Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Redistricting experts flag partisan gerrymandering in Ohio's new maps

F grade
erhui1979/Getty Images

As states start to redraw their election maps for the new decade, redistricting experts have already flagged a state for extreme partisan gerrymandering.

The map for Ohio's House of Representatives gives significant advantage to Republicans, according to the Redistricting Report Card tool created by the Princeton Gerrymandering Project and RepresentUs. The two good-government groups, which are collaborating to analyze state legislative and congressional maps as they are proposed and approved this year, did find an exemplar in Colorado.


Because the Ohio House map was a clear GOP gerrymander it was graded an F. Ohio's Senate map received a B because it similarly advantages Republicans, but to a lesser degree. The congressional district maps have not yet been finalized or graded.

"The Ohio Senate map scores higher because each Senate district is an aggregation of three house districts that appear to have been fine-tuned to produce a partisan advantage in the house maps. That effect is diluted when these districts are put together into one larger district," RepresentUs explained.

For state legislative maps, Ohio uses a seven-member commission composed of the governor, state auditor, secretary of state and one person appointed by each legislative leader. If at least two commissioners from each party vote in favor of the redistricting plans, then they will remain in effect for the entire decade. However, this year's state maps were passed on a party-line vote, so they will only be in use for four years.

In contrast, watchdogs highlight Colorado as a leading example for how to curb partisan gerrymandering. This redistricting cycle is the first in which an independent commission, approved by voters in 2018, is in charge of drawing new election maps.

While Colorado's eight congressional districts have not yet been finalized for this decade, the proposed plans (expected to be finalized by the end of the month) have all received A's from the Redistricting Report Card. The state legislative maps are also being drafted, but have not yet been analyzed for partisan fairness and competitiveness.

Colorado's proposed congressional districts so far have created no partisan advantage and kept Hispanic and Native American communities intact. RepresentUs and the Princeton Gerrymandering Project also commended the state redistricting commission for using public feedback to improve the maps.

"The vast majority of Americans despise gerrymandering and want the map-drawing process to be free from partisan influence. Clearly, Colorado passed that test and Ohio didn't," said RepresentUs CEO Josh Silver.

As more state maps are finalized, RepresentUs and the Princeton Gerrymandering Project will continue to analyze the proposed districts and flag instances of partisan gerrymandering.


Read More

People standing at voting booths.

The proposed SAVE Act and MEGA Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, risking the disenfranchisement of millions of eligible Americans.

Getty Images, EvgeniyShkolenko

The SAVE Act is a Solution in Search of A Problem

The federal government seems to be barreling toward a federal election power grab. Trump's State of the Union address called for the Senate to push through the SAVE Act, which has already passed the House, in the name of so-called "election integrity." And the SAVE Act isn’t the only such bill. Like the SAVE Act, the Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act—introduced in the House—would require voters to provide a document outlined in the Act that allegedly proves their U.S. citizenship. We’ve been down this road before in Texas, and spoiler alert: it was unworkable.

Both the SAVE and MEGA Acts would disenfranchise millions of eligible U.S. citizens without making our federal elections more secure. They seek to roll out a faulty federal voter registration system, despite the existing separate registration and voting process for state and local elections. And these Acts target a minuscule “problem”—but would unleash mass voter purges and confusion.

Keep ReadingShow less
With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

Should the U.S. nationalize elections? A constitutional analysis of federalism, the Elections Clause, and the risks of centralized control over voting systems.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Why Nationalizing Elections Threatens America’s Federalist Design

The Federalism Question: Why Nationalizing Elections Deserves Skepticism

The renewed push to nationalize American elections, presented as a necessary reform to ensure uniformity and fairness, deserves the same skepticism our founders directed toward concentrated federal power. The proposal, though well-intentioned, misunderstands both the constitutional architecture of our republic and the practical wisdom in decentralized governance.

The Constitutional Framework Matters

The Constitution grants states explicit authority over the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections, with Congress retaining only the power to "make or alter such Regulations." This was not an oversight by the framers; it was intentional design. The Tenth Amendment reinforces this principle: powers not delegated to the federal government remain with the states and the people. Advocates for nationalization often cite the Elections Clause as justification, but constitutional permission is not constitutional wisdom.

Keep ReadingShow less
Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

A voter registration drive in Corpus Christi, Texas, on Oct. 5, 2024. The deadline to register to vote for Texas' March 3 primary election is Feb. 2, 2026. Changes to USPS policies may affect whether a voter registration application is processed on time if it's not postmarked by the deadline.

Gabriel Cárdenas for Votebeat

Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

Texans seeking to register to vote or cast a ballot by mail may not want to wait until the last minute, thanks to new guidance from the U.S. Postal Service.

The USPS last month advised that it may not postmark a piece of mail on the same day that it takes possession of it. Postmarks are applied once mail reaches a processing facility, it said, which may not be the same day it’s dropped in a mailbox, for example.

Keep ReadingShow less
Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less