Ohioans will vote on Issue 1 at the Nov. 5 general election, a measure that could reshape the state’s voting districts by replacing the current politician-led redistricting commission with a 15-member citizen-led commission of Republican, Democrat and independent voters. But unclear ballot language may leave voters uncertain about what they’re voting “yes” or “no” for.
What is gerrymandering?
Ohio’s voting districts are redrawn every 10 years following the U.S. Census by the Ohio Redistricting Commission, a seven-member group consisting of the governor, the auditor, the secretary of state, two Republicans and two Democrats from the state Legislature.
The current members are Gov. Mike DeWine (R), auditor Keith Faber (R), Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R), Senate Majority floor leader Rob McColley (R), Senate Minority Leader Co-Chair Nickie Antonio (D), Representative Minority Leader Allison Russo (D), and Representative Jeff LaRe (R).
The Ohio Redistricting Commission was created after voters approved a state constitutional amendment in 2015, which prohibited state legislative districts from favoring one political party over another. It also required that districts be geographically logical, avoiding strange shapes designed to cluster specific voting groups and keep communities together by minimizing the splitting of counties, cities and towns, ensuring better representation of local interests.
Voters approved another state constitutional amendment in 2018 focused on anti-gerrymandering provisions for federal congressional districts.
Gerrymandering refers to manipulating the boundaries of electoral districts to favor one political party over another.
According to Michael Allbright, chair of the Clinton County Democratic Party, an example of gerrymandering is Hamilton County. The county is the equivalent in size to a U.S. congressional district due to its population, but the recent legislative maps split the county into three districts, dividing the urban voting bloc with a suburban and rural bloc.
“Instead of having a Congress person that’s rural, one that’s suburban and one that’s maybe urban, focusing on specific issues of where people are, they’re chopping up all the districts and making non-representative districts. That’s the biggest thing that gerrymandering does. It intentionally looks at where people live and tries to split up populations and make unnatural connections,” said Allbright.
Currently, the Ohio Redistricting Commission is required to approve the proposed maps through a bipartisan vote. If they can’t reach an agreement, the commission must submit a revised map. If disagreements continue, the state Legislature may create the maps. Courts have the authority to review the maps to ensure compliance with state and federal laws. If a new map isn’t finalized by the established deadline, the existing maps may be used for upcoming elections.
This process led to legal challenges in 2021 and 2022, with the Ohio Supreme Court ruling seven times against the proposed district maps, declaring them unconstitutional for violating the state’s anti-gerrymandering provisions and unfairly favoring Republican candidates.
Republican Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor was the swing vote in decisions regarding the redistricting maps, often siding with Democratic justices. O’Connor retired Dec. 31, 2022, and was succeeded by Republican Sharon Kennedy as chief justice.
“The map was ruled unconstitutional numerous times until they got the new Supreme Court. The one spot flipped, and then finally, it’s constitutional. That map didn’t change. The people deciding on the map is what changed,” said Allbright.
The latest Ohio legislative maps were unanimously approved by the Ohio Redistricting Commission on Sept. 26, 2023, and can be used for eight years.
“Is the map we have now perfect? Absolutely not,” said Terry Habermehl, Clinton County auditor and chair of the Clinton County Republican Party. “But they voted unanimously on those maps. To me, if they were such bad maps, why did the Democrats vote for it?”
What is Issue 1?
If Issue 1 passes, the Ohio Redistricting Commission will be replaced with the Ohio Citizens Redistricting Commission, consisting of 15 Ohioans: five Republicans, five Democrats and five independents who represent different geographic areas and demographics of the state.
“One of the biggest intentionalities [the new system] has is to make it more balanced,” said Allbright.
According to Allbright, the U.S. House representation for Ohio is currently 10 Republicans and five Democrats. The Ohio legislature has 67 Republicans to 32 Democrats in the House and 26 Republicans to seven Democrats in the Senate. The Ohio Redistricting Commission has a 5-2 majority favoring the Republicans.
“Democrats already only have a third of the power, and all they want is a third of the power. They want independents to get a third of the power, and to give that, you would have to give that one-third from the Republicans to the independents because independents decide pretty much every major election anyway, at least in swing states,” said Allbright. He added that with Ohio Republicans already holding two-thirds of the power in both state and national seats, they’re unlikely to want to reduce their share of control.
In statewide elections, Ohio’s vote tends to split about 53% Republican to 47% Democrat.
“This is what Democrats do when they can’t win an election. They change the rules,” said Habermehl. He believes the measure would negatively impact most of Ohio’s counties. “When you look at how red the state of Ohio is, if [Issue 1] passes, what’s going to happen is every district will have to be drawn basically 53 to 47, which is the norm in our statewide elections. It would disenfranchise 90% of the counties. There’s nine Democrat counties and 79 Republican counties.”
Choosing members for the new commission begins with four appointees — two Republicans and two Democrats — from the Ohio Ballot Board. Those appointees would choose a panel of four retired judges (two Republicans and two Democrats). These judges would select the commission members.
The judges would work with an independent search firm to find 90 candidates (30 Republicans, 30 Democrats and 30 independents). After a period of public comment on the applicants and interviews with each one, the panel will prune the group down to 45 candidates (15 Republicans, 15 Democrats and 15 independents), then randomly select six candidates (two Republicans, two Democrats and two independents) from that group to become members. Those six members would then choose the final nine members from the remaining candidates (three Republicans, three Democrats and three independents).
Suppoters of Issue 1 believe this would create a politically balanced redistricting commission. The judges and Ballot Board appointees would not serve on the commission. Current and former politicians, political party officials, lobbyists and large political donors are prohibited from serving on the commission for six years after leaving their roles. This would in theory ensure the commission’s independence and prevent political influence over the redistricting process.
The Ohio Citizens Restructuring Commission would be required to create new district maps with the approval of nine out of 15 members voting in favor of the proposed maps. If the commission can’t reach a consensus, they will decide using a ranked-choice selection process.
“Anybody believes that that commission is going to be nonpartisan is just fooling themselves,” said Habermehl.
He compared the proposed citizen-led redistricting commission to the Yellow Wood Solar Energy Center under construction near Martinsville. According to Habermehl, the Clinton County commissioners refused to grant Invenergy tax breaks because the company couldn’t adequately answer questions like how they would manage the property and maintain the roads.
“It went to the Ohio Power Siting board, which is an unelected bureaucratic committee, board, whatever you want to call it. They voted to go ahead with it, even though the people of Clinton County said they didn’t want it. That’s what’s going to happen with this commission. If Issue 1 passes, it’s another unaccountable board,” said Habermehl.
What a “yes” or “no” vote means
A “yes” vote would be in favor of the citizen-led commission, while a “no” vote would keep the redistricting commission as is.
Supporters of the amendment argue that the ballot wording is misleading, suggesting it would require gerrymandering instead of eliminating it. The ballot language states that the new commission would be “required to gerrymander the boundaries of state legislative and congressional districts.”
“There’s a lot of misinformation [out there],” said Allbright. “Even the way the Secretary of State wrote the language, it’s intentionally confusing. It’s intentionally combative.”
Secretary of State Frank LaRose drafted the ballot language for Issue 1 in August, and it was approved by the Republican-controlled Ohio Ballot Board – of which LaRose is also chairperson.
The board is responsible for ensuring that proposed amendments, initiatives or referendums are written in clear and understandable language for voters.
Citizens Not Politicians – the creators of Issue 1 – filed a lawsuit in late August against LaRose and the Ohio Ballot Board, arguing that the approved ballot language was misleading and biased and inaccurately described the amendment.
In September, the Ohio Supreme Court, primarily composed of Republican justices, ruled in a 4-3 decision to uphold most of the ballot wording proposed by LaRose.
Habermehl has seen voter confusion over Issue 1 because of Ohio having two different Issue 1s on the ballot in 2023.
“Somebody asked me, ‘Can I just use my Issue 1 sign from last time?’ And I said, ‘No. It says, ‘Vote Yes on Issue 1,’’” said Habermehl.
The sign referenced voting yes on the August 2023 Issue 1, a proposed amendment to raise the threshold required to pass future amendments to the Ohio Constitution from a simple majority (50% plus one vote) to 60%.
Why Issue 1 matters
Allbright believes Issue 1 is important because every voter in the state matters. “It should be decided by every registered voter in Ohio. It shouldn’t be decided by key elected officials, any elected official. It shouldn’t be the seven people on the current committee. Why should seven people control the vote of the seventh most populated state in the United States?”
Habermehl takes a more cautious view of Issue 1, questioning the motivations behind the proposal. “If I didn’t think [Issue 1] was totally politically motivated, I would say it’s a good start. It’s not the right start, but it’s a good start to fix the way we draw lines. But the best way for Democrats to ensure they get a seat at that table is to win the elections,” he said.
