The institutional Left is dumping millions into what has become the most expensive redistricting ballot initiative in history—to change how a red-leaning state elects members of Congress and the state Legislature. 

The Sixteen Thirty Fund, a client of Arabella Advisors, is the largest donor to the Ohio ballot question, dubbed Issue 1.

If voters approve it, Issue 1 would amend the state’s Constitution to establish what proponents call a nonpartisan Citizen Redistricting Commission, according to Ballotpedia. 

Supporters of the change have given a total of $26.1 million, according to campaign finance data from July, the most recently available from the Ohio Secretary of State’s Office. The total includes multimillion-dollar contributions from the liberal Tides Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union.

“This is an attempt by the Left to circumvent the democratic process,” Jason Snead, executive director of the Honest Elections Project, who added that “99% of the money supporting this is from entities outside the state.”

Snead rejected the claim that appointed officials in Ohio would be less likely to engage in partisan gerrymandering than elected officials.

“A lie can get around the world before the truth gets out of bed,” Snead said. “They are trying to outspend the truth. They want to gerrymander the state to the Left and hide behind a veneer of nonpartisanship.”

A “yes” vote on Issue 1 is to amend the Ohio Constitution to establish a 15-member Citizen Redistricting Commission made up of five Republicans, five Democrats, and five independents. 

Anyone could apply to be on the commission. A bipartisan panel of four retired judges would appoint the commissions after screening applicants for qualifications, conflicts of interest, relevant experiences, and other factors. The four retired judges—two Democrats and two Republicans—would be chosen by partisan members of the Ohio Ballot Board, which oversees elections.

The petition for the ballot question says: “Districts shall ensure the equal functional ability of politically cohesive and geographically proximate racial, ethnic, and language minorities to participate in the political process and to elect candidates of choice.”

If voters approve the initiative, this process would replace the seven-member Ohio Redistricting Commission. The existing commission is made up of the governor, state auditor, secretary of state, a member appointed by the speaker of the Ohio House, a member appointed by the state Senate president, and two members appointed by the opposition leaders in each legislative chamber.

A campaign committee called Citizens Not Politicians welcomes support from any organization in making the change, spokesperson Chris Davey said in an email to The Daily Signal, adding that “people of all political persuasions hate gerrymandering.”  

“It’s nationally known that Ohio is one of the most gerrymandered states in the country, and there have been seven Supreme Court rulings that politicians ignored,” Davey said. “Our campaign includes Republicans, Democrats, and independents, and we’re very proud of that. This amendment is supported by a broad coalition including small business owners, veterans, faith leaders, strong conservatives, and Republicans.”

The Sixteen Thirty Fund contributed a total of $6.5 million Citizens Not Politicians, according to Ballotpedia. 

A spokesperson for the Sixteen Thirty Fund didn’t respond to inquiries from The Daily Signal before publication. 

Tied for a distant second place by giving $3.5 million each are the ACLU and Article IV, a group focused on redistricting reforms in states. The Daily Signal sought comment from both the ACLU and Article IV. Neither responded by publication time. 

Our American Future Foundation, which trains aspiring Democratic congressional candidates, gave $2.4 million. A spokesperson for the organization did not respond to an inquiry for this story. 

The Ohio Progressive Collaborative and the Tides Foundation each contributed $2 million, according to Ballotpedia.

A Tides Foundation spokesperson did not respond to an inquiry for this story. The Daily Signal called a representative of Ohio Progressive Collaborative who passed along the message, but the organization did not respond by publication time. 

Other high-profile organizations on the Left that contributed to the ballot initiative include two teachers unions—the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association—which each gave $500,000 to Citizens Not Politicians, according to the campaign finance data from the Ohio Secretary of State’s Office. 

Neither union responded to inquiries for this story. 

The Soros family-connected Open Society Policy Center contributed $200,000, as did Democracy Fund, financed by eBay founder Pierre Omidyar. Neither responded to requests for comment, although the Open Society Policy Center acknowledged receiving the inquiry. 

The Brennan Center for Justice, an advocacy group affiliated with New York University, contributed $100,000, according to the data. The Brennan Center acknowledged receiving a request for comment, but didn’t comment by publication time. 

The $26.9 million in contributions in support of Ohio’s Issue 1 during the first two quarters of 2024 is more money than was raised for the entirety of past redistricting commission reforms in the states.

In 2018, Michigan’s redistricting ballot initiative brought in $16.9 million; donors gave $5.8 million to Colorado’s initiative; and Utah’s measure brought in $2.8 million. Only California’s redistricting reform on the ballot in 2010 came close to the dollar amount, bringing in $20.8 million. (Adjusted for inflation, that total is more than what’s been raised so far for the Ohio measure.)

Organizations endorsing the initiative include the Ohio NAACP, Planned Parenthood Advocates of Ohio, Abortion Forward, and the League of Women Voters of Ohio.

In 34 states, the legislatures draw up legislative and congressional district boundaries. 

A total of 14 initiatives regarding redistricting commissions have been on state ballots since 1983, according to Ballotpedia. 

Generally, “Barone’s law” is applicable in debates over redistricting processes, said Michael Watson, research director for the Capital Research Center, a conservative think tank that monitors nonprofit groups. 

Named for pundit and historian Michael Barone, the principal author of The Almanac of American Politics, Barone’s law says every process argument is insincere. Put another way, “good government” reforms usually are aimed at gaining political advantage. 

Watson noted that in some states conservative groups and Republican politicians have backed independent commissions to draw up congressional and legislative districts. The details of  individual state commissions matter, he said. 

“Progressives apparently think they can win more congressional seats if Ohio redistricting is done this way than under the current way redistricting is done,” Watson told The Daily Signal. “Given who supports the measure, I suspect it gives an advantage to the progressive institutional universe, which is larger than the conservative institutional universe.”