Two members of Michigan’s Independent Redistricting Commission are on opposite sides of the campaign for Ballot Initiative 1, which would establish a similar commission in Ohio by excluding politicians from the district-drawing process.
The commission, created by the northern state, has met multiple times since Ohio’s redistricting reform No. 1 began its march toward the November general election. Michigan’s commission is made up of 13 citizens, unlike Ohio’s proposal, which would have established a panel of 15 Ohioans to draw state and congressional district maps.
In most cases, Michigan commission issues were raised in Ohio by opponents of Issue 1, including Ohio Senate President Matt Huffman and Auditor Keith Faber, who were both members of the Ohio Redistricting Commission, Ohio’s current source of district information. maps.
Other members of the current redistricting commission include the governor, the secretary of state, two Republican lawmakers and two Democratic lawmakers.
In 2021 and 2022, Republican partisans on the committee created five Ohio Statehouse maps and two U.S. Congressional district maps that a bipartisan majority of the Ohio Supreme Court found unconstitutional. In 2023, the commission unanimously adopted the maps with bipartisan support, although Democrats they said they only support them because redistricting reform is on the way and if they voted for it, Republicans on the committee would draw even more gerrymandered maps.
The creators of Edition 1 of the redistributive reform included the provision in proposed amendment which would clearly prohibit partisan gerry manipulation.
Huffman and Faber’s committee colleague, Gov. Mike DeWine, also opposes Issue 1, arguing that the commission, which would be created with redistricting reform language, would be “forced” to move the state toward Democrats and that there is no way the commission could operate as written.
Former Michigan chair
The opposition’s message echoes comments from a Michigan committee member who was brought in by state Sen. Michele Reynolds, R-Canal Winchester, to attend last week’s news conference in which he called for a vote against Ohio’s No. 1 pick.
Rebecca Szetela, former chairwoman of the Michigan Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission, said her experience as a supporter and member of the commission should caution Ohioans against the idea that creating a similar commission in their state might be a good idea.
“The (Michigan) commission was misled, and I think part of that is because those commissions are made up of people who have no experience in redistricting, voting rights law, and the like,” she said at Tuesday’s press conference. “These are random people, selected from the general public.”
Szetela said she fears a “repeat of what happened in Michigan,” where the maps were thrown out by a federal court ordered some House and Senate districts to be redrawn in the Detroit area.
These changes have been made by the committee and adopted by a federal court. All Michigan maps are effective as soon as changes are made earlier this year.
Ohio’s congressional maps remain unconstitutional because the Ohio Redistricting Commission did not make any court-ordered changes to the maps.
Issue 1 did not include Michigan as an exact model, according to former Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor, an advocate of redistricting reform and swing voting that led to the rejection of five Statehouse maps and both of the commission’s congressional maps. The Ohio Redistricting Commission in its current form.
In comments made during a public forum hosted by the Columbus Metropolitan Club, O’Connor said Ohio’s model was developed after looking at several states and redistricting methods, and while Michigan was considered, Ohio’s reforms “are not Michigan.”
The Michigan commission ended its work, but Szetela said the group had become an “elite class of people who can make all the decisions,” creating an “insular” group in Michigan that she said had “stopped listening” to the public and even members committee members, suggesting that power has reached some commissioners.
“I think the process is flawed because there are no experienced people,” Szetela said.
Reports of the commission’s drama come as Szetela herself has been the target of multiple condemnation attempts – and has tried to condemn people herself – with one of the commissioner’s colleagues saying that ““I personally felt persecuted” by Szetela and another that said Szetela “committed a microaggression” against a committee member.
Setela was formally condemned in September following personal comments about a colleague from the third committee.
Szetela claimed that her right to freedom of speech was being trampled on as part of the vote of no confidence.
Current Michigan State Chair
Current Michigan commission chairman Anthony Eid said he doesn’t understand why Szetela says the process doesn’t work in their state when the maps were drafted and approved by a court.
“There is no perfect redistricting system, but here in Michigan we have proven that independent redistricting commissions work and provide better representation,” Eid told the Capital Journal.
Particularly outrageous are her comments that the commission members did not listen to public opinion and did not take its advice when drawing up the maps.
“We have many districts in the final map that match public expectations almost 1-to-1,” Eid said. “The notion that we haven’t listened to public comments is simply false.”
The Princeton Gerrymandering Project gave Michigan Congressional Map an overall grade of “A” with another grade of “A” specifically for partisan integrity. The map received grades of “C” for competitiveness and geographic features (which include district compactness and county division).
Condition House AND Senate Both maps received a “B” grade, although it was noted that the House maps showed “very compact districts” with “few county divisions.” The House map had a slight Republican advantage and the Senate map had a slight Democratic advantage.
By comparison, Ohio maps were rated “D.”
The Michigan commission is working on a lessons learned document that will discuss what worked well within the commission and what could have been done better. Eid said he would like to see more experts brought in to provide more perspectives, and he would recommend that Ohio hold as many in-person rather than virtual meetings as possible. As a committee that started during the pandemic, he said the engagement is completely different when the committee appears in front of a live group.
“I hope that the next commission will take our successes and our failures and incorporate these lessons into their policies,” Eid said.
Eid said he supports Ohio’s Issue 1 and believes Ohioans will encounter a group of commissioners who are willing to learn, willing to listen to public opinion and are accountable.
“It’s good that the public can have something to say about these maps, it’s good that they can see exactly how they are drawn,” he said. “The (Michigan Independent Commission) fixed the problems and (the maps) better reflect how Michiganders voted in the election.”
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.
