COLUMBUS — A single statewide question greets voters on the May 8 ballot, asking them to amend the Ohio Constitution to create what backers claim will be a less partisan way to redraw congressional districts each decade.
Both the Republican and Democratic parties have endorsed it. It has a broad swath of bipartisan support from government watchdog, business, labor, and agricultural organizations.
Even the American Civil Liberties Union, which argues the plan would still allow partisan gerrymandering, isn’t asking voters to reject it.
Keary McCarthy, one of the leaders of the “yes” campaign on Issue 1, said a modest budget of less than $500,000 will focus on promoting the broad, bipartisan support. But he also knows that the multistep process involved could be relatively confusing to explain.
“We’re trying to be smart with how to use our dollars to communicate to the statewide electorate,” Mr. McCarthy said. “We will do some digital-targeted communication and will follow up on requests for absentee ballots.”
Campaign finance reports filed Thursday show that the Coalition for Redistricting Reform had raised nearly $163,000 through April 18 and still had the vast majority of that on hand to spend.
The National Democratic Redistricting Committee, which has made remap reform in Ohio a priority, contributed $50,000. No equivalent Republican money has been contributed.
The biggest contribution, just under $57,000, came from Columbus-based Strong Ohio Communities, which had promoted a public works bond issue in 2014.
Mr. McCarthy said the “yes” campaign is urging organizations that have endorsed the campaign to do their own outreach to their members. Volunteers who had been circulating petitions to put a stricter issue on the November ballot will continue to work through mailers, postcards, other literature, and community forums to get the word out.
The campaign has not faced any organized opposition willing to spend money to persuade voters to say “no.”
Today, Ohio sends 12 Republicans and four Democrats to Washington to stand for it in the 435-member U.S. House of Representatives.
Each decade following the latest U.S. Census, the General Assembly passes a new map that adjusts the boundaries of congressional districts to compensate for population shifts witnessed over the last 10 years. It is enacted as any other bill — with simple majority votes in each chamber and signed by the governor.
But far more than population is usually taken into consideration.
The majority party holds the pencil, and more often than not in recent cycles that pencil has been held by Republicans. Those in power, Democrats or Republicans, have used the process to tighten their grip on power by creating districts likely to send their candidates to Washington.
For example, the 9th District, dubbed the “Snake on the Lake,” hugs the Lake Erie shoreline from Toledo to Cleveland. It was drawn, at least in part, to force a primary election showdown between two veteran Democrats representing the opposite ends of that district. The result was one fewer Democrat in Washington.
The next map will be further complicated by the likelihood that Ohio will lose one of its 16 congressional districts because of its stagnant population growth compared to other states.
Issue 1 asks voters to create a new process that largely keeps the pencil in the hands of lawmakers but limits how they can exploit the process for partisan gain.
The General Assembly would get the first shot at passing a 10-year map with a three-fifths vote that includes the support of at least half of the minority party.
If that fails, the seven-member redistricting commission that voters created in 2015 to redraw state legislative districts would get a chance to pass a map that has the support of at least two minority members.
Failing that, the General Assembly would get another chance to pass a 10-year map, again with the support of three-fifths of each chamber but this time with just a third of the minority. If even that proves impossible, lawmakers could pass a map with simple majorities in both chambers, but the map would last just four years before the process would have to start again.
Lawmakers would be limited on changing lines for the benefit of a political party or incumbent; slicing and dicing counties, cities, and townships between districts, and creating elongated districts like the 9th.
Contact Jim Provance at: jprovance@theblade.com or 614-221-0496.
First Published April 30, 2018, 3:03 a.m.
