Sponsor testimony, H.J.R. 13
Amstutz-Sykes new process to draw district lines
State Rep. Ron Amstutz (Wooster)
January 12, 2000
Ohio House Technology and Elections Committee
I'm here with Representative Vernon Sykes, the Ranking Democrat on this committee, to
introduce a measure which recommends to voters this November that we adopt a radically new
approach to drawing district lines for congressional representation as well as for representation in this
General Assembly.
We have a relatively rare opportunity to position Ohio for the future with a district drawing process that
will be the first of this type in the nation.
I've been involved in local and state public policy-making for 24 years. My bywords have been
patience and persistence. I've seen issues percolate for years. But when the right conditions
develop, the issue ripens and often becomes public policy. Workfare comes to mind. The school district
income tax is another. Competition in the trucking industry, the gas industry, the telephone industry
and the electricity industry also come to mind. Debt limits on debt backed by the full faith and credit of
the state's General Revenue Fund would be another example that was around for some time
and finally was approved by voters this past November.
I believe this proposal is nearly ready to be staged for implementation. We will see if this General
Assembly decides to place this resolution to the voters. And if it does, we will see if the voters approve
it. I think they might. This is not the same plan that voters defeated in 1981. As an example, that plan
gave no credit at all for keeping counties whole. Avoiding the division of counties is a centerpiece of
this revised proposal being advanced by the Ohio League of Women Voters and others.
In 1981, if my memory is serving me correctly, the plan on the ballot had opposition from the governor,
the secretary of state, the majority leadership of at least one and maybe both houses of the General
Assembly. I expect much more support from key state leaders this year.
But change is not easy. The question can be asked, "Why should we change the status quo?" Let me give the
committee a reason or two to get us started. I think we'll hear more as our hearing process unfolds.
First, what is being recommended here is an improvement in the process of creating representative districts.
It's good for average citizens who, too often, are turned off by partisan politics and who are inclined to
be cynical about the process behind the drawing of legislative districts that link them to their state and
federal representatives. Keeping more communities together for representation moves in the direction of a
better process, both substantively and in the eyes of average citizens. That's good.
Some will remember the pledge in 1991 to draft a balanced, fair plan after the 1990 census. Many on both
sides of the aisle thought current districts were reasonably drawn. Probably some, especially in the minority
party, wouldn';t agree with that assessment. And I think we can mostly agree that public perception of
the process has not improved much. That perception is that the party with the majority gerrymanders districts
to give it the advantage.
This proposal is a dramatic, radical change. It is so radical that I believe we will improve its chances of
passage if we assure voters that a full dress rehearsal will be conducted, with adequate time for making
corrections before the process that counts is unleashed.
Ohio is usually a cautious state. We seldom go first in policy initiatives. California and New York are
considering districting reforms, but they are not nearly as far along as we happen to be right here. But the law
of unintended consequences is real and the people of Ohio deserve an orderly, measured transition to this
radically new process. We should allow for the possibility that some significant inequity or glitch might arise
when we draw districts this new way. I think we should consider providing for a dry run during this decade
with data from this year's census.
This approach will improve the chances of passage and the chances of affecting good, solid public policy if we
provide for an orderly, measured transition to the real thing in 2011.
I'm not going to go into detail about what this plan does. I would recommend that each member of the
committee read the resolution and the LSC analysis carefully. We will have experts available to help us with
our questions in future hearings.
This plan looks a lot like the plan being advanced by the League of Women Voters, with a few revisions
-- the biggest of which involves an effective date after the 2010 census instead of after this
year's census.
Beyond that, this measure is based on three building blocks for good government:
- Equal representation (already provided by our constitution and our courts)
- Keeping communities together for representation (provided to a limited degree by current constitution and by
court oversight)
- Making districts geographically compact (courts are considering suits in some states that have gone much
further afield than Ohio's districts)
This process would allow anyone who wishes to submit a redistricting/reapportionment plan for the Ohio House,
Ohio Senate and Ohio's congressional seats to do so; currently the General Assembly draws congressional
district lines and the Apportionment Board draws state legislative district lines. The new process provides for
submission of plans to the Secretary of State that would have to adhere to proscribed guidelines. The plan that
splits the fewest counties, cities, and other governmental units, that has the most equitable population distribution
and that has the most compact districts would win the competition.
This measure is a product of negotiation between the League of Women Voters and a variety of key leaders and
experts on the districting process. There has been consultation involving both parties. While this is a delicately
balanced compromise, I am optimistic that this committee and this General Assembly will, with a bi-partisan vote,
and perhaps a few technical amendments, recommend this measure to the voters for their consideration in
November of this year.
| 