Ohio Moves to Pass Constitutional Amendment Establishing Citizen-Led Redistricting Commission

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Ohio voters will decide Tuesday whether they want to create a citizen-led redistricting commission to replace the state’s troubled political map-drawing system.

Proposed amendment proposed strong bipartisan coalition called Citizens Not Politicians, calls for replacing the current redistricting commission of four legislators, the governor, the auditor and the secretary of state with a 15-member citizen-led commission consisting of Republicans, Democrats and independents. Members will be selected by retired judges.

Supporters pushed the measure as an alternative after seven successive sets of legislative and congressional maps created under Ohio’s existing system – a GOP-controlled group of elected officials – were declared unconstitutionally rigged in favor of Republicans. A “yes” vote supports the creation of a commission, a “no” vote supports maintaining the current system.

Leading GOP officials, including Gov. Mike DeWine, have opposed the commission, saying its unelected members would be unaccountable to voters. The opposition campaign also objects to the amendment’s criteria for drawing House and Congressional boundaries (specifically, a standard called “proportionality,” which requires taking into account the political makeup of Republicans and Democrats in Ohio), arguing that it amounts to partisan gerrymandering.

The ballot language that will appear in voting booths to describe Issue 1 was the subject of litigation. It describes the new commission as “responsible for manipulating” district boundaries, although the amendment says otherwise.

Citizens Not Politicians sued the GOP-controlled Ohio Election Commission over the language, telling the Ohio Supreme Court it may be the “most biased, inaccurate, misleading and unconstitutional” language ever. or saw the state. Republican majority on court voted 4-3 leave the wording in place, but the judges demanded that some sections of the ballot text be rewritten.

At the press conference announcing his opposition, Devine said the mapping rules outlined in Issue 1 would divide communities and require results that fit the “classic definition of gerrymandering.” He promised to implement an alternative next year, whether the first edition passes or not.

DeWine said Iowa’s system, in which mapmakers are prohibited from consulting past election results or advocating for individual lawmakers, would work better to take politics out of the process. Proponents of the first option disagree, pointing out that Iowa lawmakers have the final say on political district maps in the state—precisely the scenario their plan was designed to avoid.