this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2024
706 points (99.0% liked)

News

23275 readers
4121 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

In November, Ohio residents will have an opportunity to vote on Issue 1, a constitutional amendment that would finally abolish the state’s extreme partisan gerrymandering. Voters will not, however, be informed of this fact on the ballot. Instead, the Ohio Supreme Court’s Republican majority ruled Monday that the amendment will be described in egregiously misleading terms on the ballot itself, with ultra-biased language designed to turn citizens against it. Incredibly, a proposal that would end gerrymandering will be framed as a proposal to require gerrymandering, a patently false representation of its intent and effect. The court’s 4–3 decision marks yet another effort to subvert democracy in Ohio by Republicans who fear that the citizenry—when given a voice on the matter—might dare to loosen their stranglehold on power.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/09/ohio-supreme-court-voter-fraud-gop.html

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 118 points 1 month ago (14 children)

I don't think the article included it and it's a little difficult to find the phrasing.

I found a sample ballot

https://www.boe.ohio.gov/clark/c/upload/ELEC_BallotProofs.pdf

The phrasing there is

To create an appointed redistricting commission not elected by or subject to removal by the voters of the state

However a vote of "Yes" would establish a non-partisan (or, IMO more accurately, a mixed partisan) committee of 15 (5R, 5D, 5 other) where a majority of the committee must approve the redistricting.

The extended description starts with this

  1. Repeal constitutional protections against gerrymandering approved by nearly three-quarters of Ohio electors participating in the statewide elections of 2015 and 2018, and eliminate the longstanding ability of Ohio citizens to hold their representatives accountable for establishing fair state legislative and congressional districts.

Technically all of this is correct but I can absolutely see how it's misleading voters.

Full disclosure, I'm not a lawyer or political scientist and I do not live in Ohio.

[–] [email protected] 55 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

As an ohioian, the current system isn't enabling some nobel pursuit of holding people accountable. It's blatantly "our team draws the lines, in a way that benefits our team, who can draw the lines next time, benefitting our team again"

And even after the R weighted supreme court rules "the lines are biased - throw out the map", they still find a way to use the map anyway. Yeah. Calling it a "repeal of gerrymander protection" is a joke and a half.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The current maps are ‘illegal’. If you remember they were ordered to redraw the districts but have been using the maps from 10 or 12 years ago. There was no agreement on new ones and were ordered to keep redrawing but there was no teeth behind the order. There was a good NPR story on it last year.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

They've updated the maps, my personal district changed the last couple years. But the maps they are using are still the ones the court explicitly ruled unconstitutional, I think from 2022. Brennan center has a nice timeline.

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/timeline-ohios-gerrymandered-maps-how-ohio-politicians-defied-court

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

That timeline is just insane to me. They don’t apply honest maps and we still have to vote.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)