Maps showing demographic differences between Ohio's congressional districts
Credit Dayton Daily News
The way states draw congressional districts may be a contributing factor to the dysfunction of today's political climate, according to an investigation by the Dayton Daily News published earlier this week. While gerrymandering is nothing new, it's now much easier.
Both the statewide issues failed. Issue 1 would have convened a constitutional convention, and state lawmakers were hoping it wouldn’t pass so they could continue with an appointed commission which will make recommendations on changes to the constitution. And Issue 2 would have taken the power to draw the maps for state and federal lawmakers out of legislators’ hands and put it with a 12-member citizens’ panel.
Ohio voters have rejected a proposal to change the process for redrawing state legislative and congressional maps.
Issue 2 lost after a fight that pitted voter advocacy groups and unions against business interests and the Ohio Republican Party. Lawyers' groups split on the issue.
The constitutional amendment would have created a 12-member citizen commission to redraw Ohio's political districts every decade. It was prompted by discontent over the maps approved by the state Legislature in 2011.
Alongside the Presidential nomination process, the most prominent American political news stories these days are about the heated, high-stakes struggles over redistricting. The modern era of reapportioning state and federal legislative districts began almost exactly a half century ago when the U.S. Supreme Court decided Baker v. Carr (1962).