Ohio: Redistricting advocates oppose Republican lawmakers’ plan | Cleveland Plain Dealer

Backers of a ballot measure to change how Ohio draws congressional districts are moving forward with little hope state lawmakers will draft a better plan. The congressional redistricting reforms proposed last week by Republican Sen. Matt Huffman would make it impossible to draw districts such as the “snake on the lake”-shaped 9th district. But critics say the proposal, Senate Joint Resolution 5, will also ensure that the majority party — currently Republicans — can draw a map that gives them plenty of safe seats. When leaders of the Fair Districts = Fair Elections coalition were asked what lawmakers could change about the proposal to win their support, they laughed. “How much time do you have?” Ann Henkener of the League of Women Voters of Ohio said at a Monday press conference. 

Ohio: Senator forges ahead with redistricting plan, still no bi-partisan support | WKBN

Several dozen people marched down the hall this week toward Ohio State Senator Matt Huffman’s office. One of them carried petitions signed by people who want a fair congressional district map free of political gerrymandering. As they poured into his office, only to find that he was not in, they shared their concerns over his current redistricting plan Senate Joint Resolution 5 with his legislative aide. They are not the only people to dislike what he is proposing. Janetta King, the president of Innovation Ohio says Ohioans want a process where there is bi-partisan drawing of congressional districts. “Quite frankly, this is not [that] process,” said King.

Ohio: Supreme Court Weighs Purge of Ohio Voting Rolls | The New York Times

In a spirited argument on Wednesday, the Supreme Court appeared deeply divided over whether Ohio may kick people off the voting rolls if they skip a few elections and fail to respond to a notice from state officials. Justice Sonia Sotomayor said Ohio’s approach effectively disenfranchised minority and homeless voters in the state’s major cities and was part of a broader effort to suppress voting. “All of these impediments result in large numbers of people not voting in certain parts of the state,” she said. But Justices Anthony M. Kennedy and Stephen G. Breyer expressed concern about maintaining the integrity of the state’s list of eligible voters.

Ohio: Supreme Court appears sympathetic to Ohio voter purge effort | Associated Press

The Supreme Court appeared sympathetic Wednesday to states that seek to prune their voting rolls by targeting people who haven’t voted in a while. In a case from Ohio, opponents of the practice called it a violation of a federal law that was intended to increase the ranks of registered voters. Justice Sonia Sotomayor said minorities and homeless people appear to be disproportionately kicked off the rolls. But the court’s conservatives and possibly also Justice Stephen Breyer indicated that they would uphold the state’s effort. Ohio is among a handful of states that use voters’ inactivity to trigger a process that could lead to their removal from voter rolls. A ruling for Ohio could prompt other states to adopt the practice, which generally pits Democrats against Republicans.

Ohio: Voter-Purge Efforts Get Support at U.S. High Court Session | Bloomberg

U.S. Supreme Court justices suggested they may give states broader latitude to purge their voting databases of people who might have moved, as the court heard arguments Wednesday in an Ohio case that could shape who gets to cast ballots in the November election.  Justice Stephen Breyer hinted he might join his more conservative colleagues in voting to uphold an Ohio system that uses non-voting as a factor in deciding which people to remove from the rolls. Breyer questioned whether states have enough other tools to purge people who have moved away or died in far-away places. “What are they supposed to do?” he asked. “Is Rhode Island supposed to look at the Tasmanian voting records or hospital records?”

Ohio: Lawmaker Prepares to Introduce Elections Cybersecurity Bills | Government Technology

State Rep. Kathleen Clyde, a Democratic candidate for Ohio secretary of state, said Wednesday she’s preparing to introduce a pair of bills designed to safeguard the state’s elections against cyberattacks. Clyde spoke about the bills at the Ohio Association of Elections Officials annual conference in Columbus. She was motivated to draft the legislation after it was reported that Russia attempted to interfere in the presidential election in 2016. “Many believe that this problem will only continue and we need to make sure that we are preparing for any attempts to hack our voting systems,” Clyde said in a phone interview prior to the conference. Unless Clyde is able to get Republican sponsors, her bill is unlikely to get through the GOP-dominated Ohio state legislature.

Ohio: In Voter Purging Case, Supreme Court Appears Divided | Governing

Ohio is among a handful of states where voters can be kicked off voter registration rolls after not voting in three federal elections. During oral arguments on Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court appeared split on whether that practice violates federal election laws. Once a registered voter skips two years’ worth of elections, Ohio mails them a confirmation notice and then purges voters who don’t respond and don’t vote for another four years. In 2015 and 2016, Ohio purged 426,781 voters this way.

Ohio: Ohio Republicans propose changes to congressional redistricting; Democrats say it won’t end gerrymandering | Cleveland Plain Dealer

State lawmakers would still draw congressional districts, but would need bipartisan support to approve a map under a GOP proposal unveiled Wednesday morning. Sen. Matt Huffman, the Lima Republican behind the proposal, said requiring minority-party votes and setting new rules for how districts could be drawn are improvements over the current process. But Democrats and redistricting-reform advocates say the plan still allows for too much political maneuvering by the majority party. The Fair Districts = Fair Elections coalition plans to move forward with its proposed constitutional amendment.

Ohio: U.S. Supreme Court considers legality of Ohio voter purging | Reuters

The U.S. Supreme Court returns to the issue of voting rights on Wednesday as the justices hear arguments over whether Ohio’s policy of purging infrequent voters from its registration rolls disenfranchises thousands of people and violates federal law. The nine justices are set to hear an hour of arguments in Republican-governed Ohio’s appeal of a lower court ruling that found the policy violated a 1993 federal law aimed at making it easier to register to vote. The Supreme Court’s ruling, due by the end of June, could affect the ability to vote for thousands of people ahead of November’s midterm congressional elections.

Ohio: Purge of voter rolls gets Supreme Court scrutiny this week | Columbus Dispatch

To the state of Ohio, it is nothing more than a housekeeping device to keep the voting rolls up to date. To opponents, it is a system that deprives legal voters the right to cast a ballot in a federal election. With oral arguments scheduled Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court will have to decide whether Ohio has been too zealous in trying to keep its voter rolls up-to-date and make certain those rolls do not include people who have left the state or died. And while the dispute between Ohio and the American Civil Liberties Union probably does not rise to the level of a landmark case, if the justices strike down Ohio’s system — the decision is expected this spring — then more than a dozen other states will have to revise their election laws.

Ohio: Voter Challenges Election Roll Purge in Supreme Court Clash | Bloomberg

Larry Harmon got a surprise when he went to his Kent, Ohio, polling place for a 2015 local election: He was no longer registered and couldn’t vote. Election officials removed him from the rolls because he hadn’t voted since 2008 and didn’t respond to the notice they say they sent in 2011. The lawsuit he and two interest groups filed against Ohio is now part of a U.S. Supreme Court case that will shape the rights of thousands of people as the 2018 elections approach. The justices will decide how far states can go in purging their election databases of people who might have moved away. The case, set for argument Jan. 10, has become a proxy for the highly partisan fight over the country’s election rules. Republicans are calling for stepped-up efforts to prevent voter fraud, while Democrats say those moves are a thinly veiled campaign to stop liberals and minorities from casting ballots.

Ohio: State’s move to toss inactive voters from rolls goes to court | Associated Press

Joseph Helle was expecting a different sort of reception when he returned home from Army tours in Iraq and Afghanistan and showed up to vote in his small Ohio town near Lake Erie. His name was missing from the voting rolls in 2011, even though Helle had registered to vote before leaving home at 18 and hadn’t changed his address during his military service. Helle, now the mayor of Oak Harbor, Ohio, is among thousands of state residents with tales of being removed from Ohio’s rolls because they didn’t vote in some elections. The Supreme Court will hear arguments Jan. 10 in the disputed practice, which generally pits Democrats against Republicans.

Ohio: Ohio Joins Wave Of States Trying To Erase Gerrymandering | WOSU

Five years ago, few people in Ohio were paying close attention to the claim that political consultants – armed with partisan power, increasingly sophisticated computer technology and big data – were in a position to hijack democracy. Critics like Carrie Davis of the League of Women Voters looked at Congressional maps, drawn largely in secrecy by Republican state lawmakers, and issued a warning. “Voters are ignored and made to feel as if their voice doesn’t count,” Davis said. “Communities are carved up so that they don’t have a Congress-person who truly represents them. Members of Congress are frequently threatened with being ‘primaried’ by the extremes of their own party.” But voters repeatedly turned down proposals to change the system. That may be changing – not just in Ohio, but around the country.

Ohio: ‘Gerrymandering Is Really Bullying’: Inside Ohio’s Attempts To Reform Redistricting | WOSU

On election night two years ago, Catherine Turcer of Common Cause Ohio couldn’t have been more thrilled. “It’s like Christmas,” Turcer said. “I got the best present, and the thing that’s exciting is that this is for all of us.”  “This” was an Ohio constitutional amendment to create a seven-member bipartisan redistricting commission. Previously, Ohio saw citizen-backed ballot issues on redistricting that were rejected by voters. But finally, in 2015, this one passed with more than 70 percent of the vote – likely because both Democratic and Republican lawmakers also supported it. One problem: The amendment applied only to state House and state Senate districts. Advocates said Congressional redistricting was next: The current Ohio map has been called one of the most gerrymandered in the country.

Ohio: Snakes, Ducks and Toilet Bowls: How Does Ohio Shape Congressional Districts? | WOSU

Ian Yarber, a former Oberlin school board member, considers himself a knowledgeable voter. He lives at the northeast end of Ohio’s 4th Congressional District, which stretches south and west nearly to the Indiana border. But when it comes to how it or any of Ohio’s 16 districts were drawn, he hasn’t a clue. “I don’t really know as to the rhyme or reason for the setting up the district,” Yarber says. “I’d be interested to know.” Every 10 years, after each U.S. Census, the 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives are re-distributed based on population. Then, the states get to work drawing a new map of their Congressional districts. In Ohio, those boundaries are set by the state legislature. Over the past five decades, Ohio’s Congressional districts have become increasingly “safe” for incumbents – because they’re strategically drawn for maximum political gain.

Ohio: Husted wants $118 million to replace old Ohio voting equipment | Columbus Dispatch

Secretary of State Jon Husted has asked Gov. John Kasich and legislative leaders to provide $118 million in the upcoming capital budget to replace aging voting equipment in time for the 2020 election. “Given the state law requirements for voting systems in Ohio, I believe that the state should pay 100 percent of the capital acquisition and setup costs of the lowest cost, safe and accurate system from the least expensive vendor,” Husted wrote to the leaders Thursday. Most voting equipment in Ohio was purchased in 2005 and 2006, largely with $115 million in one-time federal money through the Help America Vote Act. Husted and county elections officials have argued those systems are becoming increasingly difficult to maintain, as parts become more scarce and breakdowns more frequent.

Ohio: Elections chief wants new voting machines by 2020 | Associated Press

Ohio’s elections chief wants counties to modernize their voting machines before the 2020 presidential election, and he’s urging the governor and state lawmakers to foot much of the bill. Republican Secretary of State Jon Husted sent a letter to Gov. John Kasich, his budget director and state legislative leaders on Thursday seeking $118 million in state capital funds for the project. “While I am confident that the storage, maintenance and operating procedures used by the boards of elections will ensure that these systems remain secure and accurate through the 2018 election cycle, Ohio’s leaders must act soon to ensure an orderly transition to newer equipment well before the 2020 presidential general election,” he wrote. Ohio is a bellwether political state with about 7.9 million registered voters. Donald Trump, a Republican, won the state’s 2016 presidential contest against Hillary Clinton, a Democrat, by 447,000 votes, more than 8 percentage points.

Ohio: GOP leaders say bipartisan deal close for congressional redistricting reform | Cleveland Plain Dealer

Republican Ohio House and Senate leaders said Wednesday that bipartisan approval could come by the end of January for a plan to reform the way congressional districts are drawn in Ohio. The proposal would then go to the ballot for voter approval and could be in place by the next time congressional district lines are drawn, following the 2020 census. Ohio House Speaker Cliff Rosenberger of Clarksville and Senate President Larry Obhof of Medina, however, did not provide details of what reform might involve. Advocates of a separate petition drive to change the Ohio Constitution in an effort to end political gerrymandering have said they would wait for details of any legislative plan before considering an end to their effort.

Ohio: A look at who foots the bill for holding elections | The News-Herald

With results certified and an automatic recount completed, Lake County Elections Board is wrapping up the 2017 General Election. Board Director Jan Clair said she is beginning to work on the chargebacks for the election. It’s an odd-year election, so that means the costs of holding an election are being paid for by political subdivisions, such as cities and boards of education. Clair said elections cost about $1,000 to $1,500 per precinct. “There’s a shared expense in November (elections), for any subdivision overlapping another one,” Clair said. “In other words, in November, we had Willoughby City conducting their officers, we had the (Willoughby-Eastlake) Board of Education conducting their elections, so there’s a shared expense.” There were two countywide issues on the ballot, so Lake County pays for those costs.

Ohio: Supreme Court schedules January oral arguments for Ohio voter purge case | Washington Examiner

The Supreme Court on Friday scheduled oral arguments in a case involving Ohio’s voter registration lists for Jan. 10. The justices in Husted v. A Philip Randolph Institute will look to determine whether Ohio’s maintenance of its voter registration list is lawful, a decision that could have lasting impact on the outcome of future elections. Ohio gives voters who have been inactive for two years a confirmation notice that requires a response. If no response is obtained and the voter remains inactive for four years, Ohio removes the voter from its lists. The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 and Help America Vote Act of 2002 both prevent states from stripping names off its voter registration rolls because a person is not voting.

Ohio: Lawsuit against Jon Husted by blind Ohio voters is revived by appeals court | Cleveland Plain Dealer

A federal appeals court on Monday revived a lawsuit filed by a national advocacy group for the visually impaired against Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted that says the state’s voting regulations violate the Americans with Disabilities Act. The National Federation of the Blind’s 2015 lawsuit alleges that the state’s system of only allowing absentee voters to cast their ballots on paper infringes on  the right of blind people to vote privately and independently. Senior U.S. District Judge George Smith had dismissed the lawsuit, which also included three blind Ohio voters as plaintiffs, before either the advocacy group or Husted had conducted any discovery. A three-judge panel from the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati said the dismissal was premature. The 6th Circuit’s decision means the case will be sent back to Smith to be litigated.

Ohio: ACLU’s Ohio director slams voter suppression efforts in Ohio | Athens News

The American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio’s executive director spoke to a crowd of nearly 100 students, faculty and community members Tuesday about voter suppression in America and Ohio, as well as Ohio University’s controversial “Freedom of Expression” policy. J. Bennett Guess, executive director of the ACLU of Ohio, said during the talk at the Athena Cinema that Ohio Secretary of State John Husted has been engaged actively in purging people from the voter rolls in Ohio, an effort that Guess contends disproportionately impacts economically disadvantaged people of color (who typically vote Democratic).

Ohio: Secretary of State responds to Mahoning voting count snafu | WFMJ

Ohio’s voting watchdog, the Secretary of State has responded to a snafu that meant thousands of votes were tallied twice in Mahoning County earlier this month. Last week, Deputy Director of the Mahoning County Board of Elections Thomas McCabe said that some initial reports of “unofficial final” numbers may have been wrong as reported by the media. That’s because of a snafu that double counted more than 6,000 votes on election night.  According to McCabe, two poll workers were using a scanning machine that hadn’t been reset.  A last minute box of 18 “curbside” votes (votes in which a person is physically unable to get out of the car is allowed to vote via paper ballot). 

Ohio: Court says Husted must prove Ohio can’t accommodate blind voters | Columbus Dispatch

A legal dispute over when Ohio deprives blind voters of their right to a secret ballot must be heard in federal court, an appellate court ruled Monday. Because blind voters must seek assistance from sighted individuals to fill out the paper ballots set aside for the sight-impaired, a three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declared that a district court judge must consider factual claims contending that Ohio deprives them of their equal opportunity to vote privately and independently. Judge George Smith of U.S. District Court had ruled in favor of Secretary of State Jon Husted, noting that the changes proposed by groups representing blind voters would fundamentally alter Ohio’s voting program. But the appellate panel essentially said Smith should not merely have taken Husted at his word.

Ohio: Court sides with blind voters over Ohio Secretary of State | The Blade

A federal appeals court on Monday resurrected a lawsuit against Secretary of State Jon Husted that was filed by blind voters claiming Ohio’s paper absentee ballots illegally force them to rely on others to vote. The Cincinnati-based U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a ruling by the lower U.S. District Court in Columbus that found in favor of Mr. Husted. The lower court found the remedies proposed by blind plaintiffs would have fundamentally changed Ohio’s voting system. On appeal, a three-judge panel of the 6th Circuit, all appointed by Republican presidents, found the lower court should not have simply accepted the secretary of state’s arguments on the matter. It sent the case back for further proceedings.

Ohio: Emails, documents are stark reminder of Ohio’s secret gerrymandering process | Cleveland Plain Dealer

For weeks in 2011, state-paid contractors, on leave from their public jobs for Republican lawmakers, worked secretly in a hotel room described as the “bunker” to create political maps aimed at creating safe Republican districts for most of Ohio’s congressional delegation.
The maps, drawn in part with guidance from national Republican Party leaders and the staff of U.S. Speaker of the House John Boehner, often disregarded community concerns and instead focused on political gains by creating districts that in some cases weave more than 100 miles across the state. It worked. In three election cycles since, no seat has changed party hands – a 12-4 GOP majority despite a much closer overall vote.

Ohio: Jon Husted: Replacing voting machines will be costly | Dayton Daily News

Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted said he’s hoping the federal government comes forward with money to update Ohio’s voting machines but admits, “I don’t hold my breath in thinking that they are going to.” Husted said the Ohio legislature is looking at ways to share costs to update voting machines that date to the mid-2000s. A split of 80 percent cost for the state and 20 percent for the local governments is being considered for replacement of machines that the Ohio Association of Elections Officials has said could cost an estimated $200 million. Ohio and other states replaced their old punch card voting systems with electronic touch screen and optical scan machines in the wake of the “hanging chad” debacle in Florida during the deadlocked 2000 presidential election and additional problems in 2004, including long lines in Ohio. The federal Help America Vote Act in 2002 for the first time provided funding to help states buy voting equipment.

Ohio: Supreme Court tackles Ohio voter purge efforts | McClatchy

After tackling partisan gerrymandering in October, the U.S. Supreme Court will take on the controversial issue of voter purges in a November case that could have major implications for the 2018 mid-term elections. Scheduled for oral argument on Nov. 8, Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute will determine whether failure to cast a ballot in recent elections, or “voter inactivity,” can lawfully trigger efforts to remove a person from the voter registration rolls. Critics say the purge policy used by Ohio’s Republican Secretary of State Jon Husted violates the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 and disproportionately impacts black, Hispanic and poor voters who traditionally support Democrats. Republicans argue that fraud by ineligible voters can occur if people who die or move away aren’t regularly identified and cleared from the registration rolls as the NVRA requires.

Ohio: Grand jury rejects charges against 17 identified in Jon Husted’s illegal voting probe | Cleveland Plain Dealer

A grand jury voted not to charge 17 Cuyahoga County residents who were among dozens of non-U.S. citizens identified by Ohio Sec. of State Jon Husted’s office as illegally voting or registering to vote in past elections. The grand jury voted late Tuesday not to hand up false voter registration charges against 16 people, and not to charge a 17th person with illegal voting, according to court documents made public Wednesday. The dates of offenses listed in court records date back to September 1996. Voter fraud cases can be hard to bring because investigators must show the voter knew they were not allowed to register to vote or cast a ballot.

Ohio: He Didn’t Vote in a Few Elections. In the Next One, Ohio Said He Couldn’t. | The New York Times

Larry Harmon, a software engineer who lives near Akron, Ohio, says he is “a firm believer in the right to vote.” But sometimes he stays home on Election Day, on purpose. In 2012, for instance, he was unimpressed by the candidates. He did not vote, he said, because “there isn’t a box on the ballot that says ‘none of the above.’” Three years later, Mr. Harmon did want to vote, against a ballot initiative to legalize marijuana. But his name was not on the list at his usual polling place. It turned out that Mr. Harmon’s occasional decisions not to vote had led election officials to strike his name from the voting rolls. On Nov. 8, the Supreme Court will hear arguments about whether the officials had gone too far in making the franchise a use-it-or-lose-it proposition.