Two efforts that have been languishing for some time — improving the state’s criminal-justice system regarding the use of DNA evidence and changing the way legislative districts are drawn — might provoke a bit more argument than the widely praised Third Frontier, but both are worthy undertakings. Both have been vetted and deserve a vote.

For redistricting, House Democrats and Senate Republicans have separate bills with somewhat different approaches to taking the politics out of the task, but they could be reconciled by keeping the best features of each.

The Senate plan, passed in September, would create a bipartisan board to approve maps for both congressional and state legislative districts. It would require at least two votes of minority-party members to approve a plan. That makes it an improvement over the current system, in which the three-member Apportionment Board, controlled by whichever party holds at least two of three designated statewide offices, can dictate state legislative district that favors the dominant party. A state legislative majority can similarly slant the drawing of congressional districts.

The House plan introduces another valuable element: allowing the public to submit proposed maps for districts, which would be graded on four criteria aimed at producing competitive districts and fair representation of the parties and avoiding splitting municipalities between districts. A similar demonstration project sponsored by the Ohio League of Women Voters recently produced impressive results.

House Speaker Armond Budish, D-Beachwood, unfortunately already allowed the deadline to pass for getting a redistricting measure on the May ballot. That would have been best, because the longer lawmakers put off the issue, the more likely one party will sense victory in the November election and become unwilling to give up the advantage it would gain under the current system.

Likewise, Budish has offered no good reason for inaction on Senate Bill 77, sponsored by Sen. David Goodman, R-New Albany, which would improve the state’s use of DNA evidence and other criminal-justice procedures. The bill has gone nowhere since the Senate passed it on an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote, 32-1, in June. The bill would require all convicted felons to give DNA samples, require police departments to save DNA evidence for 30 years, open up DNA testing to parolees who might have been wrongly convicted and mandate “blind” photo lineups to avoid faulty witness identifications

The bill would help identify and convict the guilty, avoid faulty convictions and exonerate the wrongly convicted. It deserves an affirmative vote in the House.

Budish’s apparent lack of commitment to the bill and his talk of instead moving an alternative bill by Rep. W. Carlton Weddington, D-Columbus, are standing in the way of what should be an easy victory for justice, not to mention a bipartisan accomplishment in which candidates in both parties could take pride.