Ahead of a November vote on abortion rights, Republican lawmakers want voters to make it more difficult to amend the state constitution
Vote No to Issue 1 Ohio residents!
- an indiana resident
Already did on Saturday! Took my wife and daughter as well and we all voted no!!
As an Ohioan, this whole thing has been insane.
Ohio has had the ability direct referendum power since 1912 over the constitution. The odds are already low. First, you have to collect 1,000 signatures to get it in front of the ballot board and approve the language. Then, once approved, you have to get signatures equalling 10% of the votes cast in the last governor’s election, including in 44 out of 88 counties where you get 5% of the votes in each county. The signatures, which must come from registered voters and be separated by county, are verified by each local county. If you fall short, you have 10 days to collect additional signatures. Then you need to get 50% of the vote in the election.
The simple fact is, most fail. Only rarely are some controversial ones passed, like casino gambling and raising the minimum wage (the latter is almost certainly why the Chamber of Commerce endorses it because they fear future changes could bring the minimum wage higher).
Increasing the threshold to 60% is just part of the dastardly plot of this vote. That is specifically designed for the abortion issue that is going to be on the November ballot, which is likely to pass with 52%-58% of the vote, based on polling.
But that isn’t enough. Ohio passed gerrymandering reform several years ago by more than 60%. However, Republicans just ignored the law and passed partisan maps anyway. So the former Ohio Chief Justice is planning an amendment to create an independent panel to draw Ohio maps. Naturally, Republicans love gerrymandering, and they know it would easily garner 60%. So they also have moved to make it impossible to get something on the ballot by requiring 5% of the governor’s vote from ALL 88 COUNTIES. With how rural some counties are (and with some of them 80% red), this will be virtually impossible. One county is given a veto. Also, they are removing the 10-day period to gather more signatures if they fall short. A recent marijuana initiative shows the need for this: they fell less than 700 signatures short but turned in 10 times the amount needed in just 9 days. (Although worth noting that is a statute, not an amendment, so it isn’t subject to the same rules, but still illustrates the point that 1 signature short out of nearly half a million needed and you have to start over from scratch).
The arguments for it are pure BS. First, they claim that the Ohio constitution is open to special interest. Yet their entire campaign is bankrolled by Illinois billionaire Richard Uihlein. It also makes no sense. As the rules are so much harder to meet, grassroots efforts will be dead, whereas only wealthy people could finance a campaign.
Second, they fail basic civics by comparing the amendment process for the US Constitution to the Ohio Constitution. Set aside that no single state gets a veto in the way single counties get a veto under their rule, but they ignore that the different constitutions are supposed to do different things. James Madison, the architect of the constitution himself noted that state constitutions needed to be far more detailed.
Third, they fall back on the idea that the initiated statute is still available. They ignore people choose constitutional amendments because the legislature likes to immediately amend them, usually for the worse in the eyes of backers.
And lastly, they rely on dog whistles and lies. Numerous ads have appeared claiming that “radical groups” are “coming for your children” and a yes vote is the only way to save “parental rights.” You would think the proposal would be about some transgender thing from most of the ads, but it has nothing to do with it.
What’s the consensus - is it likely to pass or fail? I haven’t found much polling.
It’s too early to say, really. Only 20% of the vote has been counted, but so far it’s 30% Yes and 70% No based on exit polls.
Edit: good news, no won
The only argument they have that I do agree with is the outside special interests influence. The casino and medical marijuana amendments are prime examples of that. For the record, I still voted no. Fuck Frank LaRose. He’s a hypocrite.
Still, I don’t like the outside money and influence on our constitution nor our legislature, the latter being the bigger problem.
The canvassers whose petitions I signed for the upcoming election were both from out of state being paid to collect signatures. I’m not sure we can ever really have a grassroots movement in this country ever again until dark money is no longer allowed in our politics.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Republican leaders have said they wanted to make the abortion rights measure tougher to pass but also have embraced the proposal more broadly, saying changes to the state constitution should have overwhelming support.
In recent years, Republicans in a handful of states have sought to make it more difficult to pass citizen-led initiatives after a string of liberal policies — from expanding Medicaid to raising the minimum wage — have been placed on the ballot.
Last year, such efforts to raise the voter threshold failed in South Dakota and Arkansas, and attempts to schedule a similar vote in Missouri were unsuccessful this spring.
Michael Gonidakis, the president of Ohio Right to Life, lobbied the state legislature for months to try to make it harder to pass constitutional amendments.
Under long-standing rules, those who want to place constitutional amendments on the ballot must gather signatures equal to 10 percent of the number of people who voted in the most recent race for governor.
Issue 1 would change those rules by requiring petitioners to hit the 5 percent mark in every Ohio county and ending the ability to gather additional signatures
I’m a bot and I’m open source!
