Don't be bamboozled. Issue 1 is profoundly anti-democratic and elitist

Originally published in the Columbus Dispatch, this is a slightly expanded version that goes into more detail. I truly appreciate the Dispatch for their willingness to include contrarian voices and headlines that help to sell newspapers.

Ohio’s Constitution is a bloated monstrosity. Passage of Issue 1 this November will only make it more bloated — and, ironically, even less constitutional.

Issue 1 is a proposed Ohio constitutional amendment that claims to solve the problem of gerrymandering— manipulation of voting districts that favor particular candidates or political parties.

Merriam-Webster’s dictionary defines a constitution as “the basic principles and laws of a nation, state, …that determine the powers and duties of the government and guarantee certain rights to the people in it.” At 7591 words, the U.S. Constitution, including all 27 amendments, is an excellent model. Fifth-grade school children can read and understand it.

Ohio’s text is nine times longer, now running over 67,000 words of legislative language that even lawyers struggle to follow.

While Issue 1 will replace a few thousand words, it’ll add over 7000 new ones. It’s 17 pages long. Read the language for yourself, if you can spare 20-30 minutes. Few will. I never vote for issues I haven’t read and understood myself.

Worse, Issue 1 is profoundly anti-democratic and elitist. Of course, that’s not what its proponents claim, especially with their populist-sounding tag line of the “Citizens Not Politicians Amendment.”

And that’s only part of what makes it such a bad policy for Ohio.

Gerrymandering isn’t a new problem. I learned about it in grade school 50 years ago and it’s been a thing since our nation’s founding. It’s not going away. When it comes to political mapmaking, the only relevant question is who decides.

I think it should be the people via their elected representatives.

Issue 1 proponents think it should be a handful of unelected and unaccountable retired judges, career bureaucrats, a “professional search firm,” and appointed “special masters,” when the inevitable litigation ensues.

Special masters? Seriously? Didn’t our nation’s founders declare independence from the unelected special masters of the King of England?

Most of the recent commentary from Issue 1 supporters has come from those complaining about the language used to present the issue to Ohio voters when they cast their ballots. This language is determined by the Ohio Ballot Board, a bi-partisan commission chaired by the Ohio Secretary of State, currently Republican Frank LaRose.

The length and complexity of Issue 1 is the reason a lengthy summary for voters was necessary. While it’s true the language was approved by a 3-2 vote along partisan lines, it is also true the language they chose is accurate. Issue 1 supporters just don’t like that LaRose pulled back the curtain hiding their unholy creation.

This is opening phrase of Issue 1:

“Be it Resolved by the People of the State of Ohio that Articles XI Sections 1 through 10, and XIX Sections 1 through 3 of the Ohio Constitution are repealed…”

And this is the opening phrase in the approved ballot language:

“The proposed amendment would:  Repeal constitutional protections against gerrymandering approved by nearly three-quarters of Ohio electors participating in the statewide elections of 2015 and 2018…”

Articles XI and XIX of Ohio’s Constitution were approved by voters in 2015 and 2018.

Issue 1 will repeal existing constitutional protections against gerrymandering approved by voters in 2015 and 2018 and will substitute an elitist, anti-democratic, costly, and unnecessarily complex “Rube Goldberg” process in its place.  

Issue 1 will enshrine partisan gerrymandering in the Ohio Constitution and will repeal the current requirements for compact legislative and congressional districts that best serve voters with similar needs.

Even with all those flaws dressed up as benefits hidden by the “Citizens not Politicians” mantra, the worst part of Issue 1 is that it doesn’t belong in the Ohio Constitution to begin with.

Issue 1 isn’t about basic principles and laws or protecting the rights of citizens. If anything, its lengthy and convoluted text should be hashed out in the legislative process. But supporters know their badly conceived plan would fail there.

Instead Issue 1 is about the impatience and elitism of its creators who don’t trust or don’t like who voters choose as their representatives. Of course supporters won’t admit that so they’ll feign outrage that an elected official — whom they also don’t like — exposed the truth.

The redistricting process is inherently political and it therefore belongs to the people via their representatives. Taking it away from those who are accountable to voters doesn’t make it less political; it only makes it less accountable.

I can understand the desire of those who want to try to find a solution to the rank partisanship that only seems to be getting worse with each passing election cycle. Yet they are profoundly misinformed about history and human nature to think an elitist and undemocratic behemoth like Issue 1 is the answer.

Monsters have a nasty habit of turning on their creators. Issue 1 is a constitutional Frankenstein voters would be wise to avoid.