(I just finished a lot of work on this so I'm going to post it even though
this guy made a lot of the same points. I do think mine has some info his doesn't.)
I'm sure many of you have heard about the redistricting reform plan that's been proposed in Ohio and will be voted on this November. I'm not from Ohio but I love following elections, so I thought I'd do a little research and see exactly how the rules might affect Ohio's partisan representation in Congress if they pass.
For background: the current breakdown is 12 Republicans and 6 Democrats, a 2:1 ratio that is striking because Bush defeated Kerry in Ohio by only a few percentage points. There may be a number of reasons for this: poor Democratic performance in campaigns, poor Democratic candidates...but the one the mostly Democratic reformers chose to focus on was the gerrymandering of Ohio's districts. Taking the very rough standard of a margin of victory in 2000 (no data for 2004) of 10 points or more as uncompetitive, I found 7 uncompetitive R districts, 4 uncompetitive D districts, 6 competitive lean R districts, and 1 competitive lean D district. Each of those falls along party lines except District 6, represented by Ted Strickland (D).
Such a plan would not be adopted according to the rules set out in the amendment, and a new plan would almost certainly favor Democrats. Here's why.
The amendment has a "competitiveness" requirement that has the committee assign a score to each plan, based on the following formula: # of competitive districts leaning one way balanced by competitive districts leaning the other way x 2 + # of remaining competitive districts, minus # of uncompetitive districts for one side NOT balanced by an uncompetitive district for the other side x 2. Using the numbers above (again, very rough), the current map would earn a score of 3. That won't cut it, since the committee is required to consider plans with the highest score first. I put together a really rough plan without regard to benefitting Democrats or Republicans, and my plan got a 7. So I feel confident that somebody who does have all the data and expertise could make one with an even higher score.
In English: under the current map, there are several districts that lean Republican that aren't balanced by districts that lean Democrat. That means several Republicans are elected easily in districts that only favor Republicans by 5 or 6 points, while only one Democrat has a district like that. This (along with the individual campaigns, of course) almost entirely provides for the Republican advantage in Ohio.
So where are the problem areas for Republicans and Democrats? Here's where I've found they might be, though no one will know where they really are until the map is drawn.
Republicans:
Columbus--the strongly Democratic capital is cut into three, with one R and two lean R districts slicing part of it away and combining it with strongly Republican rural counties. I'd guess a new plan would have a district centered on Columbus, and the three R districts would expand further into rural central Ohio to regain population lost in Columbus. This subtracts population from other rural districts represented by Republicans, and one of them will probably lose his seat (Gillmor, Oxley, Boehner, Ney).
Cincinnati--this city has also been drawn to favor Republicans, although it's not as Democratic as Columbus. The strongest Democratic areas of Cincinnati are currently combined with part of heavily Republican Butler County to provide a lean R district for Steve Chabot. If a new map cuts out Butler County and centers the district on Cincinnati, it would be competitive and he might be unseated. It might even elect a black Democrat, which I think would be commendable since, proportionally to its statewide black population, Ohio "should" have 2 instead of its current 1.
Northeast Ohio--in eliminating the 6-1 imbalance in favor of "lean R" districts, a new map might also make Steve LaTourette a casualty. His district is carefully constructed around Geauga and Lake Counties and some Republican suburbs of Cleveland to create an 8-point Republican advantage. Those areas are surrounded by Democratic counties, however, and it would be easy to cut his district apart in the interest of creating competitiveness.
Democrats:
Southeast Ohio--Strickland's district almost certainly will become more Republican. It snakes along the Ohio River from Youngstown to Scioto County, and in my map I cut off both ends and pushed the district in toward the center, thoroughly Republican territory. He's elected in a swing district now, but cut off Mahoning and Strickland will have a tough time.
Cleveland suburbs--Sherrod Brown might also be out of a job. His district cuts through four counties and is the only lean D district in the current map. That kind of slicing and dicing might not be accepted. I made a strong D district in Lorain and western Cuyahoga (Kucinich), a strong D district in Akron and Portage County (?), a strong D district in central Cleveland (Tubbs Jones) and a swing district around the suburbs of Cleveland and Lake County. He might be able to win that district, but it could go Republican too.
Swing areas: a district centered on Canton in Stark County and taking Republican parts of Mahoning and Columbiana would be competitive, I've already mentioned a district centered in Cincinnati, and another in the suburbs of Cleveland.
In sum: the way I calculated it, as many as five or six Republicans could be unseated. This squares with what Republican opponents of the plan have been saying. As I wrote above, the basic problem for Republicans is that the commission will be required to favor a balanced number of competitive and uncompetitive districts for each party, and right now those numbers are totally unbalanced (7R - 4D uncompetitive, 6R - 1D competitive). If the commission balances them, it would be a rough 2008 in Ohio for Congressional Republicans.
Hope this sheds some light...if there are any constructive comments or questions on the stuff I looked up, let me know. Of course this is all completely unscientific with very limited data, so I can't really help quibbles about that sort of thing.