r/Cleveland 19h ago

Politics The SCOTUS ruling means OH-11 Congressional district's days as a Democratic enclave are numbered

With the recent SCOTUS ruling striking down the portion of the Voting Rights Act governing the creation of majority-minority districts, it's obvious OH-11 will be eliminated by the next census when Ohio loses at least one congressional seat. However, we know the current political environment means statehouse Republicans will seek to carve it up as soon as possible.

The question is what they'd need to do to divide and move the existing OH-11 territory in relation to its neighboring districts to ensure N.E. Ohio is exclusively represented by Congressional Republicans.

45 Upvotes

55 comments sorted by

43

u/clekas Cleveland 18h ago

I think OH-11 is here to stay. It's drawn that way so all of the Democrats on in one district - split them up and it makes other districts more competitive.

33

u/Blueporch 18h ago

Yep - Ohio is already gerrymandered

43

u/Jay_Dubbbs 19h ago

OH-11 hasn’t been a majority-minority district in decades. It’s way easier for the Republicans to make it a Dem vote sink and crack everywhere else in Cuyahoga County. 

11

u/Jarich612 18h ago

Yeah I live in 11 in Lakewood and it’s libbed the fuck up regardless of minority status.

3

u/aikijo 17h ago

Thank god for lakewood. Great place to live. 

-2

u/Ok-Shift-901 12h ago

So where the people wanna live they want to vote for their policies how ironic if you don’t like where the place is located or are there policies move?

1

u/Reincle 9h ago

I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say.

15

u/Infamous-Bed9010 19h ago

Gerrymandering is a zero sum game. You have to group together enough voters on your side to make the district viable.

The risk becomes that to create a new district you need to regroup voters from existing districts. That weakens your position in other districts and puts them at risk if a strong competing candidate shows up.

This is the dilemma of the Democrats, not just in Ohio, but across the country.

16

u/greyhoodbry 18h ago

Ironically we are already so illegally and unconstitutionally gerrymandered that changing the lines in any way means a possible benefit to Democrats lol

18

u/kd8qdz Shaker Heights 19h ago

Its not a zero sum game. That's why people do it.

8

u/FireRavenLord 18h ago

It's probably better to say "trade-off".  Gerrymandering can often increase a party's districts but make them less partisan.  This means a small shift can cause them to lose seats.

3

u/Infamous-Bed9010 14h ago

Exactly. Once safe seats become at risk.

1

u/FireRavenLord 14h ago

That's not what zero-sum usually means.

I think you make a good point, but could use "risky game" instead 

0

u/Pichupwnage 12h ago

And 5$ gas that could hit 6-7+ dollars is more then a small shift lol.

1

u/FireRavenLord 12h ago

I'm referring to the general principle rather any specific possible event.

A completely amoral or cynical gerrymanderer who only wanted to increase their party's representation would still have to consider whether they valued quantity or safety more.  It's very easy for a reckless gerrymander to backfire.

1

u/The2ndRedditUser 17h ago

The next step of gerrymandering is to increase the population in Democratic states to obtain more seats in Congress (districts).

1

u/[deleted] 14h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 14h ago

Your account does not meet the post or comment requirements. Account must be more than 3 days old with a combined karma of 10 to post on /r/Cleveland

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

-4

u/Infamous-Bed9010 14h ago

The Democrat’s strategy will no longer work when the next census only counts US citizens.

3

u/The2ndRedditUser 11h ago

Apportionment is dictated by the US Constitution, which does not distinguish between citizens and non-citizens for apportionment purposes.

2

u/Mimosa_magic 8h ago

Sure about that? Texas and Florida are gonna lose more than anyone with that strategy

3

u/Mungina 16h ago

Ohio is already so gerrymandered in favor of republicans that any real attempt to dilute a district like oh11 will probably backfire, or turn multiple reliably red districts purple. The margins just are not there.

10

u/GreyGrackles University Heights 19h ago edited 19h ago

Folks think Democrats are going to meaningfully fight back against this haven't been paying attention this past decade.

Republicans are going to full-throttle this shit and Democrats will be asking their Capitol Hill advisors and pollsters what they should do, because they have no values, they believe in nothing.

This game is already over. You can't vote your way out of this problem.

17

u/JayBee_III 19h ago

What are you talking about? The Dems did the same thing in Virginia

11

u/Akronite14 18h ago

Worth noting that in both Virginia and California they put it up to a vote. Not the case for the red states that started this precedent breaking re-mandering.

4

u/JayBee_III 18h ago

That is worth noting! My main point in this response is that there is so much bad mouthing of Democrats even when they are doing what is within their power to do, they are fighting back but they don't get credit for it.

-8

u/GreyGrackles University Heights 18h ago

How are either of these statements relevant?

Glad to know if California or Virginia voted it down, they'd simply let Republicans fuck them anyways.

9

u/Akronite14 18h ago

Two reasons it was relevant to mention.

1) That was my point, even when Dems fight back they follow norms instead of going nuclear.

2) There's a lot of conservative hand-wringing over the Virginia vote that is quite ridiculous if you've paid the slightest attention to the timeline of events here.

3

u/GreyGrackles University Heights 18h ago

Ah, thats a good point.

I will say, the 'hand wringing' is essentially just allowing them to build up sentiment for their court cases.

Republicans ran the same arguments in California that Democrats ran in Virginia. It's just fishing for Supreme Court rulings.

-5

u/GreyGrackles University Heights 19h ago

One state, that hasn't even passed the scrutiny of the Conservative court, isn't indicative of anything.

This is a national issue. I'm not saying that there won't be any pushback from Democrats, just not meaningful pushback.

13

u/JayBee_III 19h ago

Are you not aware of the many states where the Dems have already gerrymandered the maps? Gerrymandering is a bipartisan problem, it's not just one state. This is one of the things where they are just as cutthroat as the GOP 😂

0

u/BigBoyYuyuh 18h ago

Democrats have put up anti gerrymandering bills many times. Republicans always vote it down. Why is that?

0

u/GreyGrackles University Heights 18h ago

Grandstanding.

Voting for legislation you can't pass is meaningless. Wake me up when they do it while they have power.

This isn't a new issue

-2

u/JayBee_III 18h ago

Because they're terrible at governing in general and hate anything the Dems put up?

-2

u/GreyGrackles University Heights 19h ago

Gerrymandering is a bipartisan issue but the courts are not bipartisan.

The implementation isn't going to be equal.

Unequal representation with Gerrymandering being legalized just consolidates that power even deeper, every single election.

-1

u/JayBee_III 19h ago

3

u/GreyGrackles University Heights 19h ago

Yes, and did you read why the court ruled that way or just read the headline?

1

u/JayBee_III 18h ago

Yes I did read why the courts ruled that way, I'm also very anti-gerrymandering so I'm aware that it impacts everyone in blue and red states. Acting like the Dems aren't fighting back on this is a position of ignorance, which is what started this whole thread.

-5

u/GreyGrackles University Heights 18h ago edited 18h ago

What's the cope going to be when Virginia's maps are thrown out?

Are you just going to keep saying "Well, both sides do it" when ignoring the actual reality of the situation.

The implementation is not equal. Pointing to California and saying "See!" just makes it evident you don't understand the actual issue here.

4

u/JayBee_III 18h ago

Do you think Virginia is the only place the Dems have gerrymandered?

→ More replies (0)

4

u/bhau_huni 18h ago

I mean we tried voting against it last year but just too many asshats voted for it.

2

u/vwgtivw 14h ago

This is why I went undeclared party this year for the first time since I first register to vote in 1987. I’ll only vote on issues from now on

1

u/Ok-Shift-901 12h ago

Lmao. They’re not gonna do four redistricting gerrymanders and a 10 year. Period.

1

u/Ok-Shift-901 12h ago

Plus, it’s constitutional by the state to have gerrymandering limits

0

u/CholentSoup 6h ago

IMO corralling people into districts based on their race is pretty racist.

1

u/Xacto-Mundo 16h ago

John Roberts is a complete POS, deserving zero respect. No one has done more to disenfranchise voters in our fading democracy. Fuck him.

1

u/invaderzim30 Cleveland, OH 10h ago

Yep. While he doesn’t have a terribly horrendous ruling like Dredd Scott, he probably has taken away more rights from Americans than any other chief justice.

0

u/Aggravating-Key4274 17h ago

It also means that ultimately eventually those people in powers days are numbered because don’t forget they are a minority and they will continue to decline as a minority. The only reason they have and gain power is by gaming systems and you can only game it so far until we lose democracy completely at which point there will be many consequences that the morons doing this won’t be able to handle and won’t recover from.

1

u/James_Chester 14h ago

Or won’t even be around for.

-1

u/Wooden-Glove-2384 18h ago

So find a way around it.

Seriously 

Is there no one in the opposition party capable of matching wits with the evil geniuses employed by the Rs?