Early voting starts Oct. 8 for the Nov. 5 election, which includes a ballot measure known as Issue 1. In short, it’s an amendment to the Ohio Constitution that would change the state’s system for drawing political district maps for Congress members and state lawmakers. But Issue 1 has sparked a lot of questions and confusion about what exactly it will do — and if it will end gerrymandering. That’s a word that references how the process of map making can be manipulated to the benefit of one party. In short, the parties’ experts know how to study past elections to predict who voters may support in the future, among other tricks of the trade, to try to maximize their chances of winning.Both the campaigns for and against Issue 1 are claiming their side is against gerrymandering. This could leave voters to wonder: Who’s telling the truth?To help voters navigate the campaign and make an informed decision, Signal Ohio is offering this nonpartisan guide about Issue 1. This includes a comparison of the official ballot language, which summarizes the measure’s effects for voters, with the amendment’s official text. We also offer an explanation of key points of the text to help translate its technical and legal jargon. First, it’s important to provide a bit more information about Issue 1 and the backstory of the ballot language summary. What does Issue 1 do? The proposed amendment describes a multi-step process to change redistricting, the drawing of boundaries that define the political districts for state lawmakers and members of Congress. If approved by voters, the amendment would require redistricting to happen in 2026 and then every 10 years starting in 2031. It would start with replacing the Ohio Redistricting Commission, a panel of elected officials that’s currently controlled by Republicans, with a citizen’s commission that couldn’t include elected officials, lobbyists, party officials, candidates or their immediate family members. It also would set rules supporters say are meant to limit gerrymandering by requiring the maps to favor each party to win a share of districts similar to the parties’ share of the statewide vote.Who wrote the ballot language come from? State Republicans who oppose Issue 1 wrote the language that Ohioans will see on their ballots when they make their vote. The ballot language has no legal effect – it only summarizes what Issue 1 would do. Allowing ballot summaries was a reform passed in the 1970s to avoid having to publish lengthy and technical amendments directly on the ballot that might confuse voters. But research has shown that ballot language also can influence a measure’s chances of passing depending on what it says, especially in close elections.What voters should know about the Issue 1 ballot summaryThe pro-Issue 1 campaign filed a lawsuit in August calling the summary biased. But the Ohio Supreme Court’s four Republican justices largely upheld the summary as fair and accurate, although the court’s three Democrats disagreed.The main “yes” campaign group, Citizens Not Politicians, wrote the amendment and is funded by a collection of organized labor and other left-leaning groups, although its chief spokesperson is Maureen O’Connor, a retired Republican chief justice of the Ohio Supreme Court. Like the state ballot board that wrote the amendment summary, the anti-Issue 1 campaign has close ties to the Ohio Republican Party.Let’s dig into each section of the ballot summary of Issue 1.Part 1: Appointed commissionBallot summary: “To create an appointed redistricting commission not elected by or subject to removal by the voters of the state. … A majority yes vote is necessary for the amendment to pass. …Repeal constitutional protections against gerrymandering approved by nearly three-quarters of Ohio electors participating in the statewide elections of 2015 and 2018, and eliminate the longstanding ability of Ohio citizens to hold their representatives accountable for establishing fair state legislative and congressional districts.”Translation: This is Republicans’ way of again describing how new redistricting commission members would not be elected, which also means they couldn’t be voted out of office. They’re referencing how the amendment would repeal reforms voters approved in 2015 and 2018 to change congressional and state legislative redistricting in a way that was meant to make it more bipartisan. The reforms were supported by both major parties and passed easily, but broke down in their first use in 2021, leading to election delays and seven decisions from the Ohio Supreme Court ruling the maps were illegally slanted in favor of Republicans. However, commission Republicans and Democrats unanimously approved the current state legislative maps last year.Part 2: How political boundaries are drawnBallot summary: “Establish a new taxpayer-funded commission of appointees required to gerrymander the boundaries of state legislative and congressional districts to favor either of the two largest political parties in the state of Ohio, according to a formula based on partisan outcomes as the dominant factor, so that: 1. Each district shall contain single-member districts that are geographically contiguous, but state Legislative and congressional districts will no longer be required to be compact; and 2. Counties, townships and cities throughout Ohio can be split and divided across multiple districts, and preserving communities of interest will be secondary to the formula that is based on partisan political outcomes.”Translation: This section describes how the amendment would require the new commission to draw maps that favor each major political party — Republicans and Democrats – to win a share of districts that “closely corresponds” to their share of the statewide vote. Republicans have won about 56% of the vote over the past decade, so they would have to be favored to win around 56% of state legislative and congressional districts, down from the roughly 66% they currently hold. Adhering to this formula would require “gerrymandering,” state Republicans have contended. The rules voters previously adopted has similar language for legislative districts, but Republicans ended up arguing it was optional. The amendment text describes “partisan preferences,” defining it as an average of each party’s share of the vote over six years’ worth of statewide elections, which would be 2018 through 2024 if the amendment is approved.The actual text then says the redistricting commission “to the extent possible” should try to keep districts equal in population while limiting splits of government units like cities and counties while preserving “communities of interest.”It also says districts should give different types of minorities a chance to elect their “candidates of choice.” But, it reiterates the districts must favor each major party to win a share of districts in proportion to their statewide election performance. And it removes current requirements that districts be geographically compact.Amendment text: “To ban partisan gerrymandering and prohibit the use of redistricting plans that favor one political party and disfavor others, the statewide proportion of districts in each redistricting plan that favors each political party shall correspond closely to the statewide partisan preferences of the voters of Ohio.” You can read the full text of this section here, beginning on page 16.Part 3. Partisan commission membersBallot Summary: “Require that a majority of the partisan commission members belong to the state’s two largest political parties.”Translation: This section references how five members of the new redistricting commission would be Republicans and five would be Democrats, while omitting that another five must be politically unaffiliated.Amendment text: “The commission shall consist of fifteen members who have demonstrated the absence of any disqualifying conflicts of interest and who have shown an ability to conduct the redistricting process with impartiality, integrity, and fairness.” You can read the full text of this section here, beginning on page 7.Part 4. Removing commissionersBallot summary: “Prevent a commission member from being removed, except by a vote of their fellow commission members, even for incapacity, willful neglect of duty or gross misconduct.”Translation: This is Republicans’ way of describing the types of reasons the redistricting commission could cite when removing a fellow commissioner. But the amendment does not contain a way for voters to remove any commissioner.Amendment text: “A commissioner shall be removed only by the commission and only for cause after notice, a public hearing, and an opportunity for members of the public to comment. You can read the full text of this section, which spells out the reasons a commissioner can be removed, here, beginning on page 13.Part 5: Litigation rulesBallot summary: “Prohibit any citizen from filing a lawsuit challenging a redistricting plan in any court, except if the lawsuit challenges the proportionality standard applied by the commission, requirements pertaining to an incumbent elected official’s residence, or the expiration of certain senators’ terms, and then only before the Ohio Supreme Court.”Translation: This technical section describes how lawsuits over redistricting commission approved maps would be handled. The amendment says someone only can sue if they think the maps break the rule that requires each party to win a share of districts in proportion to their share of the statewide vote, or if they think the maps break a different rule saying the maps can’t take be designed to consider incumbent lawmakers’ home addresses or the expiration dates for certain state senators’ six-year terms. The amendment states clearly that people can’t sue over the secondary factors like community splitting or giving minorities a chance to elect their candidate of choice, although that wouldn’t stop someone from suing in federal court.Amendment text: “The Supreme Court of Ohio shall have exclusive, original jurisdiction in all cases which contend that a redistricting plan adopted by the commission fails to comply with the requirements of section 6(B) of this article.” You can read the full text of this section here, beginning on page 19.Part 6: Commissioner selectionBallot language: “Create the following process for appointing commission members: Four partisan appointees on the Ohio Ballot Board will choose a panel of 4 partisan retired judges (2 affiliated with the first major political party and 2 affiliated with the second major political party). Provide that the 4 Legislative appointees of the Ohio Ballot Board would be responsible for appointing the panel members as follows: the Ballot Board Legislative appointees affiliated with the same major political party would select 8 applicants and present those to the Ballot Board legislative appointees affiliated with the other major political party, who would then select 2 persons from the 8 for appointment to the panel, resulting in 4 panel appointees.”Translation: This language describes at length the multi-step process through which redistricting commission members would be chosen. It would involve a bipartisan panel of four retired judges, with members chosen by state legislative leaders from the opposite party, that would hire a search firm to find 90 redistricting commission candidates.The judges would narrow the pool of 90 people down to 45 people, and then randomly pick six of those 45 people to serve on the 15-member redistricting commission. Then, those six people would choose the other nine redistricting commissioners from that same pool of 45 people.Amendment text: “Section 2. Establishment of Bipartisan Screening Panel; Screening of Applicants;Formation of the Commission(A) A bipartisan screening panel is hereby established upon the effective date of this article toreview and screen applicants interested in serving as members of the commission. full public confidence. To be eligible to serve on the bipartisan screening panel, a retired judge shall satisfy all the requirements of section 3 of this article.” You can read the full text of this section here, beginning on page 7.Part 7: What happens if commission can’t agree on mapsBallot summary: “Require the affirmative votes of 9 of 15 members of the appointed commission to create Legislative and congressional districts. If the commission is not able to determine a plan by September 19, 2025, or July 15 of every year ending in one, the following impasse procedure will be used: for any plan at an impasse, each commissioner shall have 3 days to submit no more than one proposed redistricting plan to be subject to a commission vote through a ranked-choice selection process, with the goal of having a majority of the commission members rank one of those plans first.”Translation: This section describes what the commission would do if no plan can get the nine commission votes needed to approve a map before a legal deadline. It says commissioners would use ranked-choice voting — a form of voting that involves giving different options first, second and third-place votes, etc. – to pick a plan. If that ends up in a tie, then one would be chosen through a “random process” — such as flipping a coin.Amendment text: “If the commission fails to adopt any final redistricting plan under section 5 of this article by September 19, 2025, or by July 15 of every year ending in one, the following procedures shall be followed to resolve the impasse:(1) Each commissioner shall have three days to submit no more than one proposed redistricting plan for each redistricting plan that is the subject of impasse for a ranked-choice selection process.” You can read the full text of this section here, beginning page 18Part 8: Public inputBallot summary: “Limit the right of Ohio citizens to freely express their opinions to members of the commission or to commission staff regarding the redistricting process or proposed redistricting plans, other than through designated meetings, hearings and an online public portal, and would forbid communication with the commission members and staff outside of those contexts.”Translation: This describes how redistricting commissioners would be barred from talking about official redistricting business except for in public meetings, similar to how judges aren’t allowed to talk about court cases outside of court.Amendment text: “The commission shall conduct its hearings in a manner that invites broad public participation throughout the state, including by using technology to broadcast commission meetings and to facilitate meaningful participation from a range of Ohioans. In performing their duties, commissioners and commission staff, professionals, and consultants shall adhere to all applicable public records and open meetings laws.” You can read the full text of this section here, beginning page 14.Part 9: Deadlines for mapsBallot summary: “Require the commission to immediately create new legislative and congressional districts in 2025 to replace the most recent districts adopted by the citizens of Ohio through their elected representatives.”Translation: The amendment in various places describes setting up new state legislative and congressional maps that must be approved by Sept. 19, 2025, ahead of the 2026 election, and then again by July 15 every 10 years, starting in 2031.Amendment text: “No later than September 19, 2025, and no later than July 15 of every year ending in one, the commission shall adopt final redistricting plans. Proposed final redistricting plans shall be made public no later than three days prior to a meeting to adopt final redistricting plans.” You can read the full text of this section here, beginning on page 18.Part 10: Commission costs and members payBallot summary: “ Impose new taxpayer-funded costs on the State of Ohio to pay the commission members, the commission staff and appointed special masters, professionals, and private consultants that the commission is required to hire; and an unlimited amount for legal expenses incurred by the commission in any related Litigation.”Translation: This section describes requirements for the state to fund the redistricting commission. Commissioners would be paid $125 a day, adjusted for inflation over time, while the commission would start with a $7 million budget, which must be increased with inflation. The state would be required to give $875,000 to the bipartisan screening panel of judges for each round of redistricting. The state legislature would be required to fund any expenditures related to litigation or map-drawing by court-appointed experts.Amendment text: “Commissioners shall be entitled to one-hundred and twenty-five dollars per day, plus reimbursement for reasonable expenses at the rate set by the United States Internal Revenue Service, for each day attending commission meetings or otherwise carrying out the responsibilities of the commission. This amount shall be adjusted for inflation annually beginning in 2025. You can read the full text of this section here, beginning on page 21.The post Gerrymandering and Issue 1: How will Ohio voters decide? appeared first on Signal Akron.First published by Signal Akron.