Ohio redistricting thread

[politicallefty]

10 safe R districts
4 safe D districts (1 in Hamilton county, 1 in Franklin county, 1 in Cuyahoga county and 1 around Akron which could be linked to include some parts of Lorain county)
1 competitive district in northwest Ohio (which is trending R fast)

I don't think a map could be drawn that safe without running afoul of the state constitution. It's also possible for Democrats to win the state Supreme Court. Democrats picked up 2 seats last year. If they do the same next year, it's a majority with original jurisdiction on all maps. The new amendment does have strict standards in place. I think a more likely map will be:

Safe D - 3 (Cuyahoga County, Franklin County, Hamilton County)
Likely/Lean D - 2 (Akron-based, Toledo-based)
Toss-up - 1 (Youngtown-based)
Likely/Lean R - 2 (Dayton-based, Northeast OH)
Solid R - 7 (Everything else)

[politicallefty]

Very serious organization.

Presenting illegal maps lmao.(Easy to fix but shows how negligent they are)

Illegal in what way? It's hard to tell from that angle.

I drew a map myself, but not really any better than some of the maps I've seen here. I think a fair map of Ohio has to do a few things, especially under the new criteria. Three safe seats are created for Democrats in the 3C cities (Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati). The Toledo seat should take in territory along Lake Erie in what should be a highly competitive seat. There should also be a compact Akron-based seat that should also be highly competitive (maybe slightly D-leaning). Western Cuyahoga County fits nicely with Lorain County, creating a slightly D-leaning competitive seat. A somewhat more controversial decision, though very justifiable, is to put northern Franklin with Delaware County. That would create a new near-safe Democratic district. The Dayton district would remain a Lean R district (though maybe closer to Likely R than Toss-up). The last non-safe district would be the northeastern district that would end up going from Lake County to Youngstown. Democrats would've killed for that district a decade ago, but it's Likely R now. That leaves 6 mostly rural safe R districts.

All in all, I think the fairest way to draw Ohio is 6 safe R districts, 4 safe D, 1 Likely R, 1 Lean R, and 3 in the range of Tilt D or Toss-up. It makes sense both geographically and with the recent political trends of the state. Prior to Trump, the geography of Ohio was pretty good for Democrats. The recent weakness in the northeast is extremely problematic for Democrats in the state. However, Ohio is nothing close to Missouri.

[politicallefty]

It is barely illegal but the Lorain West Cuyahoga is illegal in that it doesn't have a whole county or it is not wholly within 1 county. Should be easy to fix but still hilarious. Maybe an organization that focused on the issue should actually make sure the map is legal on the stricter objective criteria?

Ah. That does seem like a fairly easy fix though. The West Cuyahoga-Lorain district is a very reasonable district that makes perfect sense. The most logical thing would be to make a small chop into Cuyahoga from one of the other districts. With some small alterations, that is probably a near-ideal map for the state.

[politicallefty]

Fun fact: Franklin, Delaware, and Morrow is perfect for 2 congressional districts.

That makes the other district less safe, but it does make a lot of sense. Fwiw, I noticed the same thing in terms of Cuyahoga and Lorain being just slightly larger than 2 CDs. In theory, Ohio should be a fairly easy state to draw, but Republicans are particularly obstinate considering how much they have to lose seeing their gerrymander dismantled.

[politicallefty]

Fun fact: Franklin, Delaware, and Morrow is perfect for 2 congressional districts.

That makes the other district less safe, but it does make a lot of sense. Fwiw, I noticed the same thing in terms of Cuyahoga and Lorain being just slightly larger than 2 CDs. In theory, Ohio should be a fairly easy state to draw, but Republicans are particularly obstinate considering how much they have to lose seeing their gerrymander dismantled.

How do you see a fair NE OH shaking out?

The successor to OH-14 is pretty much boxed in on account of the plurality black Cleveland district. If there were more seats, Lake County would be a more natural fit with eastern Cuyahoga, but that's not the situation. There really isn't a better option than to put Lake with the Youngstown area (i.e. Trumbull and Mahoning Counties). The Republican trend in that part of the state makes that a Likely R district, as to opposed to a decade ago when it would've been a Likely D district on paper. That would leave a Summit-Portage-Geauga district that would be highly competitive (and would've swung to Biden compared to 2016). The West Cuyahoga-Lorain district would also be very competitive, with a slight Democratic tilt.

I mentioned a particular envisioning of a fair map just a couple posts above.

[politicallefty]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/2065965e-cbac-4a57-8957-a1611bf86084

This is the map I was thinking of before. I was going to do the North Franklin-Delware-Morrow district, but I didn't like how the other districts looked (OH-15 was looking like an arch). However, shifting some territory between 4, 12, and 15, I was able to avoid chopping another county. Overall, my goals were going for mostly compact districts and preserving COIs. This map splits 11 counties a total of 12 times, of which 3 are necessary due to being larger than a single district.

According to the analysis:

Proportionality: 89 (Partisan bias of 62/100)
Competitiveness: 37
Minority Representation: 48
Compactness: 69
Splitting: 74

PRES-2020: Trump 8-7
SEN-2018: Brown 9-6
GOV-2018: DeWine 8-7 (very nearly 8-7 Cordray, losing OH-14 by 801 votes)
AG-2018: Yost 8-7
PRES-2016: Trump 8-7
SEN-2016: Portman 13-2 (LOL)

Districts 1, 3, 11 and probably 12 are safe for Democrats. Districts 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 15, and probably 14 are all probably safe for Republicans. Districts 12 and 14 are both trending rapidly away from competitive territory. Prior to the Trump era, the 12th would've been a likely R seat and the 14th would've been safe D. That leaves four districts that should all be quite competitive. If you need to see the massive problem for Democrats in Ohio, it's that the 3 northern competitive seats would've all been safely Democratic less than a decade ago (not to mention OH-14).

OH-05: Biden+3.0, Brown+18.6, Cordray+6.8, Clinton+1.4
OH-09: Biden+0.1 (489 votes), Brown+20, Cordray+7.3, Clinton+2.2
OH-10: Trump+4.0, Brown+7.0, DeWine+6.3, Trump+6.4
OH-13: Biden+1.5, Brown+15, Cordray+6.7, Clinton+1.1

OH-12: Biden+14.4, Brown+16.6, Corday+7.3, Clinton+5.7
OH-14: Trump+11.3, Brown+11.2, DeWine+0.2 (801 votes), Trump+8.5

[politicallefty]

As to the above post, in what I consider a soft Dem gerrymander unless strict proportionality trumps all, is OH-14 as drawn as being the judicial Achilles Heel. A CD that takes in Youngstown and the burbs of Cleveland is ripe hanging fruit to pluck and consume in court or elsewhere. It is not obvious what the Dem gain is there, but it is there for the Asperger type obsessives, in the nature of another Dem seat. That is not going to fly with the Pub oriented Supremes. When you draw lines, think about just who the ultimate arbitrator is, almost all of which/who are partisan hacks, except for the odd court or person that is not, but even the bulk of them imo tend to be a partisan fail. But not perhaps all, cf MT. There the Dem tie breaker tossed her partisan affiliation into the dust bin. She honored her oath of office.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, but I did not draw OH-14 to be a Dem-friendly district. A decade ago, Democrats would have loved to draw that district, but times have changed. It's trending quickly away from Democrats. (I'm still stunned that Biden lost Mahoning County. I was expecting a Lackawanna-style reversion.) As I said before, it's fairly boxed in. I also wanted to keep Trumbull and Mahoning Counties together, as they form a COI. I can provide a good reason for the way I drew the lines beyond just partisanship. I tried to adhere to the subjective criteria as well as the objective criteria.

For example, I think the way I drew the Toledo district makes far sense that combining it with a bunch of random rural counties in the NW. Orienting the district to the east as a lakeshore district respects a COI, maintains relative compactness, and doesn't unduly support one party or the other. As for why I put Dayton with Springfield, I liked that the counties that made up districts 2 and 10 fit nicely as 2 CDs with one county split. It's still a Republican-leaning district no matter how you slice it. I did also want to keep a Dayton-based district and I feel that combining it with areas to the east makes more sense than going into the Cincinnati suburbs to the south.

Would this be more to your liking for the NE?



https://davesredistricting.org/join/be1e324e-52a3-4fa0-8010-9aac2cedfce1

It maintains the same number of chops as my first map. It pulls OH-14 about a point or so the right, but more importantly, pulls OH-13 about 3-4 points to the right and turns it into a Trump district (both years). That said, I would still argue it is a fair map. I would prefer to keep Summit County whole, but this does create an Akron-Canton district, a logical and compact COI. This map was actually even better for Sherrod Brown, winning 10-5 as opposed to 9-6. While his margin in OH-14 was significantly down, he managed to win this OH-07 (despite Trump having won it by 19% in 2016 and 24% in 2020). That doesn't mean any other Democrat has a chance. (I also suppose I could've changed OH-12 and put Morrow County in instead of splitting Union County, something I didn't do in my previous map because it made OH-15 an ugly monstrosity.)

Proportionality: 81 (Partisan bias of 64/100)
Competitiveness: 35
Minority Representation: 48
Compactness: 74
Splitting: 70

It's basically 7R-4D on the safe or nearly safe seats. It leaves four competitive seats of varying degrees, from more D-friendly OH-05 to more R-friendly OH-10. I think this or my first map are both extraordinarily fair maps that meet both objective and subjective criteria as established by the voters. Relatively to the country as a whole, all of the competitive seats are to the right of the nation.

[politicallefty]

It's less objectionable on a few counts, but that's not really saying much considering their first proposals. It's still really bad though. No district contained within Hamilton County and putting Cleveland's western suburbs with counties on the central part of the Indiana border? That's quite a monstrosity. The only real improvements are districts 9, 10, and 13. I've seen some Democratic maps draw the Dayton-based district like that and I considered it myself.

I'd like to see the numbers on 15 assuming that Franklin County is split only between that and 3.

[politicallefty]

Don't give them ideas. Hopefully, the Ohio Supreme Court will force something more reasonable. Even a soft Republican gerrymander could be acceptable. The problem is that Republicans in the Legislature are really going for the fences with these maps.

[politicallefty]

Don't give them ideas. Hopefully, the Ohio Supreme Court will force something more reasonable. Even a soft Republican gerrymander could be acceptable. The problem is that Republicans in the Legislature are really going for the fences with these maps.

I mean a soft Republican gerrymander could be fairly clean and probably more effective.The main reason its so ugly is mostly due to incumbent demands.

I would argue that a soft Republican gerrymander cedes the Big C cities to the Democrats. In fact, small changes to the new Republican proposal could make it just that. First, give up on Cincinnati and cede a district entirely within Hamilton County. Swap some territory between 4, 5, and 9 to make 9 a more balanced district. Make some changes to 15 to make it more balanced as well. I'd also say clean up the lines between 13 and 7.

[politicallefty]

Don't give them ideas. Hopefully, the Ohio Supreme Court will force something more reasonable. Even a soft Republican gerrymander could be acceptable. The problem is that Republicans in the Legislature are really going for the fences with these maps.

I mean a soft Republican gerrymander could be fairly clean and probably more effective.The main reason its so ugly is mostly due to incumbent demands.

I would argue that a soft Republican gerrymander cedes the Big C cities to the Democrats. In fact, small changes to the new Republican proposal could make it just that. First, give up on Cincinnati and cede a district entirely within Hamilton County. Swap some territory between 4, 5, and 9 to make 9 a more balanced district. Make some changes to 15 to make it more balanced as well. I'd also say clean up the lines between 13 and 7.

I guess my point is making the seats more compact. It's possible to do this but the northern seat can't head East, as that would take Carrey's hometown but if it takes all of Butler that means Davidson has to find territory.

I don't see why a soft Republican gerrymander does anything but nuke 9. As you can see my map does it and its extremely compact and nothing a court would strike down on any grounds other than partisanship. Having 15 take all of Franklin after the 3rd is reasonable. It is fairly easy to argue that one in court as keeping as much of Columbus as whole as possible. It's arguable that you could even have Jordan take the Northern part of Franklin.

First, I would say that looking after incumbents violates the Ohio Constitution, which says that "The general assembly shall not pass a plan that unduly favors or disfavors a political party or its incumbents." Hacking up Hamilton County assuredly violates the subjective aspects of the redistricting reform.

That same provision above does apply to the other districts. There is also a compactness provision, although that is more difficult to adjudicate. I had assumed there was a COI provision in the Ohio Constitution, but that does not seem to be the case. However, partisanship, incumbency, and compactness are still relevant aspects, despite how subjective they may be. Drawing an Akron-Canton district into ultra-Republican (and rural) Holmes County is a blatant Republican gerrymander,

[politicallefty]

I appreciate the Ohio Supreme Court is Pub friendly, but I cannot image how that court could find that OH-01 as drawn is anything other than a text book case of the lines unduly favoring one party. Its butt ugly erosity has absolutely nothing going for it other than illegal Pubmandering. I am amazed the Pubs were that at once stupid and arrogant enough to go there. I guess we will find out the hack quotient of the Ohio high court soon enough. I hope they blow that CD out, if only to set a good example for the NYS high court, that will be charged with applying a remarkably similar NYS redistricting law.

The balance of the map I think is quite bullet proof, and I would note that they even eschewed tri-chopping any counties, including Franklin, thus rendering OH-15 rather more marginal than what would be the case otherwise. They also made OH-09 more marginal than it perhaps needed to be. How selfless of them.

I'm in agreement with you on OH-01. Hamilton County can contain a district within its boundaries. There is no justification beyond partisanship for such a district. I would also argue that the redistricting provisions should require a competitive Akron-based district. That split of Summit County is an abomination. If they'd kept Summit whole and split Medina, I suppose it would be a begrudgingly acceptable district.

As for tri-chops, they did tri-chop Cuyahoga County. OH-14 sneaks in and grabs most of Cleveland's southern suburbs within the county.

[politicallefty]

Disappointing, but not surprising that DeWine approved the map. He has been one of the better governors during the pandemic, but he's still a partisan Republican at heart (albeit more traditional as opposed to Trumpist).

Unless there are any surprise votes at the OH Supreme Court, this is almost certainly in the hands of Chief Justice Maureen O'Connor. I'm not going to pretend to predict what the court will do.

[politicallefty]

Below is a link to the decision. The court got the legal standard exactly right*, but then went hackish big time**. Bottom line is that, by applying inconsistent standards, in addition to Cincy, the Dems are going to get another seat in NE Ohio and the Columbus burbs, so that Badger will not have to further endure the horror of being represented by a Pub Congressperson. So instead of getting the expected one seat, the Dems are going to pick up three more for a huge win, at least absent a red wave.

https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/Clerk/ecms/#/caseinfo/2021/1428

And this will all be done again in 4 years.

*If neutral redistricting criteria hewing to the specific line drawing rules give the Dems more seats than what they got, and what they got is not proportional, you have an unduly favoring problem.

**I don't think hewing to neutral redistricting criteria give the Dems another seat in NE Ohio and the Columbus burbs. Instead they get a another swing seat in NE Ohio.

I read most and skimmed through some, but I hope you're not trying to defend the dissent in this. The dissent basically said that despite passing a new constitutional amendment, it's beyond the Court's capability to discern or remedy violations. The dissent didn't even see anything wrong with Hamilton County. If you want hackish, the dissent basically ignores the will of the voters in passing restrictions on redistricting.

I'm a hardliner as to interpreting the law, but that doesn't mean common sense goes out the window.

[politicallefty]

The number of Biden districts is likely to be around 230, maybe more. This round of redistricting is likely to result in a more favorable outcome for Democrats than if national redistricting legislation was passed, unless that legislation used some efficiency gap BS. The only major gerrymanders on the GOP side were Texas, which was largely defensive, Ohio, which is now gone, and NC, which has a solid chance of being gone. IL and NY are probably enough to counter all standing GOP gerrymanders on their own.

Democrats have massively won messaging on the issue. They have made gerrymandering into a Republican phenomenon and in doing so have been able to install backwards ideas like the efficiency gap into the decision making of courts and commissions. Yet the GOP will not be so successful advocating for such measures in states where they have wasted votes. If we end up in a system where GOP gerrymanders all get struck down because of superior Dem messaging and litigation, while Dem gerrymanders are allowed to remain, the House should develop a Dem bias. Especially given that Dem strength in the suburbs has minimized geographic bias in the House.

I actually agree with you that Democrats have won the messaging war on this. I'm actually quite surprised as well. This didn't happen overnight. It's been an effort for a long time, massively accelerated over the past few years. Most states are largely in compliance with respect to what the FTVA would require. There are some exceptions, but something has definitely changed since the previous round of redistricting.

Democrats have invited Republicans on a regular basis to enact a nationwide standard for redistricting. Republicans want no part of it and want to leave congressional redistricting to the states without any new limitations. Nothing would make me happier than seeing both sides agree to a new paradigm that either establishes strict limits on partisan gerrymandering or establishes a new system altogether (maybe a semi-proportional system is the way to go, such as MMP). Unfortunately, our representatives in Washington have become increasingly unimaginative as the years have passed.

[politicallefty]

So much for Republican gerrymandering. But Dems getting >80% of the districts in Illinois is totally fine. Makes sense.

there's a bill that can be passed if the republicans don't like it.

Exactly. One party wants to ban gerrymandering at a national level, the other doesn't. So Election Guy's argument is totally in bad faith as usual.

The right-wing literally doesn't want anything done about gerrymandering.

I apologize for sharing a post from Hugh Hewitt, but it's from yesterday and it's worth understanding what some people are going for in this country. I'm not even going to pick apart everything that is wrong with that article. It's simply worth showing upfront what the other side wants. We were one vote away from SCOTUS striking down independent commissions in 2015. They want the Supreme Court to do their dirty work for them: wipe out all independent commissions, strike down any and all state amendments/laws constraining state legislatures from drawing Congressional districts, and eliminate the VRA once and for all. Their view is that state legislatures should have absolute plenary power to draw the lines however they want. I don't need to be hyperbolic. It's all right there in black and white.

That mindset is exactly why Congress needs to act with haste to establish national standards. Even a strict conservative will have a hard time trying to strike down a law passed by Congress's authority under the Elections Clause.

[politicallefty]

It seems like what Republicans really want is to lock in a guaranteed supermajority in the legislature. In Ohio, that's a 3/5 majority (so, 60 in the House and 20 in the Senate). Obviously, DeWine is likely a lock for reelection. While he's obviously more conservative than Kasich, he's still irritated the right-wing fanatics in the legislature quite a few times. That same veto threshold is also the minimum needed to refer constitutional amendments to the ballot.

Also, is nesting really required? I've never really understood the point. To me, it just seems to exacerbate the unnecessary redundancy of bicameral state legislatures.

[politicallefty]

The Dem proposal doesn't help dewine, all it does is draw out moderate Republicans allies in Franklin/Cuyahoga county.

The state House seems to be more problematic on that note. However, Republicans currently have a massive 25-8 majority in the state Senate. It seems likely if there's a proportionally fair map for the state Senate that an 18R-15D map would be quite useful for DeWine. Even if Republicans got back up to 20 on that map, they'd need to hold their entire caucus together.

Commission has adopted the Republican plan on a 5-2 vote. The map will last four years, instead of ten.

For the legislature or the Congressional map? Also, what are the partisan leans of said approved map(s)?

[politicallefty]

What is this incarnation of maps going for in terms of partisan balance? It's doesn't seem like the OH Supreme Court has much tolerance for the commission or legislature playing games.

[politicallefty]

Wtf is that 15th?

And obviously, they kept the ever-so logical Lorain to Mercer district.

[politicallefty]

How is this supposed to work with the primary election still scheduled for May 3rd? No one even knows what district they're running for.

[politicallefty]

It looks like this discussion is about the state legislature maps, although I don't see why those proposals can't work for the Congressional map as well. I think the state legislature maps are where the OH Supreme Court is really pushing hard. At someone on the Republican side of the commission realizes that this back and forth with the Court is not going to go anywhere.

As for the Congressional map, the Court is not going to accept anything that doesn't have a district entirely contained within Hamilton County. They also likely want a Summit County-based district as well. (Combine it with Canton in Stark County and you have a very good COI as well.) After that, the main points of contention are where to put the remainder of Cuyahoga County, how to draw the Toledo district, and whether or how to draw a second compact district in the Columbus. A northern Franklin-Delaware County district gets you a baseline of 5 Democratic districts out of 15. Unless you do rest-of-Cuyahoga plus Lorain, any district there will probably have a decent Republican lean. Democrats can probably hold the Toledo seat so long as it moves east along the lakeshore instead of into the hyper-Republican counties to the west.

[politicallefty]

I totally agree that that's what a fair map would probably look like. I think your OH-12 is at least Likely D. Northern Franklin with Delaware County is a double-digit Biden seat. I'll agree to disagree that any Akron-Canton seat would at least barely Lean D. I think it's around Biden+8, if I remember correctly.

If your OH-05 takes in all of Wood and moves east from there rather than west, I totally agree. Kaptur is a strong incumbent in what would be a toss-up seat. But yeah, definitely a toss-up. As for your OH-09, that's a big missing piece of the puzzle. It's competitive either way, but probably Lean R (and Likely R this year) if it goes into Medina and potentially south of there. A Cuyahoga-Lorain district would be extremely competitive. I think it would have a roughly even PVI. (It's crazy that that would likely have been a Safe D district a decade ago. Democrats really need to be concerned about their losses in NEOH.)

I think any Dayton district is basically fools gold for Democrats. I think it's one of those seats that a party has that the other party just can't break through no matter, despite appearing competitive on paper.

[politicallefty]

-Honestly if Republicans run State Sen. Stephanie Kunze (who held onto her Biden+15 state senate seat in 2020 by 100 votes) they have a good shot at keeping that OH-12. And if the seat goes further south down Franklin’s western border it’s probably less blue.
-For OH-05 I think a lot of it depends on if Latta’s the nominee or if he steps aside for someone like Gavarone. Kaptur’s far from safe though even in a narrow Biden seat.
-OH-09. Lorain probably is a bit too big to fit in a district with Cuyahoga if the latter is only split twice. I honestly was thinking a district have most of the suburban parts of Cuyahoga, Medina, and leftovers of Lorain, I’d assume Miller’s the R nominee here, but I’m not sure who Ds would run. Maybe Phil Robinson?
-The OH-13 would probably look like the one that’s in the current map. That’s only like a Biden+3 and almost all of Stark County’s bluest parts are already in the seat. Assuming it’s Sykes vs. Gesiotto I’d narrowly have the latter favored.
-The Dayton seat might be winnable for Dems once Turner’s gone, though Republicans would probably still be favored most of the time.

-Did Democrats even try in that seat or was Biden's margin unexpected? Republicans seem to have a really disproportionate majority in the Ohio Senate. While it could change this year, there are only three Republicans holding double-digit Biden seats (all in California and all only barely double-digits). A northern Franklin-Delaware seat could be as high as Biden by 14-15%.
-Oh, I never said Kaptur was safe. Democrats would need to gerrymander for that. I agreed with you that it would be a toss-up.
-Lorain-Cuyahoga does require another a very small split of Cuyahoga to meet the requirements of the OH Constitution (which requires all Congressional districts larger than one county to have at least one wholly-contained county). You could easily put that extra bit in either the NE district or the Akron-Canton district. I drew rest-of-Cuyahoga-Lorain in my own map and it's Biden+3.
-It looks like I was mistaken as to the Akron-Canton seat. That version is indeed about Biden+3, but the lines are kind of weird within Stark County. If you draw it more reasonably, you get up to about 4-5%, but I won't split hairs. It's probably a tough one if this year turns out to be particularly bad for Democrats, but if Democrats can't win a seat like that in a more neutral or even more Democratic year, they have much bigger problems than just one seat.
-I admit I don't know all that much about the Dayton area. You could be right if it's an open seat. The area did swing and trend Democratic in 2020. Interestingly, Democrats probably used to want to combine Montgomery with Clark. Clark seems to have swung seriously Republican in recent years. They might actually prefer Greene now. I didn't realize until just now that Biden did a few points better on the margin in Greene compared to Clark.

[politicallefty]

I'm not sure why everyone was so excited about a technical issue a few days ago. The Ohio Supreme Court retains original and exclusive jurisdiction over redistricting suits and they clearly have no appetite for unconstitutional maps. I think they're explicitly precluded from ordering their own maps for the state legislature, but I don't that's true for the Congressional map.

I feel it depends on what the district even looks like. If it takes in some of the more conservative areas in Franklin County in the southern parts of the county I can see her pulling it off. My OH-12 on my DRA is a Biden+7.8 district.

I thought we were talking about a northern Franklin-Delaware seat. That should easily be a double-digit Biden seat.