A319 pilot reported aircraft being written up four times previously and MEL'd for PACK failures causing unsafe temperatures resulting in the pilot rejecting the aircraft. Pilot stated historically that maintenance followed direction to MEL problem rather than repair.

Narrative

I was assigned to work Aircraft X; an Airbus 319. The aircraft had been written up more than 4 times in 7 days for inability to control cockpit and cabin temperature while in flight - the cabin and cockpit were getting too warm. In some cases over 90 degrees. The aircraft had an MEL'd Pack 1. On the inbound leg; before I got the airplane on Date; it was again written up for hot cabin in flight; and the Flight Attendants on the inbound said the aft cabin was extremely warm and never cooled down while in flight. Maintenance came out and turned on Pack 1; cooled the cabin; and signed off the logbook. I questioned the Technician on what corrective action he took; and he explained he turned on the MEL'd pack; cooled the cabin; and signed off the book; but that because there was so much history with the issue; Maintenance Control was not authorizing the removal of the MEL'd pack without further investigation. I pointed out that I can't use an MEL'd item in flight; and the issue is not the cabin being warm on the ground. It's that it is getting too warm in flight. He agreed; but said he couldn't remove the MEL. So there was no corrective action taken in regards to the repeat issue. He told me Maintenance Control was asking me if I wanted to take the airplane. I called Maintenance Control; and was advised that if I refused the airplane; they could then fix it. Since we were going to ZZZ1; with a full flight and many of them older adults who would likely not do well in a hot; possibly 90 degree plus cabin for 2.5 hours; and with no fix available to the actual problem; I refused the airplane. As we were getting off the airplane; they had assigned the aircraft to another crew to work a different flight. I saw the Captain in the gate area and explained to him that I had refused the aircraft and why. He also subsequently refused the aircraft. The operation is stretched so thin; that there is no time to fix airplanes and instead they are being pressed into service with repeat issues; that are not being addressed. Not until pilots refuse them are they able to get fixed. It felt like Maintenance Control was almost saying - we want to fix it but we aren't being allowed...unless you refuse it. Then we will be allowed to fix it. Although clearly they tried to get another crew to fly the airplane before it was also subsequently refused. It's frustrating that a corrective action can actually not fix the problem. Cooling down the cabin on the ground wasn't the issue - the airplane was too hot in flight - repeatedly. It's also frustrating that pilots have to refuse airplanes to get them fixed; even if they try and get another crew to fly the airplane first. I also think the company should have to inform a Captain if the airplane was previously refused by a crew. Maintenance should have the ability to say that they are taking the airplane out of service since it has extensive history of an issue.