Mid-Decade Redistricting in Ohio

[jimrtex]

Bad Bad Democrats.

I've just discovered that the proposal for an independent redistricting commission in Ohio, if approved, would result in redistricting next year of Congressional and General Assembly districts for use in the 2008 elections.

The General Assembly is considering an amendment to the Constitution limiting redistricting to once a decade.

[Joe Republic]

And you think the 60% Republican majority in the House, 66% Republican majority in the Senate, and the Republican governor are likely to pass this?  As much as I would love to see an independent commission for redistricting here, it ain't gonna happen.

[TheresNoMoney]

It's on the ballot in 2006 and will likely be approved by the voters.  It's called Reform Ohio Now (RON).

Ohio is horribly gerrymandered, which gives the Republicans a 12-6 seat advantage in the U.S. House. Indepent redistricting is a good thing.

[Joe Republic]

Ohio is horribly gerrymandered, which gives the Republicans a 12-6 seat advantage in the U.S. House. Indepent redistricting is a good thing.

I agree, but would you really be complaining if the gerrymandered map gave the Democrats a 12-6 advantage?

[TheresNoMoney]

I agree, but would you really be complaining if the gerrymandered map gave the Democrats a 12-6 advantage?

I wouldn't complain, but I really do support independent, commons-ense redistricting in EVERY state. I welcome it even in states with Democratic-favored gerrymandered districts.

[A18]

These independent commissions are generally a good thing. However, they shouldn't gerrymander it to be competitive either.

What are the exact rules? I think districts should be drawn along county lines to the maximum extend practicable.

A 12-6 advantage is not an indicator of gerrymandering. You have to look at the districts.

[jimrtex]

And you think the 60% Republican majority in the House, 66% Republican majority in the Senate, and the Republican governor are likely to pass this?  As much as I would love to see an independent commission for redistricting here, it ain't gonna happen.

The independent commission would be created by the initiative process.  It is on the ballot for this November.  The other measure which is being considered in the house would restrict redistricting to years ending in "1" (HJR 9).  It is not clear to me that it can be passed by the legislature in time for the election.  My reading of the Constitution suggests that it has to be passed 90 days before the election.  It was just referred to committee this week, and it doesn't look lith the general assembly will meet again until October.

In each year ending in the number one and only at that time, except as provided in Section 6 of this Article,

[jimrtex]

Ohio is horribly gerrymandered, which gives the Republicans a 12-6 seat advantage in the U.S. House. Indepent redistricting is a good thing.

I agree, but would you really be complaining if the gerrymandered map gave the Democrats a 12-6 advantage?

The amendment requires that the state be horribly gerrymandered.

[jimrtex]

I've just discovered that the proposal for an independent redistricting commission in Ohio, if approved, would result in redistricting next year of Congressional and General Assembly districts for use in the 2008 elections.

State senators elected in 2006 on the current boundaries (for a 4-year) would continue to serve.  They would (if possible) be assigned a district to represent.  The assigned district might be one that they live in - but not necessarily a district that contained many of the voters who elected them.  Some voters willl not have voted for any senators.  This could be a fairly significant number of voters, given the potential for radical redistricting.

The assigned districts will first be used in 2010.  But redistricting will occur again in 2001.  So once again, senators elected in 2010 will be assigned districts under the new plan.

You will have two classes of senators:

2009-2013 Elected in 2008 using districts defined in 2007
2013-2017 Elected in 2012 using districts defined in 2011 (based on 2010 census).

2007-2009 Elected in 2006 using districts defined in 2001.
2009-2011 Assigned a district defined in 2007.
2011-2013 Elected in 2010 using districts defined in 2007.
2003-2015 Assigned a district defined in 2011.

[jimrtex]

What are the exact rules? I think districts should be drawn along county lines to the maximum extend practicable.

RON Amendments
I did not find the official text on the Secretary of State site, but only the ballot description.  I don't know if the version on the RON site is official or not.  One of the RON proposals, to create election commissions and permit unlimited early voting by mail, has been split into two ballot proposals, but remains in one proposal on the RON site.

[Smash255]

Bad Bad Democrats.

I've just discovered that the proposal for an independent redistricting commission in Ohio, if approved, would result in redistricting next year of Congressional and General Assembly districts for use in the 2008 elections.

The General Assembly is considering an amendment to the Constitution limiting redistricting to once a decade.

I wouldn't be in favor of it, but I find it kind of odd that a Texas Republican is complaining about mid decade redistricting among all things...

[Defarge]

Oh no! An independent comission! We must kill it!

[Max Power]

And you think the 60% Republican majority in the House, 66% Republican majority in the Senate, and the Republican governor are likely to pass this?  As much as I would love to see an independent commission for redistricting here, it ain't gonna happen.

And imagine what would happen to them if they rejected it? I can already imagine the ads:

"State Senator/Representative ______ voted against an independent electoral commission to eliminate gerrymandering. Why is he anti-Democracy?"

Or something like that......    <_<       >_>

[ian]

Oh no! An independent comission! We must kill it!

I'd support an independent commission, but only AFTER WE GERRYMANDER THE CRAP OUT OF THE STATE IF WE HOLD THE GOVERNORSHIP!!!!! 

[jimrtex]

I wouldn't be in favor of it, but I find it kind of odd that a Texas Republican is complaining about mid decade redistricting among all things...

The Texas legislature failed to redistrict in 2001, primarily because the Democrat-controlled House did not want the legislature to redistrict.  Democrats started filing suit as soon as the census bureau released its statewide totals in December 2000, before the legislature even met (one of its arguments was that Texas's existing 30 districts could not be used to elect 32 congressmen and the courts should jump in before the census bureau had even produced the detailed census information needed for redistricting.

The Democrats hand picked the East Texas district, because they didn't want the South Texas district court that had overseen the dismantling of the Democrat's 1990s racially tainted gerrymander.  One of the federal judges had been (then Governor) Ann Richard's Secretary of State at the time of the 1990's gerrymander.

The federal court did the minimum necessary to produce 32 equal districts, and to undo the worst of the bizarre atrocities of the Democrat gerrymander, but they resisted the urgings of the Democrat plaintiffs and other intervenors to legislate.  For example, telling Morris Overstreet, no matter what they thought about the idea of creating a 2nd black-majority district in Houston, that it was not their role as a federal court, but rather something that the legislature should do.

The Democrat plaintiffs appealed to the US Supreme Court, which refused to take the case, in effect endorsing the position that the courts should not legislate.

The next time the legislature met, they decided to fulfill their duty and obligation and perform congressional districting.

Everything since then has been the Democrat lawyers shaking down their clients to pay for fruitless appeals.

[jimrtex]

Oh no! An independent comission! We must kill it!

Do you know how the "independent" commission will be selected in Ohio and what their duties will be?

[jimrtex]

Bad Bad Democrats.

I've just discovered that the proposal for an independent redistricting commission in Ohio, if approved, would result in redistricting next year of Congressional and General Assembly districts for use in the 2008 elections.

The reason I missed it, the submitted "reform" proposal said:

"District boundaries adopted under the amendment shall not be changed until the next ensuing federal decennial census, except that the amendment provides for the first redistricting under the amendment to take place in the first odd-numbered year subsequent to the adoption of the amendment and use the most recent federal decennial census."

And this has been clarified with:

"Provide that legislative district boundaries shall change in 2007 and, thereafter, every year ending in one following a federal decennial census."

I think that this may have been done by the Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

How is this bad? Unlike the one in Texas, this one is up to the voters, and it might wait for the next census. You Republicans are a bunch of hypocrites if you oppose this, because I didn't see you opposing the mid-decade Texas gerrymander.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Oh no! An independent comission! We must kill it!

That together with "Let's save $65 million in levee spending now, and pay $200 billion in handouts to Halliburton for rebuild contracts later" seems to comprise the entire Republican platform.

[jimrtex]

How to Get a High RON Score.

Bush carried Ohio by 2.1%.  It should therefore be possible to create 9 CDs carried by Kerry by 0.1% and 9 CDs carried by Bush by 4.2%.   This would give 18 balanced competitive districts, for the maximum possible score of 36.  It matters not a bit that this would split many counties with districts stretching from NE Ohio to the western, central, and southern Ohio.  The "independent commission" is legally obligated to use the plan with the highest RON Score.

However, there is another constraint.  2 CDs must be wholly within Cuyahoga County (Cleveland), and 1 CD must be wholly in both of Franklin (Columbus) and Hamilton (Cincinnati) Counties.  

Other counties, including Montgomery (Dayton), Summit (Akron), Lucas (Toledo), and Stark (Canton), may be split into 2 fragments.  Splitting of these large counties provides two Democrat areas that can be paired with Republican-leaning small town and rural areas.

The CDs in Franklin and Hamilton Counties can easily be balanced.  Bush carried Hamilton by 5.4% and Kerry carried Franklin counties by 9.4%.  Selecting areas that produce a CD with a margin within 5.0% is trivial.

Heavily Democratic Cuyahoga is more of a probem with its 33.7% Kerry majority.  We are probably stuck with two Democrat seats here, just as under the current plan (in 2004, Kerry carried these seats by 63.4% and 16.7%).

Cuyahoga is entitles to 2.112 CDs.  If we assume that the part of the county that is placed into CDs extending outside the county is as Democratic as the part of the 2 CDs within the city, then the rest of the state (16 CDs worth), went for Bush by 6.7%.  

Creating 16 Republican districts with a 6.7% margin, and the two Cuyahoga Districts gives a RON score of -4.  So there will have to be some more heavily Republican CDs, so that the rest are "competitive".

I can create one district that is 14.999% Republican, and another that is 22.2% Republican, and have 14 districts that are 4.999% Republican.  The more heavily Republican district can be paired with the less heavily Democratic district in Cuyahoga County to form a pair of balanced uncompetitive districts.  The two Republican districts could be created in western Ohio and the Cincinnati suburbs.
The RON Score is 12 points.

The RON score can be approved by creating a few Democratic "leaning" (0.001%) CDs.  I can take 3 4.999% Republican districts and convert them to  2 0.001% Democrat districts and 1 14.999% GOP districts.

Each 0.001% Democratic CD balances a 0.499% Republican CD.  After 1 conversion:
2 Dem and 2 GOP balanced competitive districts.
9 GOP competitive (not balanced) districts.
2 other GOP districts.
1 Dem and 1 GOP balanced uncompetitive districts.
1 Dem unbalanced competitive district.
RON Score: 15 points.

After 3 conversions:
5 Dem and 5 GOP balanced competitive districts.
1 Dem competitive (not balanced) districts.
4 other GOP districts.
1 Dem and 1 GOP balanced uncompetitive districts.
1 Dem unbalanced competitive district.
RON Score: 19 points.

If I convert 2 of the GOP 14.999% districts into a 4.999% district and a 24.999% district:
6 Dem and 6 GOP balanced competitive districts.
2 other GOP districts.
1 Dem and 1 GOP balanced uncompetitive districts.
1 GOP unbalanced competitive district.
1 Dem unbalanced competitive district.
RON Score: 20 points.

If Republicans can pick up 1/2 of the Democratic "leaners" (GOP congressional candidates ran slightly ahead of Bush in 2004), then I have a 13-5 GOP delegation.

But what if I can make the two Cuyahoga districts more balanced?  A 34% Democratic district is not going to threaten the election of a black representative.  And if the voters decide to replace Kucinich with a 2nd black representative, it is not a Voting Rights violation.

The two 34% Democratic districts can be paired with two 29% Republican districts.  They already exist in the existing plan.  The rest of the state can be divided into 7 0.001% Democrat leaners and 7 4.999% GOP seats.  RON Score 28 points.

For this to work I need 7 concentrations of Democratic voters that will be split into 2 CDs that are combined with Republican areas.  Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus, Toledo-Lorain, Akron, Canton, and Youngstown.  It may be necessary for one Youngstown seats to swing away from the Ohio River (the other can be paired with GOP areas in NE Ohio).  The Democratic areas of Stark County (Canton) can be paired with rural areas towards the southwest. while the Republican areas can be used to balance the Akron and Youngstown districts, and then a Ohio River seat can be created snaking from Steubenville to Cincinnati.

[jimrtex]

How is this bad? Unlike the one in Texas, this one is up to the voters, and it might wait for the next census. You Republicans are a bunch of hypocrites if you oppose this, because I didn't see you opposing the mid-decade Texas gerrymander.

The legislature in Texas only districted once.  The legislature of Texas is elected by the citizens of Texas, and is vested by the United States and Texas constitutions with the authority and obligation to divide the state into Congressional Districts.  Just because the 2001 Texas legislature failed to perform their duty, does not absolve nor prevent later legislatures from doing so.

The judicially imposed districts were only used for one election, and the properly constituted districts will be used for the remaining 4 elections.

The Ohio proposal explicitly calls for a mid-decade redistricting, and tried to sneak it on the basis of support for a reform proposal for future redistricting.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

How is this bad? Unlike the one in Texas, this one is up to the voters, and it might wait for the next census. You Republicans are a bunch of hypocrites if you oppose this, because I didn't see you opposing the mid-decade Texas gerrymander.

The legislature in Texas only districted once.  The legislature of Texas is elected by the citizens of Texas, and is vested by the United States and Texas constitutions with the authority and obligation to divide the state into Congressional Districts.  Just because the 2001 Texas legislature failed to perform their duty, does not absolve nor prevent later legislatures from doing so.

The judicially imposed districts were only used for one election, and the properly constituted districts will be used for the remaining 4 elections.

The Ohio proposal explicitly calls for a mid-decade redistricting, and tried to sneak it on the basis of support for a reform proposal for future redistricting.

In other words, the Republicans blocked the Democrats in the legislature from re-districtiinging in 2002, and so the courts drew a plan that the Democrats didn't like. There's some serious hypocrity there.

[jimrtex]

How is this bad? Unlike the one in Texas, this one is up to the voters, and it might wait for the next census. You Republicans are a bunch of hypocrites if you oppose this, because I didn't see you opposing the mid-decade Texas gerrymander.

The legislature in Texas only districted once.  The legislature of Texas is elected by the citizens of Texas, and is vested by the United States and Texas constitutions with the authority and obligation to divide the state into Congressional Districts.  Just because the 2001 Texas legislature failed to perform their duty, does not absolve nor prevent later legislatures from doing so.

The judicially imposed districts were only used for one election, and the properly constituted districts will be used for the remaining 4 elections.

The Ohio proposal explicitly calls for a mid-decade redistricting, and tried to sneak it on the basis of support for a reform proposal for future redistricting.

In other words, the Republicans blocked the Democrats in the legislature from re-districting in 2002, and so the courts drew a plan that the Democrats didn't like.

What are you talking about?  In 2002, the Supreme Court still hadn't made a final decision on the appeal by the Democrat interest groups.   Filing deadline for the primaries is in January, and the primaries are in March.  By the time that the Supreme Court had ruled, the candidates for the General Election had already been chosen. 

In 2000, the census figures were released and the Democrats started sueing.  The courts held them off telling them the issue was not ripe.

In 2001, the Democrats controlled the House of Representatives, the Republicans controlled the Senate.  They not only failed to redistrict congressional districts, they failed to redistrict the legislative districts.   The Texas Constitution provides for a Legislative Redistricting Board to handle legislative redistricting in the event the legislature fails to do so.  There is no such provision for congressional districts.

Once it became clear that the legislature would not act, the federal court took over.  The court plan is largely based on the 1990s Democratic gerrymander, with some of the patently bizarre features and geographical atrocities removed.  But they specifically refused to enact changes sought by the Democratic plaintiffs wanted, saying that was solely the domain of the legislature. 

To consider a districting plan imposed by the federal courts as final, is to effectively deny me and the other citizens of Texas the right to express our political will through our legislature.   Perhaps such a deprivation of fundamental liberties is OK in Minnesota.

The district court decision was late in 2001, not too long before the filing deadline.  The Democratic plaintiffs appealed to the Supreme Court, which did not finally reject the case until June or July of 2002.

The legislature (unlike the Democrat-controlled legislature in 1992) waited until after the 2002 election.  The federal court plan resolved the immediate plan of not having 32 districts of equal plan.  There is no reason to regard it as anything other than a temporary fix.  In 2003, the legislature fulfilled their responsiblity to divide Texas into congressional districts.

[muon2]

How to Get a High RON Score.

Bush carried Ohio by 2.1%.  It should therefore be possible to create 9 CDs carried by Kerry by 0.1% and 9 CDs carried by Bush by 4.2%.   This would give 18 balanced competitive districts, for the maximum possible score of 36.  It matters not a bit that this would split many counties with districts stretching from NE Ohio to the western, central, and southern Ohio.  The "independent commission" is legally obligated to use the plan with the highest RON Score.

However, there is another constraint.  2 CDs must be wholly within Cuyahoga County (Cleveland), and 1 CD must be wholly in both of Franklin (Columbus) and Hamilton (Cincinnati) Counties.  

Other counties, including Montgomery (Dayton), Summit (Akron), Lucas (Toledo), and Stark (Canton), may be split into 2 fragments.  Splitting of these large counties provides two Democrat areas that can be paired with Republican-leaning small town and rural areas.

The CDs in Franklin and Hamilton Counties can easily be balanced.  Bush carried Hamilton by 5.4% and Kerry carried Franklin counties by 9.4%.  Selecting areas that produce a CD with a margin within 5.0% is trivial.

Heavily Democratic Cuyahoga is more of a probem with its 33.7% Kerry majority.  We are probably stuck with two Democrat seats here, just as under the current plan (in 2004, Kerry carried these seats by 63.4% and 16.7%).

Cuyahoga is entitles to 2.112 CDs.  If we assume that the part of the county that is placed into CDs extending outside the county is as Democratic as the part of the 2 CDs within the city, then the rest of the state (16 CDs worth), went for Bush by 6.7%.  

Creating 16 Republican districts with a 6.7% margin, and the two Cuyahoga Districts gives a RON score of -4.  So there will have to be some more heavily Republican CDs, so that the rest are "competitive".

I can create one district that is 14.999% Republican, and another that is 22.2% Republican, and have 14 districts that are 4.999% Republican.  The more heavily Republican district can be paired with the less heavily Democratic district in Cuyahoga County to form a pair of balanced uncompetitive districts.  The two Republican districts could be created in western Ohio and the Cincinnati suburbs.
The RON Score is 12 points.

The RON score can be approved by creating a few Democratic "leaning" (0.001%) CDs.  I can take 3 4.999% Republican districts and convert them to  2 0.001% Democrat districts and 1 14.999% GOP districts.

Each 0.001% Democratic CD balances a 0.499% Republican CD.  After 1 conversion:
2 Dem and 2 GOP balanced competitive districts.
9 GOP competitive (not balanced) districts.
2 other GOP districts.
1 Dem and 1 GOP balanced uncompetitive districts.
1 Dem unbalanced competitive district.
RON Score: 15 points.

After 3 conversions:
5 Dem and 5 GOP balanced competitive districts.
1 Dem competitive (not balanced) districts.
4 other GOP districts.
1 Dem and 1 GOP balanced uncompetitive districts.
1 Dem unbalanced competitive district.
RON Score: 19 points.

If I convert 2 of the GOP 14.999% districts into a 4.999% district and a 24.999% district:
6 Dem and 6 GOP balanced competitive districts.
2 other GOP districts.
1 Dem and 1 GOP balanced uncompetitive districts.
1 GOP unbalanced competitive district.
1 Dem unbalanced competitive district.
RON Score: 20 points.

If Republicans can pick up 1/2 of the Democratic "leaners" (GOP congressional candidates ran slightly ahead of Bush in 2004), then I have a 13-5 GOP delegation.

But what if I can make the two Cuyahoga districts more balanced?  A 34% Democratic district is not going to threaten the election of a black representative.  And if the voters decide to replace Kucinich with a 2nd black representative, it is not a Voting Rights violation.

The two 34% Democratic districts can be paired with two 29% Republican districts.  They already exist in the existing plan.  The rest of the state can be divided into 7 0.001% Democrat leaners and 7 4.999% GOP seats.  RON Score 28 points.

For this to work I need 7 concentrations of Democratic voters that will be split into 2 CDs that are combined with Republican areas.  Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus, Toledo-Lorain, Akron, Canton, and Youngstown.  It may be necessary for one Youngstown seats to swing away from the Ohio River (the other can be paired with GOP areas in NE Ohio).  The Democratic areas of Stark County (Canton) can be paired with rural areas towards the southwest. while the Republican areas can be used to balance the Akron and Youngstown districts, and then a Ohio River seat can be created snaking from Steubenville to Cincinnati.

An interesting plan.

One restriction I see is that no county can have more than two partial districts. Have you looked to see if this impacts your plan?

[jimrtex]

But what if I can make the two Cuyahoga districts more balanced?  A 34% Democratic district is not going to threaten the election of a black representative.  And if the voters decide to replace Kucinich with a 2nd black representative, it is not a Voting Rights violation.

The two 34% Democratic districts can be paired with two 29% Republican districts.  They already exist in the existing plan.  The rest of the state can be divided into 7 0.001% Democrat leaners and 7 4.999% GOP seats.  RON Score 28 points.

For this to work I need 7 concentrations of Democratic voters that will be split into 2 CDs that are combined with Republican areas.  Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus, Toledo-Lorain, Akron, Canton, and Youngstown.  It may be necessary for one Youngstown seats to swing away from the Ohio River (the other can be paired with GOP areas in NE Ohio).  The Democratic areas of Stark County (Canton) can be paired with rural areas towards the southwest. while the Republican areas can be used to balance the Akron and Youngstown districts, and then a Ohio River seat can be created snaking from Steubenville to Cincinnati.

An interesting plan.

One restriction I see is that no county can have more than two partial districts. Have you looked to see if this impacts your plan?

I think so.  Let's start with your plan.

I balance the two Cuyahoga County districts.

In the NE corner seat, I add Geuga to boost the GOP, and then use whatever part of Trumbull that I need to produce a balanced seat.

A district of Portage, Stark, Tuscarawas is about the right size and balance.  (Canton is the least Democratic of the NE Ohio cities).

A district along the Ohio River from Steubenville to nearly Cincinnati.  Hopefully there are enough Democrats.

I need to create two districts beginning in the Youngstown-Warren area that goes between the above two districts and then picks up areas east of Columbus.  This requires splitting Mahoning, Columbiana, and Carroll.  If I push west a bit taking in a bit of Stark and Tuscarawas, I will   By the time you get to Coshocton and Harrison the districts you no longer have to split counties.

The westward shift into Start and Tuscarwas, means that the Canton seat has to shift a bit westward into Wayne and Holmes Counties.

Your Toledo and Lorain seats are pretty near the right balance, and the NW Ohio rural seat is one of the GOP competitive seats.

Like the Youngstown seats, I need a pair of Akron based seats extending to the west.  I can go through Medina and souther Lorain, Hurd, and then dip down southward.  The other district would include the rest of Wayne, and then Ashland, Richland, etc.

The three Columbus area seats would have to redivide the city of Columbus to get more in balance,  The seat to the east would be swung around more to the south.  This makes the Zanesville and Newark areas available for the Youngstown seats.

Your Dayton and Cincinnati seats are close to balance, and the suburban seat from west of Cincinnati, through Hamilton and to Xenia is the other GOP dominated seat.  It might make sense to keep this a little more localized to the Cincinnati area.

The eastern Cincinnati suburbs seat gets split between the Ohio River seat and Columbus area seats.

The GOP (4.999%) competitive seats will tend to be in the SW, while the Democrat leaners (0.001%) will be in the NE.