For 111 years, Ohioans who couldn’t get politicians to listen to them have had a straightforward way to try to bring about change. They can sidestep the governor and lawmakers to amend the state constitution on their own.

By gathering several hundred thousand signatures from around the state, they can put issues on the ballot and, with the support of a simple majority, put new policies in place. Under this system, abortion rights advocates have placed a measure on the November ballot that would guarantee access to abortion in a state where restrictions at around six weeks of pregnancy have been put on hold by a judge.

But Ohio Republicans, who control both chambers of the state legislature and have sought to restrict access to abortion, are trying to make the process more difficult. They scheduled a special election for Tuesday with just one issue on the ballot: Should constitutional amendments require the support of 60 percent of voters rather than a simple majority?

To pass, that measure needs just a simple majority. If it’s approved, future ballot initiatives — including the abortion measure — will need to achieve the new, higher threshold.

Supporters of abortion rights and other advocates for keeping the citizen initiative process intact have accused Republican lawmakers of trying to thwart the will of the majority and weaken voters’ voices. Republicans and opponents of abortion have defended their call for the special election, arguing that there should be a high bar for amending the state constitution, just as there is for modifying the U.S. Constitution. They argue that voters still would have a say in state policy under their plan and contend that they want to prevent out-of-state groups from wielding outsize influence in Ohio.

In essence, Ohio voters are grappling with a confluence of two hot-button ideas: the fate of abortion rights and, when it comes to citizens’ ability to change the state constitution, the future of an important tool of democracy.

  • @Boobski@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    701 year ago

    As an Ohioan I’ve been so incredibly stressed about this special election. If it passes, I fully believe it will be the reason for an increasingly polarized state where only the special interests get the spotlight and any kind of grassroots efforts from the actual populace won’t have any chance of success.

    • Chetzemoka
      link
      fedilink
      241 year ago

      My parents both voted early to keep the amendment process as it is now! Fuck the Ohio fascist party

    • gullible
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      This is an absolutely ridiculous premise that you’re positing. Nothing will change, buddy, relax! C’mon, take a seat, sip this ice cold kool aid, and ignore the heat and smoke.

    • Wenchette
      link
      fedilink
      41 year ago

      They definitely don’t want people voting on abortion rights

  • @lolola@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    351 year ago

    “Uh-oh, someone’s making a policy I don’t like, and I’m not sure I can sway enough voters to block it. Better break the policymaking process entirely.”

  • @grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    27
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    What’s even more outrageous about this is that the more recent ballot item to change the voting threshold is being allowed to “jump the line” and be voted on before the abortion amendment. That should just straight-up be disallowed, and the voting standard for the abortion amendment should be whatever it was at the time it earned its place on the ballot regardless of whatever bullshit shenanigans the Republicans try to pull in the interim.

    The conservatives do love their grandfather clauses, after all, and what’s good for the goose is good for the gander!

  • GoatRodeo
    link
    fedilink
    201 year ago

    I have voted no, and got into an argument with my parents about it, and ignored my inlaws while talking… religion doesn’t belong in government, and government doesn’t belong in a doctors office. And, what a waste of money

  • AutoTL;DRB
    link
    English
    151 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    In essence, Ohio voters are grappling with a confluence of two hot-button ideas: the fate of abortion rights and, when it comes to citizens’ ability to change the state constitution, the future of an important tool of democracy.

    Proponents of the new threshold are “willing to change the rules because they don’t trust voters,” said Catherine Turcer, executive director of Common Cause Ohio, a nonprofit group focused on strengthening democratic institutions.

    Hinting at a bribery scandal that sent a former Ohio House speaker to prison, state Rep. Michael Skindell (D) told the audience that voters need to “send a message to these corrupt Republicans for trying to jam this down our throats.”

    “Issue One wants to move that threshold to 60 percent needed, and so what that does is that takes the minority and gives them the majority, which doesn’t make any sense to, really, anybody,” Richards told one voter in a suburb on Cleveland’s west side.

    “Constitutions do not exist for day-to-day legislating — things like casinos or raising the minimum wage or maybe trying to do something that would make it harder for farmers to run their operations … or something like this radical abortion amendment that is being considered this November,” he said.

    Lee Weingart, a Republican who lost a race for Cuyahoga county executive last year, said he is likely to vote against the abortion rights measure but opposes the effort to raise the threshold for amending the state constitution.


    I’m a bot and I’m open source!

      • @Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        61 year ago

        Indeed! The “60%” requirement at the polls is actually the smaller hurdle this bill would add. The larger hurdle is the change in getting an amendment issue on the ballot.

        Under the current rules, citizen initiatives require a petition be circulated. Petitioners must collect signatures from at least 10% of voters throughout the state. Additionally, they must collect signatures from at least 5% of voters in 44 of Ohio’s 88 counties.

        Under the proposed rules, you still need 10%, but canvassers must get signatures from at least 5% of voters in all 88 counties. You can have 4 million people sign your petition throughout the state, but if you can’t get 200 signatures in Vinton county, your petition has failed.

  • Buck Fucket
    link
    fedilink
    151 year ago

    Many Ohioans are dumb. Evidence? They are putting signs on their yard to vote Yes on Issue 1 to peotect…THE 2ND AMMENDMENT…These Republican idiots will vote for anything if you put “Protect Life” or “Protect the 2nd ammendment” on it…ugh…I hate how red this state is, but it has great places to vacation and spend time at…I expect this issue will pass. Republican voters don’t see that they’re taking away the power of the people by voting yes…

  • @c0c0c0@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -301 year ago

    Not a fan of the a republican party or their anti-abortion agenda, but I gotta agree that a constitutional amendment should require more than a bare majority. How else can the rights of the minority be protected?

    • Maximilious
      link
      fedilink
      26
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s very convenient that the Republicans in rule decide to bring this up right now given the fact that the state collected enough ballot signatures to have abortion rights on the ballot for November. This is specifically a power grab to go AGAINST the will of the populace, and they’ve been brazen enough to even admit it is the reason for the special election.

      This is the same party that had their maps ruled unconstitutional for the 2020 election and ignored the court order for a redraw, and have still not redrawn the maps for the state.

      The reason is not for “fairness” but for keeping thier decisions in check and not giving the populace their fair vote. Why shouldn’t a simple majority be able to change the rules that govern them?

      • the_itsb (she/her)
        link
        fedilink
        English
        131 year ago

        They also only got the Supreme Court to agree to their extremely sketchy August date for the election along party lines.

        Really rich, lovely quote from the article linked:

        In fact, the Ohio Legislature explicitly banned August elections (except in very limited circumstances) in its omnibus election law that was enacted earlier this year. Ironically, the Legislature did so at the behest of LaRose who stated that “August special elections generate chronically low turnout because voters aren’t expecting an election to occur. This is bad news for the civic health of our state.”

        It’s fucking gross. My husband and I went in person to the Board of Elections to vote early, and we were heartened to see the steady trickle of people coming in mid-morning on a weekday.

    • @CatsGoMOW@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 year ago

      This has nothing to do with protecting the rights of the minority. Besides, when has the Republican Party ever cared about minority rights except when it’s them in the minority?

      This is purely about taking those minority viewpoints (such as those against abortion) and enforcing them upon the majority.

    • You know it’ll be impossible to change anything if issue 1 passes. It’s not just the 50% metric if one signature from all countries is fucked it’s a wash

      This makes it impossible to check and balance your representation.

    • Adlach
      link
      fedilink
      English
      7
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Which rights of which minority are we talking about here? The right to impose your religious beliefs on others?

    • pizza-bagel
      link
      fedilink
      41 year ago

      What rights are being taken away here exactly? The vote is on keeping access to abortion. That does the opposite of take away rights. The minority is not gonna be forced into having abortions.