Map-drawing plan must be fair

Paper: Cincinnati Enquirer, The (OH)

Date: May 12, 2006

Editorial

Barely six months after Ohio voters soundly rejected a Democratic-backed plan to change the way the state draws its legislative and congressional districts, GOP House leaders have come up with what they consider a fair, bipartisan alternative.

The basic concept has merit; so do the sentiments behind it. But skeptical Democrats are correct in voicing concerns that the plan isn't as "bipartisan" as it seems.

Legislative leaders shouldn't rush it onto the November ballot. Such a major constitutional change merits a full, deliberate debate that includes all interested groups and considers many alternatives. The bottom line in any redistricting reform should be to make sure that Ohioans' choices are accurately reflected in the leaders that represent them in Columbus and in Washington.

Last fall's Issue 4, one of several reforms put on the ballot by a group called Reform Ohio Now (RON), clearly didn't pass muster. Confusing and badly flawed - "rigged" is more like it - the scheme would have taken gerrymandering to an absurd new level, and could have kept Ohio's electoral process tied up in courts for years. Voters certainly thought so; they walloped Issue 4, with 70 percent voting against it.

But within days, House Speaker Jon Husted, R-Kettering, and Majority Whip Kevin DeWine, R-Fairborn, a leader of the anti-RON forces, held out an olive branch to the defeated Democrats: Let's come up with another plan. The result of this unusual gesture, House Joint Resolution 13, is being debated this month, with the goal of getting it on the November ballot. Its main features look promisingly voter-centric, particularly the proposal to mandate partisan "competitiveness" within districts (see box), but behind the highlights are some questions.

House Minority Whip Steve Driehaus, D-Cincinnati, who proposed a basic redistricting reform several months before RON issue took shape, says Democrats see two "fundamental flaws":

If the independent commission can't agree on a plan, the decision is left to the Ohio Supreme Court, which is likely to remain heavily GOP-dominated for the foreseeable future. So the Republican members of the commission could simply agree to disagree, knowing their party could take charge of the process.

The plan's district "compactness" requirement, which would supersede the "competitiveness" rule, could isolate Democratic voters in a few urban congressional districts, guaranteeing a GOP majority in the state's Washington delegation for years to come.

"I am not interested in giving one party any advantage written into the constitution over time," Driehaus said.

So far, that advantage has come through pure politics. Traditionally, Ohio's once-each-census map-drawing has been a partisan process, controlled by the party that holds a majority on the state's five-member Apportionment Board - the governor, the secretary of state, the state auditor, and one legislator from each party.

In 1971 and 1981, Democrats ruled. In 1991 and 2001, Republicans reigned. There's reason to believe the cycle could restart in 2011, as Democrats have a reasonable shot at picking up the governor and auditor posts as early as this fall. Then again, Republicans could retain one or both seats.

This uncertainty explains why redistricting reform is such a loaded issue right now. Both parties are making calculations, hedging bets and second-guessing. Both have self-serving motives. Republicans might like a more neutral district-drawing scheme in place in case they lose majority control. Democrats, smelling blood, might prefer a taste of the traditional raw power Republicans have long enjoyed.

Driehaus also noted that House Democrats - namely, him and Minority Leader Joyce Beatty - have only been in on two meetings regarding HJR 13. "Yes, it has had Democrat input, but right now it is not a bipartisan plan," he said.

That doesn't mean GOP leaders have failed to act in good faith. Husted even has offered to adopt Driehaus' plan instead, although Driehaus says it's only a basic idea he proposed "to get the conversation going."

Finding a solution will not be easy. Setting up any method of drawing political districts is always a tricky proposition, full of unseen variables and moving demographic targets. Any plan will have arbitrary features that one party or the other can work to its advantage.

But leaders of both parties have the duty to minimize those features as much as possible. "The fact of the matter is that we need a plan that is fair - a plan that isn't about partisanship, personal motives, or political power plays, but instead is the right thing to do," DeWine said.

It's hard to argue with that statement, but it remains to be seen if HJR 13 is the "plan that is fair." We also wonder if Ohio voters, faced with a crowded November ballot anyway, will be in a mood to pass any redistricting plan so soon after torpedoing the ill-conceived RON proposal.

Lawmakers ought to take the time to explore all the plan's implications and make necessary changes.

If not, they should wait until next year and make the crafting of a smart, bipartisan and truly fair redistricting plan a major goal for Ohio's new governor and General Assembly.

About the proposal

House Joint Resolution 13, if passed by a three-fifths majority of the General Assembly, would be on the November ballot as a proposed Ohio constitutional amendment. Among other things, HJR 13 would:

Establish an independent, bipartisan, seven-member redistricting commission; the first four members would be appointed by the parties' legislative leaders, and the other three must be chosen unanimously by the first four members.

Keep state and federal elected officials from serving on the panel.

Require a "supermajority" of five to pass any plan, including at least one member from each party plus one of the three chosen members.

Mandate partisan competitiveness in drawing districts, provided it doesn't conflict with compactness, voting-rights laws and other factors.

Require all commission meetings to be open to the public.

Ban mid-census redistricting.

Allow any Ohio resident to submit a redistricting plan.

Section: Editorial

Page: 6B