In the swing state of Ohio, voters will soon decide the fate of State Issue 1, a proposal to establish a 15-member citizens' redistricting commission to draw the state's political maps.
Backers of the measure said it is intended to reduce gerrymandering, or changing voting-district boundaries to favor one political party. But a key controversy surrounds the ballot language, which now includes the word "gerrymander." The change was permitted by Ohio's Supreme Court.
Annette Tucker Sutherland, chair of the Shaker Heights Chapter of the League of Women Voters, which supports the measure, argued the wording misrepresents the proposal's true intent.
"I'm out here trying to urge everybody to ban gerrymandering in Ohio," Sutherland emphasized. "I never in my life thought I'd be telling people, 'Don't read carefully what's on the ballot and then vote.'"
Supporters like Sutherland want to change how the voting district maps are drawn. Under the current system, state lawmakers draw the lines, often favoring the party in power. Issue 1 would shift the responsibility to a 15-member citizens' commission, aiming to take politics out of the process, although some opponents question whether the new approach could truly eliminate political influence.
Gov. Mike DeWine, along with other critics of the measure, argued it could have the opposite effect. DeWine believes Issue 1 would introduce more politics into the redistricting process rather than remove them.
"State Issue 1 sounds great but it is the ultimate in gerrymandering," DeWine alleged. "I think people are sick of having politics as part of it. State Issue 1 demands that politics be included in this. It's not right."
At the heart of the debate is who gets to draw Ohio's legislative and congressional district maps. Issue 1 would place this power in the hands of a commission made up of Ohioans with no political ties.
get more stories like this via email
If it is getting harder to talk with the people in your life about politics, a community-level survey in northeastern Minnesota indicated you are not alone.
A small city there is making an effort to put political divisiveness out to pasture. Some 55% of residents of Grand Marais said polarization in politics is something they have noticed. The result was second-highest in a question focused on communitywide tension, in a survey commissioned by the regional nonprofit Northspan.
Amber Lewis, consultant and Welcoming Community program manager for the group, said in an early October meeting, they then provided de-escalation training for those in attendance.
"When you are in a conversation with somebody and you start talking about politics, and there might be some very different viewpoints that rise up, you get out of your window of tolerance," Lewis explained. "We talked a little bit about that. How do you stay cool, calm, collected?"
She pointed out they want people to still have chats in the future but at least have the tools to prevent the conversation from blowing up. Lewis acknowledged potential setbacks, such as social media serving as a distraction. This outreach led by Northspan is through a partnership with the humanitarian group Nonviolent Peaceforce to address safety concerns in select Minnesota towns.
The local workshops and surveys do not only cover politics but Lewis said tensions surrounding elections often overshadow the fabric of a smaller community. She suggested people feel more inclined these days to take back their town's identity and reestablish normalcy in their daily lives.
"You don't have the same dynamic that you have in a city where there's as many options," Lewis acknowledged. "If you want to go shopping at a grocery store and don't want to run into somebody who maybe you've had this political back-and-forth with, you don't really have that option. You have one grocery store to go to, or two grocery stores, maybe."
Political scientists said elected officials and their campaigns often take their cues from voters. Lewis argued a grassroots approach by communities to build a resistance to hateful rhetoric in politics might send a message and end the cycle.
"That is my greatest hope and expectation," Lewis stressed. "That we can see that push towards less polarized communities that will then affect who we're electing and how those elected officials respond to each other, and respond to conflicts while they're in office."
get more stories like this via email
New Mexicans who've been released from prison after serving time for a felony conviction will be able to vote in next month's election, after pro-voting groups lit a fire under state officials.
A law was implemented last year to restore voting rights to people previously incarcerated for felony convictions upon their release.
Blair Bowie, Restore Your Vote director at the Campaign Legal Center, said the state's nearly 11,000 affected people faced obstacles nonetheless.
"Folks with past convictions have had a really hard time actually getting registered to vote in New Mexico, because the officials who are responsible for implementing that law, have really dragged their feet," Bowie asserted.
She explained slow adherence to the 2023 New Mexico Voting Rights Act led the Center to co-file a lawsuit in state District Court late last month. An agreement has since been reached requiring New Mexico to immediately update its records. Those already denied registration will be reprocessed and should be eligible to vote on Nov. 5.
Bowie acknowledged because the rules are different in every state, many who have served time for a felony conviction believe they are permanently disenfranchised from voting. She also noted a lack of coordination between correctional officials and those who administer state elections can result in stale or faulty data.
"They're not always very good at removing the flags that make them eligible again," Bowie explained. "Whether that's being released from prison, completing probation and parole or whatever - so, I would say it's a widespread problem."
According to the New Mexico Secretary of State's office, more than 730 people so far have registered to vote under the new voting provisions concerning felony convictions.
Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.
get more stories like this via email
New York City election integrity is under added scrutiny after Mayor Eric Adams' indictment.
Part of the indictment alleges Adams broke campaign finance laws during his 2021 mayoral bid. But some groups advocating for good government feel there is not much cause for concern.
Rachael Fauss, senior policy analyst for the group Reinvent Albany, noted the charges against Adams mean the enforcement mechanism works in New York's public matching program for political campaign funds. She said the city's Campaign Finance Board flags any suspicious patterns of contributions.
"There's a whole filing and disclosure process that candidates have to go through," Fauss explained. "By vetting those filings, the Campaign Finance Board can find where they think there are violations and, in this case, it ended up going through to the Southern District and an indictment resulted from this."
With the mayoral election next year, and Adams vehemently aiming for a second term, Fauss pointed out there are ways to bolster election integrity. One recommendation is for the Campaign Finance Board to hold campaign audits closer to elections, which could boost confidence in the process. Fauss also feels the language should be clearer on campaign contribution disclosures about the penalties a person can face.
The Campaign Finance Board is considering new rules about when to withhold matching funds from a campaign. The rules would also examine when expenses are truly independent. Fauss thinks now is not the time to make big changes, although she added they would have value in future elections.
"Their new regulations should help with enforcement. Speeding up the process for the audits I think will help give more confidence that the system is working as it should," Fauss outlined. "But you know, of course, we're in the middle of a presidential election right now, so we have other things on our minds, but the mayoral election will be here shortly in 2025."
She adds the Campaign Finance Board provides transparency about how campaigns get money. The challenge ahead is ensuring people understand what the board's data mean in terms of election integrity.
Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.
get more stories like this via email
Contact
