Democratic leaning areas of the state tend to abut bodies of water.  Of course the GOP will want to draw lines that dillute democratic support in other areas.  It is no different than when North Carolina's GOP drew a district which was something like 100 miles long and just a few miles wide along I-85 between Charlotte and the Triad area.  Both sides gerrymander, but since democratic support comes from more densely populated areas (such as along the lake or the Ohio River) or areas where the land is cheaper (such as along a highway), it is just that much more obvious when the GOP does it.

^ I honestly don't care which party does it, but I do think the practice makes for bad governance and is quite arguably anti-democratic. As I questioned before, what good does it serve Cleveland to have a representative based in Toledo? Or likewise if the situation were reversed?

Is any part of "Cleveland" in the district?  I know some of the western burbs are in it, but I thought the re-districting caused the entire city proper to be redrawn into Fudge's district....

we need a map!

 

ny is supposedly arguing about reforming this redistricting shuffling problem too. it seems intractable -- does any state do it fairly and reasonably??

we need a map!

 

Here's one. There are others out there for the googling if this isn't what you're looking for

 

 

 

The green strip represents what is now Kaptur's region.

 

Personally, I think this specific region will be the straw that breaks the redistricting's back. It's so clearly serves no purpose other than quarantining democratic leaning regions

Yeah, although 11 and 13 are looking pretty messed up too ...

I just noticed that four different districts split up both Cuyahoga and Summit.  It appears that only Franklin and Portage  (which are both split up 3 ways) have more than two.  I realize that population probably demands that Cuyahoga not be under one district, but the 4 way split seems a bit out of wack with the rest of the state.

^They sure "cracked" it good, didn't they :(

 

There are 8-10 congressional districts within "NEO" depending upon how you want to define it.  This is not a population problem, it's a drawing problem.  They chose to draw a district that at points is a third of a mile wide.  If there were more population in NEO they'd just draw the district thinner in other spots to reach the same end point.

 

I've read more than one news article attributing Ohio's loss of congressional seats to the states "declining" population.  For these specific purposes it's not a crucial distinction, but it would be swell if journalists didn't straight out misstate things.