Ohio voters are expressing confusion over the language written on their ballots by Ohio’s Issue 1 opponents, so let’s be clear: A Yes vote establishes a modern citizen redistricting commission. A “No” vote keeps politicians from the current Ohio Redistricting Commission in power.
Voting yes.
If Issue 1 is passed, a 15-member citizen redistricting commission would be created to remap the Ohio Statehouse and U.S. Congressional districts starting in the 2026 elections.
The commission would consist of five Republicans, five Democrats and five independent members.
Citizens serving on the commission would be selected by a bipartisan panel of retired judges, which would screen commission nominees for conflicts of interest, weeding out those who currently hold or previously held political office, have been appointed to federal, state or local office, or have served as a lobbyist political.
“Like a jury, such a commission has no conflict of interest and is tasked with ensuring an impartial outcome,” Sam Wang of the Princeton, New Jersey-based Election Innovation Lab said of the redistricting process proposed in Issue 1.
Once the commission adopts the map, any judicial challenges will be referred to the Ohio Supreme Court, which will review and approve or disapprove the maps.
The amendment proposal ensured transparency throughout the process, with public hearings and mapping taking place in a location open to public inspection and scrutiny.
As proposed, the amendment would counter gerrymandering by requiring proportionality in the mapping process, meaning the commission would have to create districts that match Ohio voters’ preferences from the last election.
Even those who support the amendment say it would mean the state would still be more Republican than Democratic, but the margins would not be as wide as in maps created under the current process, under the guidance of the all-elected official Ohio Redistricting Commission. Supporters argue that the modern redistricting model would create more competitive districts, which would translate into greater responsiveness of elected officials, greater representation and greater voter engagement.
don’t vote
A ‘no’ vote on issue 1 would mean that the process would continue as it stands. As it currently stands, the Ohio Redistricting Commission has authority when it comes to Ohio Statehouse maps, and is the authority on Ohio’s U.S. Congressional map if the state legislature cannot agree.
The ORK consists of the state’s governor, secretary of state and auditor, and four lawmakers: one person each appointed by the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House, the Minority Leader of the Senate, and the Minority Leader of the House of Representatives. The committee that created the last six Statehouse maps and two Congressional maps starting in 2021 included five Republicans and two Democrats.
The Ohio Supreme Court also reviewed maps for the Ohio Redistricting Commission when they were challenged, and rejected five of the six Statehouse maps as unduly biased and unconstitutional. Both congressional maps were also rejected as favoring the Republican Party in a way that did not reflect voting trends in Ohio.
The current system requires three public hearings on proposed maps, but does not require that map drawing take place in public places. In one case, the Ohio Supreme Court suggested hiring two independent map makers After rejecting the third attempt on Statehouse maps and launched a live broadcast of mapmakers.
After six days, with the mapmakers earning $450 an hour, their map was ready ultimately not taken by the Ohio Redistricting Commission, and a slightly revised version of the map previously rejected by the state supreme court was approved along party lines.
ORC members, most notably Gov. Mike DeWine and State Auditor Keith Faber, acknowledged that the current method needed some changes and that ORC’s maps could be improved.
Faber told the gathering Columbus Metropolitan Club in October that the current system “doesn’t work very well, it’s designed not to work very well, it’s designed with compromise in mind.”
But DeWine, Faber and others, including Senate President Matt Huffman, say the proposed amendment is not a solution, largely because ORC members say the parameters set for map drawing would not improve any redistricting efforts. DeWine and Faber argued that proportionality and competitiveness could not exist in tandem, and that the parameters would “force” the outcome rather than create fair maps.
DeWine went so far as to say that regardless of whether Issue 1 passes or not, he plans to urge the Legislature next session to implement Iowa’s redistricting method.
“I’m not going to say, ‘I’ll never, never, never,’ I’ll never do it, I’m not going to say that,” DeWine said in July when asked whether he would still push for an Iowa plan if Issue 1 is passed. “I hope we can overcome this problem in the fall… I will keep pushing and do everything in my power to lead so that we end up with something better than what we have now.”
DeWine said he wants to put the measure before voters in future elections.
Polls in Ohio will be open on Tuesday until 7:30 p.m
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.
