Gerrymandering aside, vote 'no' on Issue 2 (or not)

Ohio Issue 2 is as plain as two crow turds on a plow handle. It really is.

Just how elementary is this proposed amendment to the Ohio Constitution?

Well, according to Matthew Cain of votersfirstohio.com, "Voters First is offering the people of Ohio a solution: Vote yes on Issue 2.

"A yes vote is a vote to put the citizens back in charge," Cain said in a Sept. 5 letter to The Highland County Press.

"A yes on Issue 2 means taking power away from the Washington politicians and creating an honest, accountable system."

And if that isn't straightforward enough for you, Carlo LoParo of Protect Your Vote Ohio – which opposes Issue 2 – says the issue "undermines the important constitutional doctrine of the separation of powers where each of the three co-equal branches undertakes particular responsibilities.

"This proposal inappropriately takes executive and legislative appointment authority and moves it to the judiciary. This politicizes the judicial branch of government, which must remain independent, fair and impartial."

Who's right?

Ah, that's where your friendly community newspaper columnist comes to the rescue.

In some aspects, both Messrs. Cain and LoParo are correct in that Ohio's redistricting process is a problem in need of a solution.

It has been for many years.

Why? Because partisan politics – more often than not – gets in the way of good government.

A quick read at one of your (i.e. Ohio taxpayers') many websites, in this particular reference, the Ohio Secretary of State (www.sos.state.oh.us/SOS/reshape/Congressional.aspx), points out that the Ohio Constitution designates five officials who are responsible for adopting General Assembly districts, known as the Ohio Apportionment Board.

Present members of the Apportionment Board reflect the political majority in power. Those members include four Republicans – Gov. John Kasich, Auditor David Yost, Secretary of State Jon Husted and Senator Tom Niehaus, and one lone Democrat, Rep. Armond Budish. (I'll bet he has to bring the coffee and doughnuts to the meetings, but I digress.)

Based on the results of the 2010 Census, Ohio has been apportioned 16 of the U.S. House of Representatives’ total 435 seats. This is down from the 18 seats Ohio has held over the last decade. Under the one person, one vote principle, Ohio's 16 districts must have an equal number of residents as is practicable, with the target population being 721,032, according to the secretary of state.

How we get there is the issue.

While the process for establishing General Assembly districts is prescribed by the Ohio Constitution, there are no specifications for the configuration of congressional districts. In Ohio, congressional district plans are a piece of legislation that is voted upon and enacted by the General Assembly and codified in section 3521.01 (ORC).

Thus, we have the political game of gerrymandering, which is almost as old as our great nation. It goes back to Elbridge Gerry, while he was governor of Massachusetts in 1812.

"Gerrymandering" was a word derived from "Gerry" and a snaky salamander, and used to describe an election district formed not of common sense, but of unfair political advantage.

As I wrote here three years ago, Ohio voters have long endured a disservice by our elected officials when it comes to the political art of gerrymandering.

Instead of doing the right thing (after the 2000 census) and drawing Ohio's legislative and congressional districts in a fair manner, based on population and a reasonable comprehension of geography, the Republican Party majority played politics. (Which explains Highland County's inclusion in the Third Congressional District a decade ago) and former Congressman Ted Strickland's Ohio River Houseboat District.

Democrats, when in the majority, are equally guilty of gerrymandering districts and stacking the deck on apportionment. There's no corner on the market.

The so-called "leaders" of these political parties apparently enjoy the gamesmanship, as they've gotten too old and too fat for country club golf or sun bathing in public. Gerrymandering is one of the few remaining pleasures they have. Let's not take that from the party hacks.

By the way, why is it that it's always the minority party that wants to reform gerrymandering tactics? (I think we all know the answer to that one.)

The only possible chance for real redistricting reform is for the majority party to step up and do the right thing. We do not need a constitutional amendment for that. We need honest representation without regard to party loyalties. And we have as much chance of receiving that as winning the lottery, probably less, in fact.

Gee whiz. Ohio State University boasts one of the world's highest-paid college presidents (with a multi-million-dollar expense account to boot). Couldn't the good doctor make positive headlines by having a few math and geography students put together an honest proposal for Ohio's congressional and assembly districts? Gee, just think of all the positive publicity.

Start at the northwest corner of the state and move down and over, using variables of population and distance, and divide the state into fair and balanced legislative districts.

It can be done. But only if the majority party has the guts to do it.

Oh, wait. It was done. A retired mechanical nuclear engineer from

Coshocton accomplished the task last year. 

One year ago this week, an editorial by Robert Brems Sr., a citizen

member of the Coshocton Tribune Editorial Board, appeared in the Sept.

25 Zanesville Times-Recorder.

In his editorial, Brems said, "The Republican-dominated redistricting committee for the state of Ohio has spit in the face of Ohio voters with their new, heavily partisan, grossly gerrymandered Ohio Congressional District map that already has passed the Ohio House of Representatives and the Ohio Senate.

"This gross misuse of political power is the reason most people have tuned out of the political process because it reeks of political self-interest, not the public's interest. This is not what the people want from their government."

Brems, who says he is a lifelong registered Republican, said he was one of two people who provided testimony at the Redistricting Committee's public meeting July 20 in Zanesville. His proposed redistricting map, which also is available on the Ohio Secretary of State's website, places Highland, Adams, Brown, Clinton and Fayette counties (and others) in the same southwest Ohio Third Congressional District.

However, as reported in The Highland County Press last year, the Ohio Senate voted 24-7 to approve a bill that would have placed Highland County in the 15th Congressional District.

That proposed district would have placed Highland County in the southwest corner of a horseshoe-shaped district. Other than a portion of Ross County to the east, all of Highland County's neighboring counties are in other districts in this proposal. Fayette County would be a part of the 10th District, while Clinton, Brown, Adams, Pike and a portion of Ross counties would be part of the Second District.

Sadly, Ohio 17th District Sen. David Daniels (R-Greenfield) voted in favor of the bill as did 86th House District Rep. Cliff Rosenberger, R-Clarksville, who also represents Highland County.

Highland County Democratic Party Chairperson Dinah Phillips told The Highland County Press that she didn't feel the proposed map looked at the needs of the people in the districts.

She was right – and was ultimately proved so.

"It's not fair to the people who they're supposed to be representing," Phillips said. "We have nothing in common (in the proposed 15th District) with the big industrial cities, and even the people. Their needs are not the same as the needs we have. We get overshadowed by the congressmen who represent the big district, which are composed of the large counties. They have more people; and therefore, they tend to gravitate toward what those people need, and ignore us."

"The results of this redistricting expose the charade that was played before the people of having hearings around the state to get the public's input to the redistricting process," Robert Brems said.

"Graphical online mapping tools were made available to the public by the Secretary of State's office to supposedly give the public a chance to draw their own maps and submit them for consideration. This was all a sham. The public certainly did not recommend anything like this monstrosity that will dominate Ohio politics for the next 10 years."

So, should Ohio support Issue 2?

No.

Changing our state constitution is not the answer.

Those who control the political party in power can fix this problem in one state committee meeting – if they have the guts. And if they don't (and let's be honest, they are gutless), then Ohio voters can hold their respective political party accountable.

But if Ohio voters do make a statement on Nov. 6 and support Issue 2, I'll understand.

Sometimes frustration with the system outweighs sound judgment.

Partisan politics reaps what it sows. Just deserts, etc. etc.

Rory Ryan is publisher of The Highland County Press.