Experts offer analysis of Ohio Dems’ redistricting

Dr. Chris Cusack, professor emeritus of geography at Keene State College, has completed an initial analysis of the redistricting map proposed by Ohio Senate Democrats.

He said he used Dave’s Redistricting app, a tool used by other political science firms.

The map is considered complete, contiguous, free of holes and has an equal population distribution.

In the proposed Ohio Senate map, 18 districts lean Republican, 11 districts lean Democratic, while four districts are too competitive to make a determination.

“I think this is relatively fair,” Cusack said. “There is nothing that jumps out as being problematic.”

He judged the Senate map to be 90 to 95 percent proportional in terms of fairness.

Districts were rated to be about 50 out of 100, which he deemed good. The map ranked lower in competitiveness at 16/100.

He said to have a high score in competitiveness there would need to be 45 to 55 percent partisan balance in each district; however, Democrats went for proportionality instead making it representative of the voting population.

“It’s almost impossible to do both,” Cusack said.

Dr. Brian Glassman, a professor emeritus at the Cleveland-Marshall College of Law, explained representational fairness as proportionality in maps.

“There is no such thing as a perfect map,” Glassman said.

He said voting history over the past 10 years should be represented.

He added map makers have a five percent margin for equally-sized districts when it comes to population.

For the Ohio House, 51 districts lean Republican and 26 districts lean Democrat, while 22 districts are competitive. He said proportionality and compactness were very similar to the Senate map with about an 85 percent proportionality score.

“These maps serve as a very strong starting point,” Cusack said.

Jen Miller, executive director of the League of Women Voters of Ohio, said they remain neutral on the proposed maps themselves.

The LWV worked with Common Cause Ohio to collect thousands of signatures to get redistricting reform on the ballot in 2015 and 2018.

She said they work against partisan gerrymandering by either party.

“Our goal is a process that truly serves the people,” Miller said.

She pointed out that because of way districts are drawn party majorities can be exaggerated, and don’t necessarily reflect the votes cast statewide.

“We are concerned that we have now passed our first deadline. It would be one thing if the commission said hey we are going to pass the deadline but we have a plan. Here is how we are going to work on maps together, everyone is going to be on the same page for how mapping is going to be done, what the timeline would be and when the public hearings would be, but we have just blown through that first deadline without any clarity,” Miller said.

She is concerned there has been no movement on mapmaking by the Ohio General Assembly.

“We have a Congressional mapping deadline right upon us as well,” Miller said.

She said more than a thousand Ohioans showed up at redistricting hearings last week asking for maps that represent them not political parties interests.

“We call on the commission to do better,” Miller said.

Common Cause Ohio Executive Director Catherine Turcer said it wasn’t surprising that legislators missed a deadline because the census information arrived late.

She said she was worried because the best way not to miss the next deadline is to come up with clear ways for how you are going to proceed to get to the next deadline,”

“The manipulation of district lines is the manipulation of elections and the manipulation of elections ends up manipulating public policy,” Turcer said.