Issue One will be on the ballot this November for Ohioans. I spoke to Catey Wolfe, the Campaign Manager for Representative Beryl Brown Piccolantonio, about the importance of ending partisan gerrymandering in Ohio.

Since August, I have had the honor to intern on the campaign for Representative Beryl Brown Piccolantonio, who is running to keep her seat in the 4th District in the Ohio House of Representatives. Her district is one of the most competitive in the state. Piccolantonio is the Democratic nominee and is running on a platform for reproductive rights, more substantial funding for public schools, and perhaps Ohio’s most important issue this November, Issue One. 

The United States is currently on the verge of one of, if not the most, contentious presidential elections in recent history. The race between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump has been labeled as a fight for democracy, between what’s wrong and what’s right. However, in Ohio, the race is practically uncontested, with former President Trump leading in the polls by 9.0 points as of October 9th. 

While many Ohioans, specifically Democrats, may feel apathetic toward voting, the presidential election is only a portion of the ballot. This November, several competitive races and a fundamental issue will occupy Ohioan’s ballots, potentially saving democracy in the state. 

I interviewed Catey Wolfe, Piccolantonio’s campaign manager, about her role and a key issue on the ballot for Ohioans this November: gerrymandering.

Gerrymandering, specifically partisan gerrymandering, is arguably one of American politics’ most salient and contested issues. It occurs during routine redistricting when a district map is drawn to favor a party or set of electors. Typically, mapmakers either concentrate the opposing parties’ base into a few districts or dilute the parties’ base by spreading them out into several districts where they are the minority.

Gerrymandering has long been an issue in Ohio, from the Snake-On-the-Lake in the 2010s to the string of struck-down Republican-drawn maps in 2022. Countless cases regarding gerrymandering have made their way to District, Appellate, and even state Supreme Court.

During one of our weekly meetings, Wolfe explained what Issue One was. For supporters, Issue One will seek to end partisan gerrymandering in Ohio for good. The proposed plan will see retired, non-partisan judged appoint a committee of citizens that is equally representative among political affiliations and aligned with Ohio’s population demographics in the hopes that future district maps will be drawn relatively and absent of favoritism towards one political party. 

Wolfe believes that the passage of Issue One will ensure that “elected officials are actually representative of the people who put them there and that the politicians are not picking their constituents.” Given the detrimental impacts of unregulated gerrymandering in other countries, Wolfe’s concern is well directed.

In their book How Democracies Die, authors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt discuss the adverse effects of gerrymandering in other countries, specifically Hungary. In 2010, Hungary’s winning party, Fidesz, altered electoral rules and the constitution to ensure they could gerrymander districts to maximize their seats in parliament. Levitsky and Ziblatt see this act of altering election procedures and violating democratic norms as a critical indicator of democratic backsliding.

While the United States’ issues with gerrymandering may not be as severe as those in Hungary, a troubling pattern has begun to occur. 

Several cases have been brought to the Supreme Court regarding gerrymandering, and the Court has refused to define what it considers unjust partisan gerrymandering. Unfortunately, in Rucho v. Common Cause (2018), the Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering cases are “nonjusticiable.” In other words, the Supreme Court would not hear or decide cases dealing with partisan gerrymandering.

This rests the sole responsibility of regulating partisan gerrymandering on the states, many of which have capitalized on the lack of checks from the federal judiciary to craft unjust maps. Author Ozan Varol, in his article Stealth Authoritarianism, credits gerrymandering as providing grounds for authoritarian practices while masking as a measure of “fairness” in elections. 

Partisan gerrymandering not only disenfranchises voters but, in the recent past, has been shown to lead to the rise of extremism. 

When I asked Wolfe about the importance of Issue One, she said something that stuck out to me: Issue One “helps reduce the likelihood of anyone at extreme ends of the political spectrum.” I knew how important this was, as Ohio was certainly no stranger to extremism. 

Jane Mayer explores how gerrymandering impacts not only what party is elected into office but also how extreme the candidate is. In her article “State Legislatures Are Torching Democracy,” she discusses a phenomenon that has plagued the politically “moderate” state of Ohio as a result of gerrymandering.

Ohio Republicans are guaranteed to win in the general, so all of their energy goes to the primary. In the primary, they have one goal: be the candidate who is the most Republican, which often leads to extremism, especially around contentious issues such as abortion.

Issue One’s key goal is to build districts that are not only fair and representative of all Ohioans but also competitive. Competitive districts ensure equal competition between Republicans and Democrats for seats; however, due to gerrymandering, the rate of competitive seats has decreased on the national level. 

However, after asking Wolfe about how gerrymandering has impacted Ohio’s 4th House District, her answer reassured me about our state’s future. 

“House District 4 is actually one of the more fairly drawn maps in the state, which is why we have been working so hard since the district is very competitive, which is how it should be.” 

Democracy thrives on free and fair elections, but it also thrives on competitive elections. Issue One seeks to install fair maps to ensure that electoral competition is not a concept of the past. Wolfe’s final remarks gave me some hope: maybe democracy was going to be alright after all.