Meandering, odd-shaped districts are the very picture of gerrymandering, which defines Ohio’s congressional map.
It is among the most blatantly gerrymandered congressional maps in the nation.
The Princeton Gerrymandering Project, which rates the maps of all 50 states, gives Ohio a “D” – placing it in the bottom one-fourth of the nation.
The highly respected Cook Political Report, which assigns partisan indexes to all congressional districts, reports Ohio has 12 districts favoring Republicans, three for Democrats.
In gerrymandering, snake-like districts are drawn by the majority party, which controls the map-making process, to dilute the voting power of the minority party.
In Ohio’s case, for example, majority Republicans at the Statehouse drew the 9th Congressional District to dilute the voting power of Democratic-heavy Lucas County and metropolitan Toledo.
As a result, the 9th District’s partisan index (according to Cook) is only D+3, making it competitive.
Democratic-leaning Lorain County was stitched onto 11 Republican-heavy counties to its west to ensure the Cleveland metro area would have only one, not two, Democratic-oriented districts.
For the same reason, the southern half of Cuyahoga County was pasted onto Republican-oriented Medina and Wayne counties to its south. The result: The 7th Congressional District has a partisan index of R+7.
By the same game plan, half of Democratic stronghold Franklin County is stapled to five Republican-heavy counties to the west, rather than to a more natural neighbor to the north, Delaware County.
The same game plan severely dilutes the Democratic voting power of Hamilton County and the Cincinnati metro area.
Ohio’s map clearly violates the Ohio Constitution’s mandate that, “The General Assembly shall not pass a plan that unduly favors or disfavors a political party or its incumbents.”
Three members of the Ohio Supreme Court’s current Republican majority, ignoring the mandate, concluded in a 2022 dissent that the Ohio Constitution does not define the meaning of “unduly.” Never mind that the word’s meaning has remained unaltered for six centuries: More than is necessary. Synonyms: disproportionately, extremely, unfairly.
Law students learn “the plain meaning rule” – definitions of words are not required, and not desired, in constitutions or statutes when their meanings are clear from common usage.
Sadly, Ohioans are becoming accustomed to politicians in robes.
The stench of gerrymandering has been decried throughout American history.
In 1890, one of Ohio’s most famous politicians, William McKinley, a Republican, lost re-election to Congress primarily due to Democratic gerrymandering.
The following year – 1891 – statewide elections then were in odd-numbered years – McKinley was elected governor. In his inaugural address in January 1892, he condemned gerrymandering and urged the General Assembly to end it.
“Free suffrage is of little service to the citizens if its force can be defeated by legislative machinations in the form of a gerrymander,” McKinley said.
Over the last 132 years, Ohioans have become accustomed to promises to end gerrymandering by leaders of both major parties. All of them have been broken.
The most recent promise was in 2018. Ohioans approved a bipartisan amendment with an overwhelming 75% of the vote.
State Sen. (now Senate President) Matt Huffman, a Lima Republican, promised: “This plan ends the process of stretching districts far across the state, while maintaining the importance of the historic Voting Rights Act.”
The official argument in favor of the amendment, co-authored by Huffman, promised the plan would “promote geographically compact districts.”
Another broken promise. As anyone can see, Ohio’s congressional map contains many districts that stretch far across the state. They are anything but compact. They are drawn to maximize political power.