Subject: RE: Ohio redistricting measure in trouble / "Mockracy" at MSNBC
From: smulroy@memphis.edu
Date: 10/4/2005, 2:28 PM
To: rr@fairvote.org, election-law@majordomo.lls.edu

This MSNBC interactive "Mockracy" thing is really, really cool.  If it stays up there next fall, I will assign it to my students. 

Asst. Prof. Steven J. Mulroy
Univ. of Memphis Law School
207 Humphreys
Univ. of Memphis/Memphis, TN 38152
Ofc: 901-678-4494
Fax: 901-678-5210

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-election-law_gl@majordomo.lls.edu [mailto:owner-election-law_gl@majordomo.lls.edu] On Behalf Of Rob Richie
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 4:06 PM
To: election-law
Subject: Ohio redistricting measure in trouble / "Mockracy" at MSNBC

Greetings,

A Columbus Dispatch poll has the Ohio ballot measure on redistricting at 
only 26% yes, with 38% no and 36% undecided. This isn't good news for 
those seeking nonpartisan redistricting as the means to address 
non-competitive elections in the US, particularly when combined with the 
polls coming out of California right now. Perhaps advocates can turn 
this around, but it sure looks like a very uphill battle.

Nonpartisan elections also is in some trouble, ahead 42%-37%. Relaxed 
absentee and campaign contribution limits are at abotu 70% yes

As a separate matter, MSNBC has a nifty new interactive feature on its 
website allowing visitors to test out different voting methods and hear 
comments on them from me and Washington and Lee Professor Mark Rush. See:
http://msnbc.com/modules/mockracy/

- Rob Richie

########
http://www.dispatch.com/news-story.php?story=dispatch/2005/10/01/20051001-A1-02.htm 



EXCERPT

Much of the battle so far has centered on Issue 4, which would take the 
power to redraw legislative and congressional lines from a state board 
and the legislature and hand it to an independent commission. It would 
not affect school districts.

In the poll, Issue 4 is the only one losing: 38-26, although 36 percent 
were undecided. The measure also produced a partisan divide: Democrats 
favored it by 16 points, Republicans opposed it by 21.



FULL STORY


DISPATCH POLL
Statewide election proposals fare well
Saturday, October 01, 2005, THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
By Darrel Rowland

One poll respondent wanted to know if the state issue revamping how 
congressional and legislative districts are drawn would affect her 
schooldistrict boundaries.

Another opposes a separate proposal to lower contribution limits to 
state campaigns because politicians "make enough money."

The first Dispatch Poll of the 2005 campaign shows substantial support 
for three of the five proposed constitutional amendments on Ohio's Nov. 
8 ballot. Another has a narrow lead, while one is losing.

However, interviews with poll participants show that many are more than 
a little fuzzy on the details of the far-reaching, complicated proposals.

Perhaps surprisingly, at least 78 percent of the poll participants say 
they already have made up their mind on four of the five issues.

Still, one Cincinnati respondent wrote on her mail poll that it was 
difficult to complete the survey because she hadn't seen any publicity 
on the proposals.

That will change soon.

Both sides are gearing up for an expensive battle over the 5¸ weeks 
leading up to the election, because both acknowledge the issues would 
change the face of Ohio elections.

"It's going to revolutionize politics in Ohio," said Henry W. Eckhart, a 
board member of Common Cause-Ohio, which is backing Issues 2-5. That 
quartet was placed on the ballot by Reform Ohio Now, a group of unions 
and mostly Democraticleaning groups.

Those four issues are opposed adamantly by Ohio First, a group backed by 
Republicans who have controlled state government for more than a decade. 
Rep. Kevin DeWine, a Fairborn Republican, said this week that if Issue 4 
passes, it will mean "unilaterally disarming the state of Ohio and 
relegating it to a second-class position when it comes to influence and 
power in Congress."

Much of the battle so far has centered on Issue 4, which would take the 
power to redraw legislative and congressional lines from a state board 
and the legislature and hand it to an independent commission. It would 
not affect school districts.

In the poll, Issue 4 is the only one losing: 38-26, although 36 percent 
were undecided. The measure also produced a partisan divide: Democrats 
favored it by 16 points, Republicans opposed it by 21.

Respondent Matthew Wheeler, 18, a Sinclair Community College student 
from Beavercreek, near Dayton, doesn't like the proposal because judges 
would pick some of the members of the commission.

"Judges should be interpreting law, not making it," said Wheeler, a 
Republican. "Overall, I'm against giving more authority to judges."

But Tracy Bodnar, 32, a Democrat and stay-at-home mom from Cincinnati, 
said she supports the redistricting changes because "people would have 
more of a say in who gets in and who doesn't get in."

The sharpest division between Democrats and Republicans came on Issue 5, 
which would create a ninemember board to oversee elections instead of 
the secretary of state.

Democrats backed getting rid of a partisan officeholder administering 
elections by 30 points; GOP poll-takers turned thumbs down by 23 points.

Todd Kerr, 31, a Columbus mortgage loan officer, said Issue 5 is 
unnecessary because an elected secretary of state would not be able to 
sway an election and get away with it.

"I don't buy the conspiracy theories," the Republican said.

Steve Knowland, 39, a social worker from Gahanna, backs the revamp 
because even if a partisan secretary of state is not shown to have done 
anything to influence an election, removing such questions is a good idea.

"An independent body to oversee procedures can ensure that partisan 
politics do not come into play," the Democrat said.

The most-popular amendment was Issue 3, passing with a 55-point margin. 
The proposal would reduce the maximum campaign contributions for state 
candidates, parties and political-action committees. It would not affect 
how much elected officials are paid.

Cathy LeVan, 52, of Rushsylvania in Logan County, said she's inclined to 
support Issue 3 because she thinks having so much money in elections 
discourages good candidates from seeking office.

"You might find more people running for office if they don't have to 
compete for all those dollars," said LeVan, who runs a tax-preparation 
and small-business accounting company.

Issue 2, which would allow "no-excuse" absentee voting, is passing by a 
43-point margin.

Issue 1, which includes Gov. Bob Taft's Third Frontier, is winning by a 
2¸-to-1 margin.

Ironically, Democrats in the poll are supporting the initiative more 
than are Republicans.

The mail poll of 1,325 registered Ohio voters was conducted Sept. 22 
through Thursday. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 2.6 
percentage points.

Dispatch reporters Catherine Candisky, Alan Johnson, Mark Niquette and 
Jim Siegel contributed to this story.

*drowland@dispatch.com
*

*####################
*http://news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051003/NEWS01/510030362 


Poll: Ballot wording confusing
Associated Press

ISSUE 1

Issue 1, placed on the ballot by the Ohio General Assembly, would use 
the state's public works bond program to leverage passage of $500 
million worth of bonding authority to help universities and private 
interests conduct research plus another $150 million to prepare 
industrial sites for construction.

Four issues, stemming from petitions and relating to elections and 
campaign finance, will be on the Nov. 8 ballot.

Issue 2 would allow all registered voters to vote by mail or in person 
up to 35 days before an election.

Issue 3 would cut individual campaign contribution limits from $10,000 
to $2,000 for statewide candidates and $1,000 for legislative candidates.

Issue 4 would put an independent commission in charge of drawing 
legislative districts instead of elected officials.

Issue 5 would put a bi-partisan board of supervisors in charge of 
statewide elections instead of the secretary of state, who is an elected 
official.

COLUMBUS - Some Ohioans are confused by the wordy language in the five 
measures on the November ballot, a new statewide poll indicates.

Some are unclear about what their votes on the issues mean exactly and 
are uncertain about the details of each proposal, according to 
interviews with the respondents to a poll commissioned by the Columbus 
Dispatch.

All five ballot issues involve proposed constitutional amendments and 
four started as initiative petitions that could drastically change how 
elections are conducted.

Each issue runs an average of 562 words - five times longer than the 
gay-marriage ban proposal that was the only statewide question on last 
November's ballot.

The issues include a $2 billion bond package for road projects and 
high-tech jobs; granting all electors the option of voting absentee; 
lowering limits on state campaign contributions; creating a commission 
to approve legislative districts; and establishing a board to replace 
the secretary of state in administering elections.

The poll, conducted by mail Sept. 22-29, asked 1,325 registered voters 
about the proposals. One respondent worried whether the proposal on 
legislative redistricting would affect her school-district boundaries. 
Another opposed the item lowering contribution limits because 
"politicians make enough money."

More than one-third of respondents said they were undecided on the 
redistricting issue, and 20 percent were undecided on the creation of 
the elections panel.

Four of the items - all but the tech and road construction bond package 
- are backed by a Democratic and union-led coalition called Reform Ohio 
Now. Those measures are opposed by a Republican-leaning group called 
Ohio First.

Both sides said they expect to step up publicity in the weeks ahead.

Poll results showed support ranging between 56 percent and 70 percent 
for the bond package, the vote-by-mail measure and the proposal to lower 
campaign spending limits.

-- Rob Richie
-- Rob Richie Executive Director F a i r V o t e The Center for Voting and Democracy 6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 610 Takoma Park, MD 20912 www.fairvote.org rr@fairvote.org (301) 270-4616
--