Court can end gerrymandering

In 2018, Ohioans overwhelmingly voted for Issue 1 to reform how congressional districts were drawn up. They wanted fair districts and fair elections. But our state government failed to abide by that mandate, and there's just one chance left that it can meet it before it's too late. Lawmakers were mandated to redraw congressional districts this time to be compact with fewer counties in each district rather than jigsawed across the state with numerous counties cut up in pieces to gerrymander elections. Gerrymandering hits close to home in our region. After the 2010 census, Republican lawmakers in the majority drew up a new 9th U.S. Congressional District, from Toledo to Cleveland, including Sandusky. The new map combined the old 9th District with the old 10th District, adding Lorain and Cuyahoga counties to it. That map guaranteed that one of two sitting Democratic representatives — Marcy Kaptur or Dennis Kucinich — would be removed from office in the 2012 election. The new 9th District Republicans approved late last year removed those eastern counties where Democrats outnumber Republicans and added four counties to the west where there are more Republicans than Democrats, thereby shifting the balance in the district to favor the Republican candidate in the general election. That, in our view, is the very definition of gerrymandering, both times. Republican lawmakers and Democratic lawmakers each presented different plans for redrawing maps last year. That happens every 10 years after the U.S. Census data is compiled and released. Each side claimed their map met the standard for fair and balanced Congressional districts that Ohioans, when they approved Issue 1 in 2018, required. "When you look at (the plans), they were very close," DeWine told the Register this week. "They were only five members apart for the Democratic plan and the Republican plan. When you get that close you ought to make a deal." The governor said he wanted the two sides to "split the difference," but neither side was willing to budge. DeWine is pragmatic, and he chooses his battles carefully. He sided with Republicans, he said, because their map was more in line with the voter mandate than the one Democrats presented. His first term as governor has been tumultuous, in many respects, with the Republican majority in the statehouse, at times, being his harshest critics and undermining his efforts fighting the pandemic and other initiatives. Fair maps, as mandated by voters, was a battle he likely thought he could not win in the General Assembly. He was unwilling to take it on. But taking DeWine at his word presents the sad fact that two of the three branches of state government failed to follow the mandate from voters because they refused to negotiate in good faith. The legislature could not compromise and the executive branch could not influence a compromise. There's just one branch of government left that has the opportunity to do right by voters or fail them. The Ohio Supreme Court will rule whether the maps adopted by Republicans and against opposition from Democrats will stand or whether lawmakers will be ordered to go back to the negotiating table and told to negotiate in good faith. The best thing that can happen, in our view, is for the court to order lawmakers to do just that. Ohioans asked — they demanded — fair districts and fair elections. That is reasonable, and the court should order legislators to do the right thing or take the decision away from them completely. We hope the court comes through for Ohioans on this one. Editor's note: The Ohio Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down the district maps that were approved by Republican lawmakers in a party-line vote.