Downtown at Sunset by Bill Badzo, licensed under CC
No taxation without representation was the rallying call of American colonists as they pushed for independence from the British crown. Today, the situation is much different, but holding secure elections remains vital to taxpayers’ confidence that government is accountable to them.
That is why Americans for Tax Reform’s 2024 State Ballot Measure Guide includes election-related questions. Perhaps the most significant measure that would impact election processes is Ohio’s “Issue 1.”
This year’s Ohio Issue 1 (not to be confused with any ‘Issue 1’ from a prior cycle) would create an independent redistricting commission.
Ohio Republicans and Democrats have been levying accusations of gerrymandering at each other for as long as apportionment has existed. There has been a long line of attempted reform in the state. It isn’t even the first time Democrats have proposed a citizen redistricting commission. Twice before, in 2005 and 2012, such a policy has appeared on the ballot, both times slightly breaching 30% of the vote.
The current Ohio redistricting commission was the result of a bipartisan ballot measure in 2015. It gained 70% of the vote, and democrats left optimistic about the future. Not much has changed since.
While the redistricting commission isn’t independent of the state legislature, it requires bipartisan input, with at least 2 of the 7 members always being part of the non-dominant party. Moreover, for any redistricting plan, there must be a majority vote including members of both major parties, or else the plan doesn’t move forward.
What has Democrats up in arms is the fact that federal courts ordered the commission to approve a map that had been struck down as partisan gerrymandering by the Ohio Supreme Court if the members couldn’t decide by the deadline.
That map was only struck down because of one judge, Maureen O’Connor, who joined the organizers behind Issue 1 as soon as she retired and became one of the issue’s top public advocates. After her departure, the Ohio Supreme Court dismissed all challenges to the current map.
Issue 1’s redistricting commission would be an outlier among state redistricting commissions. The rules on how the commission draws district lines are very loose; the population threshold is just “reasonable.”, and existing municipal geography does not matter.
This would likely result in neighborhoods being carved up and combined with more suburban areas to add more overall districts that are favorable to democrats. One of the costs, warns former state legislator John Barnes, would be the end of seats held by African American elected officials.
A panel of unelected retired judges would screen applicants. Talking to members of the commission would not be allowed. Inexperienced commission members would be completely shielded from public feedback outside of formal meetings and processes.
Redistricting commissions like Arizona and Colorado select members of the independent committee through the state legislatures, and Supreme Court respectively. They both maximize for competitiveness, where Ohio Issue 1 would aim at proportionality.
Issue 1 has all the hallmarks of a costly, out-of-state effort to change the rules in Ohio to help Democrats, rather than install a commission that is anything like what other states do.