​How would Issue 1 ban gerrymandering in Ohio​?

Issue 1 explicitly requires Ohio to “ban partisan gerrymandering and prohibit the use of redistricting plans that favor one political party and disfavor others.”

 

The current system allows politicians to ignore court rulings about unconstitutional gerrymandering in Ohio’s electoral maps. That’s why Ohio voters were forced to vote using maps the Ohio Supreme Court struck down seven times by the politician-run Ohio Redistricting Commission in 2022. Ohio is one of the most gerrymandered states in the country because politicians have abused their power for decades, creating maps that allowed them to pick their voters.

 

Issue 1 also requires that the statewide proportion of districts closely align with voter preferences, which are reflected by the outcomes of statewide elections. That means that if 60% of Ohio voters elected party X candidates in statewide elections, about 60% of the districts should be places where voters prefer party X. This will prevent manipulation of district lines for partisan advantage, aka gerrymandering.

 

The Ohio Constitution already requires this- here’s what it says now: “The statewide proportion of districts whose voters, based on statewide state and federal partisan general election results during the last ten years, favor each political party shall correspond closely to the statewide preferences of the voters of Ohio.” The real difference is that Issue 1 makes clear how close that proportion should be so that it is not subject to different interpretations, which is a flaw in the current law.

Where to find this in the amendment: Sections 6A, 4E

​

​​​​​​

​How would Issue 1 bring accountability to Ohio redistricting​?

First, it's important to know that the politicians in charge of the current system are not accountable to voters now. The Ohio Redistricting Commission is a politician commission with three statewide elected officials and four legislative appointees. The vast majority of Ohioans do not live in one of the four districts that have representation on the commission; this year, one Republican member and one Democratic member of the commission is running unopposed, so even their own constituents can’t hold them accountable. Most voters are unlikely to vote on candidates for statewide office based on their role in redistricting. 

 

And it's not just voters who can't hold these politicians accountable, the Ohio Supreme Court, who is named as the government authority able to have a check on the commission, couldn’t hold them accountable, either.

 

Issue 1 ensures accountability by requiring:

• all commission meetings and actions take place in public meetings

• at least 5 public hearings, held across different regions of Ohio and including opportunity for remote public participation and broadcast, to get public testimony before any redistricting plans are drafted

• at least 5 public hearings, held across different regions of Ohio and including opportunity for remote public participation and broadcast, to get public feedback after redistricting plans are drafted

• a fully open and transparent commission screening process

• a clear process for the commission to remove a commissioner for cause, which could include failing to disclose required information, gross misconduct, neglect of duty, incapacity, or actions undermining public trust.

• a public hearing to gather public comment. A replacement commissioner with the same partisan affiliate would be chosen using the same strict criteria as all other commissioners.

Where to find this in the amendment: Section 6B

​

​​​​

Why is Issue 1 ballot language is different from the Issue 1 amendment​?​

Ohio law requires the state to write a summary, also referred to as ballot language, for any initiative or statute that appears in front of voters. It does not require that the ballot language and proposed law say the same thing. The ballot language for Issue 1 was written by the same politicians who stand to lose the most when Ohio has strong anti-gerrymandering protections– this is an obvious conflict of interest. Full of distortions, the summary was written to confuse voters by making them think Issue 1 would cause gerrymandering, rather than ban it.

 

In the last three elections that involved an initiative or statute, the Ohio Ballot Board (which includes two legislative appointees from each party and is chaired by the Ohio Secretary of State) has been sued for misrepresenting the proposed law, and the Ohio Supreme Court has ruled in each of those cases that the Ballot Board erred. Unfortunately, the Court did not go far enough, forcing Ohioans to see inaccurate and biased ballot language when they go to vote.

 

It’s important to know that the ballot language in Issue 1 is NOT the law that would go into the Ohio Constitution when passed. The ballot language is only for elections and can be politically biased, as it is for Issue 1. For an accurate review of Issue 1 or any citizen initiative, look to the summary certified as "fair and truthful" by the Ohio Attorney General, which is required before a citizen-initiated constitutional amendment can be put to voters.

Where to find the actual summary of Issue 1, approved by the Ohio Attorney General: here.

​​​​​

​

Who is or isn't eligible to serve on Issue 1's citizen commission?​

The Amendment would ban current elected or appointive officials to federal, state, or local office and their immediate family members from serving on the Commission. That does not include police officers or people in the military, who, along with their families are eligible to become a member of the commission.

 

Ohio law says:

• “appointive officials” = offices appointed by the US President, Ohio governor, or a local jurisdiction

• “public office” = any state, county, municipal, township, or district office, except an office of a political party, that is filled by an election and the offices of United States senator and representative

Where to find this in the amendment: Section 3C​​

​

​

How would Issue 1 preserve the right to challenge maps in court?​

The Amendment preserves the right for Ohio voters to challenge any redistricting plan adopted by the Commission in the Ohio Supreme Court. Any registered voter may file a petition within 10 days of the Commission issuing its report on a new redistricting plan. If multiple petitions are filed, they will be consolidated into one case. The Court uses an expedited process to review challenges, ensuring prompt resolution.

 

Here’s the judicial review process for challenges:

• A bipartisan screening panel selects special masters aka redistricting experts to assist in reviewing the redistricting plan if a challenge is filed.

• The special masters issue a report on whether the Commission submitted plans that conflicted with constitutional standards

• The Ohio Supreme court reviews the report, and if they conclude the maps would violate the constitution, the Commission would be required to revise their plan.

• If the Commission fails to fix the violations, the special masters can make small adjustments to make sure the maps comply with the law

 

These processes provide Ohioans a pathway to challenge maps before they’re confirmed, as well as ensure that maps are accountable to the constitutional requirements banning gerrymandering.

​Where to find this in the amendment: Sections 8D, 11A 

​

​​​

How is Issue 1 nonpartisan and without favor to either political party?​

Given the chance, both the Republican Party and the Democratic party will gerrymander. Everyone wants to keep the power they have. But Issue 1 does not benefit one party over the other, and is supported by a broad grassroots coalition that includes Ohioans across political backgrounds.

 

The authors of this amendment include retired Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor, a Republican, and former Ohio Supreme Court Justice Yvette McGee Brown, a Democrat. Both red and blue counties signed the petition to get Issue 1 onto the ballot. Ohioans everywhere are united by a belief that gerrymandering prevents real representation for all of us.

See retired Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice O'Connor talk about Issue 1: here 

​​​

​

How does Issue 1 keep communities together?​

The amendment prioritizes keeping communities of interest together to ensure fair representation.

​

Communities of interest:

• are defined in the amendment as a group of people with shared representational needs, which can be based on factors such as common ethnic, racial, social, cultural, geographic, environmental, socioeconomic, or historic identities

• can also include municipalities, townships, and school districts

• cannot be defined by shared political identities or relationships with political parties or candidates

Where to find this in the amendment: Section 6C

​​​

​​

How would Issue 1 prioritize compliance with the Voting Rights Act to protect and empower communities of color?

Before any other considerations, district maps must comply with the Voting Rights Act, the federal law that prohibits any voting practices or procedures, including redistricting, that discriminate against voters based on race or ethnicity. All legal staff are required to have experience in enforcing or employing the Voting Rights Act.

 

Issue 1 is supported by every major civil rights organization in Ohio, including the NAACP, Ohio Unity Coalition, and Ohio Organizing Collaborative. Right now, Black Ohio voters are denied a clear path to fixing the gerrymandered 6th Ohio U.S. Congressional District in court. Read the statement issued by some of Ohio’s most prominent civil rights leaders calling on all Ohioans to vote yes on Issue 1 to end gerrymandering in Ohio here.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Where to find this in the amendment: Sections 6A, 4E​​