MEGA THREAD - 2023 Ohio Special Election - Voters Reject Issue 1

Ohioans vote Tuesday on a measure that would make it harder to pass future changes to the state constitution. Ideastream's Karen Kasler explains the possible implications for abortion access in Ohio.

Sources:

NPR: A look ahead at the Ohio special election

Five Thirty Eight: Everything You Need To Know About The Ohio Ballot Measure That Could Block Abortion Rights

CNN: Ohio special election becomes proxy for abortion rights fight

PBS News Hour: Ohio voters to decide on constitutional change before determining abortion rights

The Guardian: Republicans pushed a special election in Ohio – what does it mean for abortion rights?

Slate: The Cardboard-Box Billionaires Are at It Again, This Time in Ohio The Uihleins have put millions of dollars toward preventing a vote on abortion in the state.

AP: Voters in Ohio reject GOP-backed proposal that would have made it tougher to protect abortion rights

NY Times: Ohio Voters Reject Constitutional Change Intended to Thwart Abortion Amendment

26 comments

If there is interest we can add the Mississippi, Missouri, and Michigan election news here as well. They are state and local primary elections but I've not seen much interest by the community.

Edit: Looks like there isn't.
This measure is so blatantly anti-democratic that I can barely understand how anyone could justify it. I get text messages from right-leaning groups though and these are the kinds of things they’re using to push this initiative:

“Radicals are targeting Ohio children. Leftist amendments to the Ohio constitution will allow children to undergo dangerous sex changes without parental consent, and allow men to dominate women's sports. Protect your parental rights. Protect your children.“

It’s so ridiculously stupid and over-the-top, do Republicans actually believe this trash? It’s obviously about abortion, I’m surprised they don’t come out and just say it.

I voted ‘No’ on the measure, however, Brexit, of all things, did make me think about this a little more. I think Brexit was a universally stupid move for Britain and I can’t imagine something so incredibly important was left up to a slim ~51-49 vote result, when it should’ve been something more like 60-40, which could’ve prevented Brexit altogether.

Yet I’m doing the exact opposite in voting against Issue 1, which I should be in support of, since it would make it harder for potentially catastrophic initiatives from getting passed. I guess it’s painfully obvious what Republicans are trying to do here AND they’re sneaking it in during a low voter turnout special election, it’s literally the only thing on the ballot in my area. I’m contradicting myself because I don’t trust the motives of the people pushing it.
- Republicans count on people's prejudice and watching propaganda so they don't know it is about abortion choice. They want to say woke agenda to get them to vote against their interests.
  
  Woke people are women, minorities, LGBTQ, and non Christians. They are against us.
- This measure is so blatantly anti-democratic that I can barely understand how anyone could justify it.
  
  This very thing inspired me, a person who currently works nights, to screw up my sleep schedule to vote against it.
  
  Same. This is the second time I've ever voted, and I'm 35.
  
  I guess I have to thank the Republicans for becoming insane enough to make me feel like I can no longer afford not to vote.
  
  Wouldn't it be nice if you could just vote by mail at your leisure?
- The 60% threshold isn't inherently bad, and I agree that an argument could be made for requiring at least 55% approval in order for a ballot initiative to pass. Here are my problems with the Ohio situation:
  
  Issue 1 would make it harder to put initiatives on the ballot, period. The big hurdle is requiring a relatively large number of signatures from EVERY county in the state. This means that a single ruby-red county could single-handedly keep an issue off of the ballot
  
  Ohio is so gerrymandered that ballot initiatives are about the only voice available to the population. The GOP has supermajorities in the state Senate and House, even though they only have about a 4% advantage in registered voters.
  
  It's absolutely critical to defeat Issue 1.
  
  Ohio is so gerrymandered that ballot initiatives are about the only voice available to the population. The GOP has supermajorities in the state Senate and House, even though they only have about a 4% advantage in registered voters.
  
  Even more to the gerrymandering, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled the CURRENT gerrymandered districting is unconstitutional. GOP lead house and senate in the state simply ignored it and keeps the gerrymandering which keeps them in control of the state legislature.
  
  Ohioians few remaining ways to make their voices heard is by referendum, which is what the GOP is trying to take away here from Ohio voters.
- Constitutions are fundamentally anti-democratic in intention.
Good analysis as usual from 538: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ohio-issue-1-abortion-ballot-measures/

For those who haven't seen coverage yet, in brief: as usual republicans saw a defeat coming in a democratic election (the 50%+1 threshold November ballot initiative to enshrine reproductive rights into Ohio's constitution), so they are attempting to change the rules in their favor (require constitutional amendments to get 60% of the vote, effectively allowing minority rule) in an early off-season ballot measure today.

Despite the early positive indications that this measure has an uphill battle, if you are in Ohio please vote.
- Added your link.
Is this the same referendum format requiring half the votes +1 to pass? The exact thing they're trying to kill off?

EDIT: The measure should have to be supported by the same vote threshold to pass that it seeks to impose.
- The irony is even dumber since they already passed HB 458 which forbids such an election in August.
  
  They broke their own rule, a rule that they themselves pushed through.
  
  Don't ever pretend that the GOP cares about rules or laws. They will literally do whatever they must to remain in power.
  
  Thank you for this. I live in Ohio and did not know this law existed. I have not heard it brought up in any discussion or news coverage (although I admit my decision was made early and have not spent much time listening to the 'debates'). Did LaRose and company offer any reason as to why they think HB 458 does not apply in this case?
- Sort of the ironic soft underbelly of small-d democratic institutions. You overthrow them by winning power democratically and keeping it by force, whereas if someone wants to take it back for democracy they have to then take it by force and keep it democratically, the harder proposition.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/election-results/2023/ohio-issue-1/

Votes received and percentages of total vote
Response Votes Pct.
Yes 111,710 28.4 %
No 281,694 71.6 %
An estimated 12.6 percent of votes have been counted.

As of 7:50 PM right now.

Edit 1: 7:53 PM
Yes 138,143 29.4 %
No 331,325 70.6 %

Edit 2: 7:55 PM
Yes 158,861 29.1 %
No 387,174 70.9 %

17.5% counted.

Edit 3: 8:04 PM
Yes 193,220 29.7 %
No 457,553 70.3 %

20.8% counted.

Edit 4: 8:19 PM

Yes 232,355 30.9 %
No 519,368 69.1 %

24.1% counted. Yeah I don't see it passing.

Edit 5: 8:25 PM

Wasserman and Decision Desk already called it for No. Will see how big of a margin now, but it is clear the proposition failed.

Edit 6: 8:48 PM

Yes 376,012 37.1 %
No 638,696 62.9 %

32.5% counted.

Edit 7: 8:56 PM

Washington Post projects No winning.

Yes 429,617 38.1 %
No 697,980 61.9 %

36.9% counted.
- Oh boy if it stays ~30 something to ~60, the legislators may regret this. Plus if it's 60+, the proposition will have failed by the proportion they were proposing.
- I really hope the numbers stay at these levels. This issue needs to not only fail, it needs to be demolished with extreme prejudice. The goons who put this on the ballot need to see that they are absolutely on the wrong side of history.
I actually think you should make it somewhat difficult to do direct democracy votes. There was a crisis in California a while back because the voters decided to mandate taxes don't go up, and also spending does go up substantially. As separate propositions, both things sound good, but the reason for little-r republican representation is that if your legislator did both those things and caused a crisis you would vote them out. People in charge of institutions have longer term responsibility.

Or look at Brexit where a slight majority voted for it and a majority now regret it since it caused all the economic pain and political chaos everyone was saying it would.

So I think there is an argument for the threshold being above 50%, I think 60% is pretty high but you can make the argument, maybe something in the middle is reasonable. Preferable to me is something like a double approval process...any amendment needs to get approved by 50%+, followed by a mandatory vote in the legislature and if confirmed it would become law, but if it fails it would get another public vote where it would need to get 50%+ and if it got it, become law.

All that said, I don't want abortion banned in Ohio, I know that's pretty heavily a part of this vote in particular but just wanted to talk about the actual argument for a bit.
- That's not an unreasonable reaction but this one in Ohio is different in several ways.
  
  1 The GOP super majority passed a lady abolishing August special elections that went into effect on January 2023. They are immediately ignoring this law and had to create a loophole to even hold this election.
  
  2 It does not just raise the passing vote threshold. It mandates signatures from 100% of Ohio counties to even place a measure on the ballot. And it's not just 1 signature is a proportion of the counties population. Idk how well you know Ohio but that is almost effectively impossible.
  
  3 The GOP are blatantly short cutting the November election and chose 60% because polling places support for the amendment enshrining abortion rights at about 58%.
  
  4 This is a simple majority to pass but raises it for everything else which is hypocritical. Amendments of this Nature should have to pass at the threshold they are attempting to set.
Let's vote Ohio! I am in Alabama but I am very interested in this.
Well the point of a constitution is to bind the future majority, so it makes sense to require significant/overwhelming majority of counties to support it.
- significant/overwhelming majority of counties
  
  Change "counties" to "people" and I might agree. But "significant majority of counties" is just an extension of the anti-democratic bias that we see in the Senate and EC. It should always be one-person-one-vote.
- Wanting to raise the threshold isn't inherently bad. But from what I've read on this their legislature previously banned August elections like this because of poor turnout and they're also trying to make it effectively impossible to even put a measure like this on the ballot to get that increased majority by requiring a large amount of signatures from every county in the state. Meaning it would only take one county to not get enough people and it theoretically wouldn't matter if literally every single other person in the state signed onto the petition; It wouldn't get in the ballot.
  
  It seems like the 60% rather than 50% is just to try and hide the ball so they can effectively outlaw popular grassroots action going directly to the ballot.
- Republicans in Ohio saw what Michigan Democrats have been able to do because of constitutional amendments and shit themselves

You've viewed 26 comments.