Saturday, November 05, 2005

Enquirer All About Keeping the GOP in Control

Without shock to me, the Enquirer Editorial Board has issued their views on the Issues: Yes on 2, No on 3, 4, 5. I will focus only on their view on Issue 4.
But to an extent, the board's makeup is a false issue. It wouldn't matter if Dopey, Sneezy, Daffy, Goofy and Bugs were on it. The board would be required to follow mathematical formulas, enshrined in the Constitution, that require districts with the highest possible "competitive balance," instead of the current premium on geographically "compact" districts. This could easily result in absurd districts criss-crossing the state, as sample maps generated by Ohio First have shown, and would be open to plenty of legal challenges. If that's not so, why has RON declined to produce its own maps showing how well this would work?

As for the "bipartisan" aspect of this plan: A fund-raising pitch for RON called this a way to put six more Democrats in the U.S. House. And instead of waiting for the next census, Issue 4 would require new districts to be in effect for the 2008 election, and again after the 2010 census. Hmm. Now why the rush?
So, someone at the Enquirer Editorial Board finds these districts to be "compact?" Have they looked at districts 6 and 18?

Why is the City of Cincinnati divided between two districts? There is only ONE valid reason: to delude the Democratic votes and elect more Republicans. If the state is more "competitive" and elects more Democrats, then that is how the cookie crumbles. The same thing would happen in California and ever other state, a fair election brings fair results. "Fair" means equitable, not just who can tilt the board their way the most.

It is funny though how the paper restates the propaganda lines of the anti-issue 4 camp (which is just the GOP). The even call the anti-camp by their name (Ohio First) and call Reform Ohio Now by an acronym. Just a coincidence?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Don't be an idiot or your post will be deleted.