Support for the statewide broadcast of the state of Ohio comes from Medical Mutual, providing more than 1.4 million Ohioans peace of mind with a selection of health insurance plans online at med mutual dot com slash Ohio by the law offices of Porter Wright, Morris and Arthur LLP now with eight locations across the country.

Porter Wright is a legal partner with a new perspective to the business community.

Maude Porter Wright dot com and from the Ohio Education Association representing 124,000 members who work to inspire their students to think creatively and experience the joy of learning online at OHEA.org The battle over Ohio State Legislative District maps made major headlines in 2022.

We talked to the Republican and Democratic leaders of the Ohio House to break down the redistricting saga and the year's other big topics.

It's all this week on the state of Ohio.

Welcome to the state of Ohio.

I'm Andy Chow, sitting in for Karen Kasler.

Republican House Speaker Bob Cupp took over the leadership role after former Speaker Larry Householder was removed from the post.

We sat down with Cupp to talk about the year's biggest moments and what to expect in 2023.

Looking back at everything that happened with redistricting, how would you assess that whole process?

Well, I would agree that it was a very long process that started in August of last year and and continued.

It was, I think maybe in a word, excruciating and disappointing, as it turned out.

I never expected that there would be so much controversy about it.

And I think partly it's the design of the amendment.

It sounded good in theory.

That's that if you can't have bipartisan agreement, the district only lasts for four years.

But if you do, it's ten years.

There was thought to be and I wasn't involved in it was thought to be an incentive to do a ten year and to work out agreement.

It turned out to be a disincentive and the incentive was to go to four years and I think that played a part in it.

One of the other aspects of it is that because there was so much litigation, the parties couldn't actually get together and sort of talk about working out a solution because if you did, it was going to end up in court.

And so that was kind of discouraged what normally might have occurred as well.

So I think one thing that people generally don't understand is that it was not only divided in the in the legislature in that redistricting commission, but the Supreme Court itself was divided.

Decisions were 4 to 3.

And so it all it wasn't very clear cut at all.

So I'm hopeful in the New session that that those those things get worked out and we can move on.

Now, you have a unique perspective because you sat on the Ohio Redistricting Commission and you used to be a Supreme Court justice.

So you were probably looking at it from a whole other perspective than what other people might have been looking at it as well.

So, yes, having experience with interpreting the Constitution and I think many people were were disappointed that some of the decisions that didn't seem to reflect what was actually in the Constitution.

So but that will that will all play out.

It was a new new provision, never been used before.

So we always have some some issue with interpretation in the beginning.

And so maybe that has that is clarified.

But one thing is clear.

I think the the it needs to get settled so people know where the districts are going to be for the 2024 election.

Well, ahead, it was unfortunate we had a second primary election.

And if federal court hadn't ordered.

I'm not sure if we'd ever had a primary election.

So so just a lot of disruption and maybe that'll get resolved.

Speaking of disruption, it's interesting to look back at the year now sitting here in December at the what other policymaking took place and maybe sort of evaluating that against other years.

What impact did the redistricting process have on just general policy making?

Did it seem to hamper just passing bills?

Business as usual?

Well, it consumed a lot of time.

And and that did take away from some of the other issues.

We think we we got them handled, but it was sort of like doing double duty in many cases.

So so it was it was front and center.

Is there important issues?

No question about it.

What advice do you have?

You won't be on the commission next year.

Probably a little grateful for that, maybe.

But what advice do you have for leaders who will be taking on that role in the future?

How would you like to see the process done differently?

Well, that's I'm not I'm not sure what the answer to that is.

Obviously, everybody has to go back to the drawing board and redo the districts.

And so we'll see whether the Supreme Court has a different interpretation of it.

And, of course, the congressional one is now on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

So we'll see where those go.

It would it would be good if the four and Democrats could get together and come up with something that both can live with.

But I'm not certain that that's going to be the case, considering the design of the constitutional amendment itself.

As someone who sat on that commission for hours and hours, would you hope that they would you advise them to meet sooner than later?

Well, there's a the line drawing itself takes a lot of work, a lot of time.

It's not as I have said on occasion, it's not just like getting an Etch a Sketch out and drawing districts.

It's there's a lot of metrics involved in it.

And while you don't want to look at it in a political sense yet, when you're done, everybody looks at it in a political sense.

So you have to be cognizant of that as well.

And and then again, the line is a little blurry or conflicted, perhaps based upon what some read.

The Constitution amendment to say and what the court a majority of the court and a majority of a divided court has said, it means.

So those things, we're going to have to get reconciled.

So switching gears here a little bit.

When you took over as speaker, you took over for former speaker Larry Householder.

How would you describe the state of the House Republican caucus when you took over compared to what it's like now?

Well, I think what I tried to do is to restore the traditional way of doing things that has worked, you know, for decades and decades, create some predictability, some reliability, some consistency in what we do.

I like to empower our members and our committee chairs to really look at the legislation and apply their own judgment to it.

I was did not think it would be was appropriate and I didn't try to control every aspect of what goes on.

We have members here from all over the state, someone with a great deal of experience, very talented people, and they need to apply their judgment and their experience as a draft legislation.

So one of the things we did was try to, you know, empower members to provide their, you know, their full potential in developing legislation.

I think the other thing is that we tried to do everything above board and make sure that what we did was with that was ethical and I think we succeeded in doing that.

And so I think as a result, we strengthened our House Republican caucus.

I think sometimes people compare the House to the Senate, and that's there are very different bodies having served in both.

The Senate, of course, is only one third the size of the House.

So the Ohio House is about the size minus one member, the size of the U.S. Senate.

And so it's a much more dynamic institution.

They're smaller districts.

They're more quickly respond to the public pressure and the public mood.

The Senate has bigger districts.

They have four year terms.

And so they tend to be more deliberately deliberate and deliberative when they act.

And so the two bodies can in some cases, a culture is different.

So.

So but I think we've we've worked well with with the Senate and hopefully have set a standard that will be continue to be followed.

You mentioned giving members a certain level of control and being able to make their own decisions on things.

And at some points, it almost seemed like there was disagreement that sort of spilled out into the floor.

An example of that was the bill to ban transgender athletes from girls sports.

It didn't make it out of committee on its did it make it to the floor as its own?

But it was added as an amendment on the floor, and that seemed to happen every once in a while.

Does that speak to disagreement within the caucus and not seeing eye to eye with each other?

Or is it just part of the process to a being allowed letting individuals, letting members allowed to make their own moves on the House floor?

Well, often you need a little time to to vet these ideas, and sometimes they get vetted, but they don't make it to the floor.

And so that's when members and I feel that there was a majority support in the caucus and not only in the caucus, but majority support in the House because they don't make it into a bill unless there is.

And so that's when they will offer an amendment.

And certainly there's different points of view on these things.

We have 99 districts for the House all over the state of Ohio, urban areas, rural areas, suburban areas, Appalachian areas.

So they're all different.

And people come to represent their constituents and they're going to have different ideas.

And the House is a dynamic place.

And these ideas, you know, compete with each other.

And so sometimes they end up as an amendment, sometimes they're part of a bill.

And that that is the legislative process.

This is representative democracy in action.

Is that just something that to be expected, especially with a super majority, so many members in one caucus?

Well, that that it lends itself to that.

But I think you'll see examples of that no matter what the division of the of the party.

Partizanship in the House is.

So the issue of abortion came back to Ohio again after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned roe v wade.

What were some of the things that you wanted to see happen when it comes to abortion policy in Ohio following that summer decision?

Well, it's clearly clear that the U.S. Supreme Court said this is a state issue.

It's not a federal issue.

So for since 1973, almost two whole generations, the state has not really had authority and responsibility over it.

And so now we do.

And it's been relatively a very short time.

And so I think a lot of people are trying to sorting this out in terms of what is the appropriate policy on abortion.

And so and I think the statute that we have, so-called heartbeat statute, is actually a lot clearer than many opponents are saying it is.

A lot of decision making rests with the physicians on this issue, and perhaps it can be clarified.

But I'm also advised that it's actually in the, you know, regular medical practice that these things are understood.

So the question is, where do you go from here?

And I'm not I'm not sure where that goes because I think the consensus is still forming on it.

Obviously, in the legislature, there's, I think, a majority that would ban abortion except for the life of the mother and the and the serious physical injury to the mother.

There is also, I think, some desire on the part of some to add some exceptions for limited exceptions, time limits, exceptions for for rape and incest.

Those are very rare occurrences, but they do happen.

And so I have picked this up from members and also from from the general public.

So.

So, again, it's of course, the statute is on hold in the in in the state courts at the moment.

And so I think that consensus is still developing on what is the appropriate calibration of this.

Two states, Indiana and West Virginia, have passed bills banning abortion since the top decision, and they have all included a very time limit and short term exceptions for rape or incest.

So that may be the way forward, may not be the way forward.

It'll be the next General Assembly that decides and then, of course, there's also a citizens initiative to to weigh in on the issue as well.

Cupp is term limited and won't be returning to the General Assembly next year, but Allison Rousseau will be coming back as the leader of the Ohio House Democratic Caucus.

Russo also joined us to talk about the highs and lows of 2022.

Well, I think first, keep in mind that we will be starting a general assembly that was elected on unconstitutional maps.

But, you know, I think what we learned the last time is the process needs to be open to the public.

It shouldn't be behind closed doors.

It should have plenty of opportunity for that transparency to the public.

And I also think, you know, there has to be communication between the members of the commission.

And that was challenging at times.

But, you know, we will hopefully get started on that pretty quickly because, you know, the unfortunate piece to all of this was that voters were confused and didn't know who was going to be running and what districts candidates didn't know if they should file in certain districts.

So I do hope that we start this process earlier, that we make the process transparent to the public, and then at the end of the day, that we follow the will of the voters.

Yeah.

And at the end there we were pushing up against the primary.

Of course, the primary for the state legislative races had to be delayed because of it.

What needs to happen?

Do we need to start right away?

Do you think that that everybody can come to the table sooner or when do you is there a sense of urgency here?

Well, I have a sense of urgency.

You know, if it were up to me, we would already have this done.

As a reminder, we are still under a court order to submit these maps.

And the majority of the commission, the Republican members have chosen to ignore that.

So the sooner the better.

As far as I am concerned, of course, we'll be very busy at the beginning of the next General Assembly working through the budget.

But that shouldn't be an excuse.

You know, just because we delayed the work doesn't mean that we should continue to delay it even further.

The Supreme Court ended up being the backstop to a lot of the maps that were passed.

The makeup of the Supreme Court is likely to change with Sharon Kennedy as chief justice.

Where do you think that leaves it?

Does that change your approach to any of the process, knowing that the Supreme Court might not fall in your favor next time around?

Well, you know, when you ask, does it change, you know, my process or do I think that the process the process or prospects of getting to fair maps are are high under what will be the new Supreme Court?

No, I think they showed very clearly in their decisions that they will fall in line with the partizan interest.

And I think that should be hugely concerning to all Ohioans.

That's not the role of our judicial branch.

But that said, you know, I will continue to work forward and, you know, again, try to achieve what the Constitution says that we should do.

And also what I know is the will and the intent of the voters.

Because the makeup of the Supreme Court is changing, because the leadership within the redistricting commission won't really be changing too much.

Or I'm guessing the the approach to it from the Republican leadership, but won't change too much.

Is there a need for a constitutional amendment?

Is there a need for citizens to go back to the ballot and change the process again to achieve what you say is more fair maps?

Well, I think what we learned in the last process in the last round of this and what has happened so far is that it did not work as it should.

There is no way to ensure that the members of the Commission are following through on the intent of the voters.

So I think that there are certainly revisions to the process that need to be happen, that need to happen.

Perhaps it needs to be taken out of the hands of politicians and put in the hands of independent commissioners.

You know, I will leave other folks to to work and decide what is best.

But if it goes back to the citizens, you know, I would be supportive of that.

Let's changing topics to reproductive rights and abortion, of course.

After the US Supreme Court overruled Roe v Wade, Ohio's six week ban on abortion went into effect.

It's now on hold.

What should voters expect from the legislature?

What would you like to let voters know about that might be coming from the legislature in regards to abortion laws next year?

Well, one of the surprising things that didn't come out of lame duck was, you know, there was a lot of talk among the Senate president and the governor about their intent to clarify much of the confusion that we knew was going to happen with the six week abortion ban.

In fact, we had doctors who came and testified about that back in 2019.

Of course, that didn't happen.

And my guess is it didn't happen because there are some very extreme perspectives on it within the caucuses of both chambers that want to do things like ban procedures and birth control at conception, want to make it difficult for families to get access to in vitro fertilization, treatments, all of these things.

And so to me, I'm quite alarmed about what additional may come in the next General Assembly, because we see that the Republicans who are represented at the Statehouse in both the Senate and the House are becoming more and more extreme, particularly regarding their views on this issue of reproductive choice.

Something you mentioned there and what came up in the lawsuit that ended up blocking the ban is vagueness or confusion?

And you mentioned confusion with redistricting to are these laws that are being passed to the legislature too confusing and is that to the detriment of Ohioans in the state?

Well, I think when you rush through legislation in the process, which is what we saw in this lame duck that happened, there are things that are not discussed.

There unintended consequences.

There are errors in the language, there's vagueness in the language.

Or if you are going through the legislative process and you are only listening to one side of the debate, for example, in the six week abortion ban, a lot of that language came from the anti-abortion movement.

It was not actually coming from the clinician community, the hospital community, those folks who actually have medical knowledge and expertize.

Those things were all pointed out during the debate of the bill.

I sat on the committees for all of those.

They were pointed out during the debate on the bill there were recommendations to change, to clarify.

None of that was considered.

And, you know, that is a problem.

And that goes back to me, you know, what happens and is the consequence of gerrymandering is that you end up with representatives on very extreme sides of the partizan ideology and you get very few people who are in the middle and really willing to work towards compromise and work to actually solve the issues of the people or who will stand up and say, we're not going to take on these very controversial issues because they don't fit with where the majority of Ohioans actually are on an issue.

So that's very interesting.

And so staying on the topic of are Republicans listening to the Democrats when it comes to certain issues and are they listening to the witnesses who come in during the committee process?

Representative Bill Seitz on the floor when when he was talking about the election bill that just passed in lame duck said he accused Democrats of not coming to the table or trying to give input on the issue.

Is that the case or are they are Democrats simply not being listened to?

Well, there are lots of things that my colleagues say on the floor that probably are not the full truth.

I can guarantee you that Democrats were giving a lot of input, particularly in the elections, Bill.

You know, we were hearing from our elections officials, hearing from our constituents.

Listen, you know, the reality is there was very clear intent.

They wanted to pass anti voter legislation.

You know, maybe they threw in a couple of things that were less bad at the end.

But then at the end of the day, you know, we absolutely both within committee on the floor, but also behind the scenes, constantly communicating, trying to get changes into legislation and have those discussions.

So that is not an accurate description.

So that elections bill changes and makes a lot of changes to the way people can vote in Ohio.

How do you see that playing out on the next Election Day, all these provisions playing out on the next Election Day?

Well, what will be interesting with this particular bill that passed is I anticipate there probably will be some legal challenges because of some of the federal election implications as well and federal election protections.

So we'll see how that plays out.

But the reality is, you know, we have seen over the last couple of cycles and over the last decade, you know, I think it more challenging for voters to access the ballot box, whether we make it more difficult for them to register.

We've now put into the Constitution because of issue two that recently passed.

You know, they are locked out within 30 days.

So at a minimum, they have to make sure that they are registered 30 days before election.

They are locked out.

We don't make the registration process easy.

We don't make the absentee voter process easy.

We don't have online access.

We limit those drop boxes to one per county.

So regardless of if you are a county of a million people are a county of only 12,000 people, same access.

You know, now we've added this photo ID piece to it, which I think, you know, the vast majority of individuals believe that we should have some sort of identification process.

But it's important in the details.

What IDs are we accepting?

Who are we excluding?

For example, we heard from organizations that represent older Ohioans and how difficult it is for them to get access to these federal IDs.

Often they don't have a need for them because they're no longer driving or for a variety of reasons.

So we really have to think about what is it that we're doing to prevent people from ever being able to cast that vote?

And, you know, to me, this is a fundamental freedom and we should make it as accessible as possible to our citizens.

That's it for us this week for my colleagues at the Statehouse News Bureau.

Thanks for watching.

Be sure to check us out at state news dot org and follow the show.

Karen Kasler, Joe Ingles and me on Facebook and Twitter.

Be sure to join us next time for the state of Ohio.

When support for the statewide broadcast of the state of Ohio comes from Medical Mutual, providing more than 1.4 million Ohioans.

Peace of mind with a selection of health insurance plans online at med mutual dot com slash Ohio by the law offices of Porter Wright, Morris and Arthur LLP now with eight locations across the country.

Porter Right is a legal partner with a new perspective to the business community.

More at Porter right dot com and from the Ohio Education Association representing 124,000 members who work to inspire their students to think creatively and experience the joy of learning online at OHEA.org