Schwarzenegger Enters Debate Over Redistricting in Ohio

New York Times ^ | October 18, 2005 | Dean E. Murphy

[calcowgirl]

Separate ballot measures in California and Ohio to remove lawmakers from the drawing of legislative districts have been dogged by accusations that they are essentially partisan power grabs.

Now Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, hopes to counter those claims by throwing his weight behind the Ohio measure, even though no prominent Republican elected official in that state has done so and many Republican lawmakers there are raising money to defeat it.

... A top supporter of the measures in both states said Mr. Schwarzenegger would participate in a series of public events this week to signal his stance.

(snip)

In Ohio, where Republicans dominate the statehouse, Democrats and unions led the effort to qualify Issue 4 and several other election-related initiatives for the vote next month.

(snip)

Keary McCarthy, a spokesman for Reform Ohio Now, the main group behind the Ohio measures, said supporters would hold a news conference on Wednesday in Columbus, during which other Californians involved in Proposition 77 would endorse the Ohio measure and the Ohio group, in turn, would endorse Proposition 77.

The endorsement of Proposition 77 by Reform Ohio Now, which has strong backing by labor unions, will raise hackles in California, where organized labor is firmly behind Democratic efforts to oppose all of Mr. Schwarzenegger's ballot measures. But redistricting supporters said the move would offer further proof that redistricting should transcend party politics.

(snip)

Bill Mundell, a Republican who leads one of the committees in California that advocates passage of Proposition 77, said the decision to cross-endorse with the Ohio groups was "a calculated gamble" for Republicans in California, some of whom already oppose the measure.

"It is worth the risk," Mr. Mundell said, "to demonstrate that this thing can rise above basic and knee-jerk partisanship."

[calcowgirl]

http://www.protectyourvote.org/news/pressreleases/09_09_05.pdf

Reform Ohio Now Financed by Wealthy Out-Of-State Liberals in Their Bid to Change Ohio’s Constitution

Over 93% of Campaign War Chest Comes from Out of State

COLUMBUS--Wealthy out-of-state interest groups and individuals who have ties to radical ideals and interests are trying to buy the votes of Ohioans who must decide the fate of four statewide ballot issues that would dramatically change how Ohio holds its elections.

More than 93 percent of the nearly $1.2 million dollars collected comes from such out-of-state special interests, according to campaign finance filings of the supporters of the ballot issues, Reform Ohio Now (RON).

Of these contributions, The Rockefeller Family Fund, Alida R. Messinger and The Philanthropic Collaborative, all having close ties to the Rockefeller family, contributed $310,000. Alida Messinger, is the tenth largest individual donor to 527 organizations and has contributed $2.2 million to Americans Coming Together (ACT). ACT was involved with alleged voter registration fraud in Ohio in their attempt to defeat President Bush.

Another major contributor, the California based Therestofus.org purports to “be a non-partisan watchdog committed to exposing the role of big money in politics and telling citizens what they can do about it.” The finance report shows a $235,000 donation, but there is no indication of where that money came from.

(snip)

[California Patriot]

It would be nice if the Rockefellers would help out in California, but presumably their aim is to screw the GOP.

[defenderSD]

Legislative districts don't make any difference in the US Presidential race or US senate races, and those are the elections that really matter.

[Loyal Buckeye]

Except in the ability for a party to raise money. The more offices held translates into an easier time of raising money and more options in allocating that money.

[Alia]

Rockefeller Foundation... help the GOP? They never have. They have a heavy track record of only supporting the radical left, and the radical left just loves gerrymandering districts. For the people, you see. For the vote, you see. It's the "lazy man's guide to winning elections".

[California Patriot]

Yeah, I know. I despise rich liberals, and you can bet they despise us.

[Alia]

Well, "rich liberals", IMHO, would love to win us over to their side of seeing "things". However, they've got this pesky ideologic sloganeering going on that "we" represent bigots, homophobes, racists, blah blah.

They shoot themselves in their own foot, there.

And elsewhere: The rich liberals love money! But, they denigrate anyone (repubs, libbies, indeps) who also wishes to rise up the economic ladder. Tsk Tsk.

Short gains, they've made, for such a long, long term loss.

Alas. And. Alack! ;>

[conservative_2001]

Thanks for your input Arnold, but we Ohioans vote that you clean up your own state first, and let us worry about our's.

[J-Bro_in_Ohio]

Isn't it pretty obvious from this that whomever has the power to redistrict (gerrymander) is not going to want reform, and the minority party is going to be in favor reguardless of what party it is.
To gerrymander is to create a monopoly, and no monopoly is going to just crumble at request. It's obviously in the CURRENT best interests for the republican base to oppose Issue-4 in Ohio, just the same as it is for them to support Prop-77 in Ca.
This is not a sure power-grab for democrats. It will only equal the playing field. If the tables should turn on the republicans, the dems will gerrymander the hell out of the districts. Republicans have MANY well known politicians throughout Ohio, and with gerrymander any can easily be taken out.
We saw in the previous 2 Presidential elections that the state is divided fairly evenly. Gerrymandering in the dems favor will NOT be hard.
That's why, as crazy as it sounds, I really think base republicans are better off voting for balance and conserving the politicians they have in power.
If you read the actual amendments you'll see that in no way is this definitly going to hurt republicans.
To be conservative, is to oppose change that endangers the good things we have. I think passing these measures will keep conservative values safer in the long run.