Progressives Are Trying to Make Ohio More Like Michigan

As progressives continue celebrating their victory last year that enshrined abortion into Ohio’s constitution, their latest efforts could turn Ohio’s congressional and legislative districts into a much bigger problem for conservatives.

The group known as Citizens Not Politicians (CNP) has successfully secured ballot access for its proposed amendment, Issue One, to Ohio’s constitution, which the group claims will “end gerrymandering” once and for all in Ohio. Despite those claims, the backers and supporters of Issue One are not coming to this state to end gerrymandering; rather, they seek to exploit Ohio’s system to impose their radical progressive agenda further. 

Ohio’s New Issue One Will Confuse Voters

In a few weeks, Ohioans will vote on whether to approve Issue One (not to be confused with last year’s amendments seeking to increase the threshold for approving an amendment or enshrining the right to abortion into Ohio’s Constitution). Issue One, also called the Citizens Not Politicians Amendment by its advocates, seeks to create an “Independent” redistricting commission intending to make “fair and impartial” districts for the Ohio General Assembly as well as assist with the redistricting plans for Ohio’s congressional districts for the U.S. House of Representatives. On their webpage, the amendment’s advocates argue that the amendment would do the following:

• Create the 15-member Ohio Citizens Redistricting Commission made up of Democratic, Republican, and Independent citizens who broadly represent the different geographic areas and demographics of the state. 

• Ban current or former politicians, political party officials and lobbyists from sitting on the Commission.

• Require fair and impartial districts by making it unconstitutional to draw voting districts that discriminate against or favor any political party or individual politician.

• Require the commission to operate under an open and independent process.

Despite optimism from the amendment’s proponents, the language approved by the Ohio Ballot Board in a 3-2 vote is now being challenged by the CNP for what the group argues are “misleading descriptions” of the amendment. A statement from Don McTigue, the lawyer representing CNP, states: “I’ve never seen ballot language this dishonest and so blatantly illegal… [i]t’s insulting to voters, and I’m embarrassed for the Secretary of State.” (READ MORE: Springfield, Ohio Is About More Than Cats and Dogs)

Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose, a Republican, responded to the accusations saying, “It is what I genuinely believe to be our best effort to faithfully summarize, truthfully summarize, a very long amendment for the voters to consider.” On Sept. 17, the Ohio Supreme Court sided with LaRose and the Ohio Ballot Board, ordering that only minor changes were needed but that most of the language was accurate. 

While proponents have claimed that such an amendment would “fix” Ohio’s voting districts, their arguments fall flat when looking at their prized example: The bordering state of Michigan.

Michigan Passed a Similar Proposal. Gerrymandering Didn’t Go Away.

In 2018, Michigan passed its own amendment (Proposal 2) by an overwhelming majority of Michigan voters. Voters Not Politicians (VNP), the group responsible for changing Michigan’s redistricting model, received major funding and endorsements from national far-left organizations, including many of the groups currently funding and supporting Issue One in Ohio. Left-wing organizations including Action Now Initiative, The Sixteen Thirty Fund, and the National Education Association were among the key endorsers and financial backers of VNP. 

What became of Michigan in the following years? Unsurprisingly gerrymandering didn’t go away; instead, it was ramped up to a whole new level. Using the language of Proposal 2, progressives managed to use the independent commission to redraw the districts across Michigan in a way that enabled Democrats to secure both chambers of the state’s legislature in the 2022 midterms. Democrats didn’t hide the fact that the commission’s redistricting helped create the Democrats’ trifecta over Michigan’s government, allowing them to pass their extreme progressive agenda in Michigan.

As if regular gerrymandering wasn’t enough, things got worse after Michigan’s commission was found making unconstitutional districts by engaging in racial gerrymandering. Michigan’s Independent Citizen’s Redistricting Commission (MICRC) and the Secretary of State of Michigan were sued in 2022 for applying race for redistricting purposes. The federal lawsuit (Agee v. Benson) was brought by 19 African American Detroiters to the United States District Court Western District of Michigan Southern Division, arguing that the efforts to reduce the black voting age from 80 percent to 50 percent in 13 districts violated both U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act. The three federal judge panel sided with the plaintiffs in 2023, and affirmed that “All the districts were drawn in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution.”

Besides the ramped-up gerrymandering, the process itself has been a complete disaster. Accusations of bullying and inappropriate behavior amongst the members of the commission led to shouting matches, a failed effort to censure the commission’s chair, and a public apology. (READ MORE: Immigration Control Is Smart, Not Un-Christian)

The tension within the MICRC got so bad that, in 2022, the commission’s top attorney resigned, which pushed the commission further into chaos. The commission’s inconsistent approach towards redistricting has led to numerous lawsuits and court orders to redraw their proposals. Nancy Wang, executive director and one of the founding members of VNP, admitted that Michigan’s model is far from perfect and still faces many unresolved problems. During a policy talk in 2022, Wang said that “This is not a perfect process. It’s not perfect maps. People have concerns and they’re very real.”

Those Backing Ohio’s Issue One Are Hardly Bipartisan

Those behind the initiative to pass Issue One in Ohio are not as bipartisan as they appear. No different from the backers and supporters of VNP in 2018, CNP has received major funding from many out-of-state left-wing organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union, Tides Foundation, and Our American Future Foundation. The Sixteen Thirty Fund, the top contributor to the VNP in 2018, is once again the top contributor to the CNP, giving over $6.6 million in total contributions. 

Besides the clear partisan effort by progressives to take control over Ohio’s redistricting, the entire idea of simply “ending gerrymandering” is deeply flawed. The idea sounds great on paper, but it usually ends in complete catastrophe.

Issue One sounds promising, after all, who doesn’t want to combat corruption with the hope of attaining a fairer system? But there lies the key problem of Issue One and Michigan’s model: It’s predicated on a notion of reform that dwells in the theoretical, without recognizing limits set forth by reality. The fact is that, regardless of who draws the districts, someone will be dissatisfied. The task of redrawing districts is purely one of trade-offs, and there will always be some who don’t believe that the trade-offs made were fair or advantageous to them.

Groups like VNP and CNP ignore this reality and ultimately do nothing to stop gerrymandering. As Galen Druke pointed out: “If ending gerrymandering means creating maps that simultaneously enhance competition, don’t benefit either party, promote minority representation and keep cities, counties and communities whole, then it is impossible to end gerrymandering.” (READ MORE: It’s Not About the Cats. It’s About America.)

Regardless of the rhetoric, the idea of creating an “independent” commission begs the question, who is the commission independent of? According to the VNP and CNP, the answer is politicians and lobbyists. But, according to the language of Issue One, the commission won’t be elected or chosen by the people, rather it will be created by unelected bureaucrats from the Department of Administration Services and a bipartisan panel of “four retired judges.”

Despite the CNP’s claim that its amendment would put the people over politicians and lobbyists, the proposal itself makes it quite clear that the commission is not independent from “the politicians and lobbyists,” but the people. The harsh truth is that it’s impossible to remove politics from something that is inherently a political affair. As Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, notes, “You can’t take politics out of redistricting.”

As a native Ohioan, hearing the words “Ohio is becoming more like Michigan” is beyond insulting. Unfortunately, that might just be the case. If Ohioans take the misfortunate step of approving Issue One, then there will be nothing stopping left-wing Democrats from gerrymandering Ohio and pushing forward their extreme progressive agenda. If progressives have their way and are successful in Michiganizing Ohio, it won’t be long until the entirety of the United States has been Michgianzied, and our voices silenced. 

The post Progressives Are Trying to Make Ohio More Like Michigan appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.