, to show their interest in getting a bill passed the way they want it to be passed, and to subtly signal, by their presence, that they won’t accept any member of their leadership team from straying too far off message. Note the silence of Senator Dawn Euer, who has pushed a bill for an Independent Redistricting Commission for years. She certainly understands the corrupt, undemocratic process at play, but she she chose to remain silent throughout the hearing.

Other members of the committee, such as Senator Frank Lombardi, were eager to throw themselves in harms way for Senate leadership. Senator Lombardi called into question the terrific reporting of Patrick Anderson in the Providence Journal that questioned the story behind the Archambault land grab. Baselessly attacking the integrity of journalists is authoritarian and anti-democratic.

Also of note was the presence of [former] Senator William Connolly as legal counsel for the Senate Judiciary Commission. Connolly was defeated by Cynthia Mendes last year, in part for putting the concerns of a developer he worked for as a lawyer over the interests of the East Providence residents he [putatively] served.

5. During the second House Committee hearing on the redistricting bill, legal counsel was provided by Timothy Williamson, a former state rep with a shady, sometimes criminal past.

Williamson asserted the General Assembly’s “legal authority to place the power of appointment for Senatorial and House District Committees in the hands of the chairpersons of state committees of both parties.” For more on this issue, see: Corruption and back-room deals: Redistricting Commission a massive failure


After the Senate and House committees approve the bills this afternoon, the full House and Senate will hear the bills next week. Those hearings will be longish, with Republican lawmakers possibly floating amendments to deal with the Archambault, Caldwell and Baginski issues, and progressive Democrats possibly floating some amendments as well. Most if not all of these amendments will fail as the majority of Democrats line-up behind leadership to ensure the fruits of their corrupt process.