Dec 30, 2014 3 min read

OK, no one is asking anyone to stash away their black and gold and start rooting for the Cincinnati Bengals or – gasp! – the Cleveland Browns, but Pennsylvanians could profit by paying some attention to what our neighbors are up to in Ohio. There are some interesting things percolating in the Buckeye State.

Front-and-center is a bill approved earlier this month by Ohio’s House of Representatives that would make the drawing of state legislative district boundaries more fair and equitable. Voters will have the final say on the measure in May, and it should receive an overwhelming endorsement.

As it currently stands in Ohio, a commission consisting of the governor, auditor, secretary of state and one member chosen by each of the two main parties carves up legislative boundaries. The new plan would retain the commission system, but expand it to include an additional appointee from each party. If the members of the minority party don’t sign off on the district maps, they would only be in effect for just four years, rather than a full 10 years.

The rationale behind the arrangement is that it gives an incentive to the majority party to work with the minority party, or face the possibility that the partisan composition of the board could change within four years, and the current majority will get a less satisfying deal if they end up in the minority. The legislative maps must also be drawn to minimize the possibility of splitting up local communities, which will help reduce instances where one legislator represents one side of a street, while a different legislator represents the other. Creating a map that represents the makeup of the voting public will also be encouraged – this would do away with instances where one party wins a majority of votes cast, but the other party ends up taking the lion’s share of the seats.

The plan would not affect Ohio’s congressional districts.

Richard Gunther, a political scientist at Ohio State University, told The Columbus Dispatch that “I think this is moving forward in a way that will create much greater fairness.”

There is, of course, no silver bullet that will bridge the partisan differences that have driven America over the last couple of decades. They are too deeply tied to issues of geography, technology, social issues that don’t lend themselves to compromise, and the 24/7 media cycle that puts a premium on hyperbole and pressing the buttons of the most die-hard partisans. Besides, to recast the well-worn phrase, American politics has never been beanbag – for the majority of its 238-year history, it’s been marked by two-fisted, bare-knuckle exchanges. Many historians pointed out the period of relative partisan comity that stretched from World War II to the 1980s were more the exception than the rule.

But the gerrymandering of our legislative and congressional districts has led to too many situations where elections are noncompetitive, parties or long-serving incumbents are entrenched in power, and elected officials have more to fear from primary challengers than they do from opponents across the aisle. This leads to campaigns tailored to the most vociferous true-believers, not the broad, moderate middle.

And surely, when the outcomes of elections are all but preordained, it does nothing to encourage voters to exercise their franchise.

No one gets to win every fight, but a loss is easier to take when the fight is fair and the playing field is even. Ohio’s redistrcting plan should help accomplish that. Our own state lawmakers should be watching it closely and, perhaps, emulating it.