Washington Examiner

Ohio is working to increase the support threshold to 60% for an abortion ballot measure.

Ohio⁣ Voters Face⁣ Unusual​ Constitutional Amendment Ballot Referendum

On Aug. 8, ⁤voters⁤ in Ohio will head to the polls for⁢ an unusually timed constitutional​ amendment ⁤ballot⁣ referendum‌ that, if passed,​ will require that​ all future amendments ​to‍ the state ‌constitution reach a 60% ‍threshold ​in ​a statewide vote.

Accusations of ⁤Dirty Political‌ Tricks

The timing of the referendum, in ⁣August rather than ‍the November general​ election, has launched accusations of ⁤dirty political tricks, as a group of progressive advocacy ​groups has ‌submitted a​ petition⁢ to hold ​a constitutional ⁤referendum vote⁤ in November‍ that would legalize abortion ‌statewide.

Under⁣ the current ⁢rules‍ governing amendments ⁤to the Ohio constitution, a ‌statewide ‍vote⁤ requires ​only a bare majority to amend the ‍constitution. But ‍if the‌ August amendment is‌ adopted, dubbed‍ “Issue 1,” the abortion referendum that⁤ is likely to take ⁢place ⁤later this ⁢year will ⁢need a 60% supermajority ‍to ​become the law of the​ Buckeye State. ⁤The⁢ state has passed ​a six-week abortion ban,⁤ but the law has⁤ been ‌tied ‌up in ⁤court ‌challenges.

Ohio ‍Secretary of State⁢ Frank LaRose,⁢ who ‍announced a ‍run ⁤for ​Senate Monday, says ⁤the current hurdles ‌for⁣ amending the state constitution are too easily cleared and⁣ the state’s​ governing document should not⁤ be⁤ so easily changed.

Protecting​ Ohio’s ​Constitution

“It’s simply too easy to ​amend the state ⁢constitution,” LaRose told the Washington Examiner​ in an interview. “As a‌ result, activist⁢ groups,‍ out-of-state groups ‍have figured out that they can try to⁢ make ‌laws by⁢ constitutional amendment, which is not how‍ government​ is​ supposed to work. ⁤You⁤ don’t‌ want ‍your constitution to be changing constantly on whatever the issue‍ of the day‌ may⁢ be.”

But ​with the ⁣vote ⁤on‌ abortion ⁤potentially coming soon after the August referendum,⁢ LaRose said ‍the ⁢Left is dishonestly trying to paint‍ the⁢ increased ‍threshold⁢ amendment ‍as ⁣only⁤ about⁣ abortion, noting that the proposed amendment makes no changes ‍to ‍the​ ballot ​referendum process for​ normal legislation.

Not ‍Exclusively⁤ About Abortion

“It’s​ never⁣ been ‌exclusively​ about abortion,” LaRose told the⁣ Washington Examiner in ⁣an interview. “This is about protecting Ohio’s‍ farmers from ​burdensome regulations ⁣that some have conceived. This is⁣ about protecting Ohio small businesses from ‍burdensome​ regulations. That’s why ⁣groups like ⁣the Ohio ‌Chamber ⁤of Commerce and ⁤the⁤ Ohio ​Farm ⁣Bureau and⁤ the Ohio Restaurant Association, groups that don’t⁣ particularly focus on⁤ the abortion question,‌ they’ve all⁣ supported this.”

The⁤ abortion amendment has been criticized by‍ conservative and Republican ⁢groups⁤ for overly ⁤broad language. The‌ text of the⁢ amendment, they say, would ⁣allow ⁤minors to undergo ‌sex change procedures ‌or obtain‍ abortions without parental consent, which is ⁢something that⁤ would⁢ be ​unlikely to garner 60% support from the state’s voters.

Controversial‌ Language

“Out-of-state sexual activists⁤ are⁤ attempting ⁢to amendment the Ohio constitution to allow degenerates ⁣to‍ sexualize children in schools ⁢— even​ give them sex change ⁢procedures against their parents’ wishes,” Terry Schilling, the​ president ‍of ⁤the American ⁣Principles ‌Project,‌ told the Washington⁤ Examiner. “This amendment‌ would ⁢affect almost‌ all ‌laws⁤ and policies‌ pertaining to children and families. These⁣ radical activists know‌ how expansive⁣ this⁤ amendment ‌is⁢ and that‌ it ⁣could never muster support from 60% of Ohio families, and that’s‌ why they don’t want‌ it.”

Ohioans‌ for Reproductive Freedom, a coalition‍ of organizations ​that⁤ is behind the proposed abortion amendment ⁣campaign, did not respond‌ to a request ​for comment ⁤from ‌the⁤ Washington Examiner. ⁢In​ May,​ the‌ group⁤ blasted the effort to increase​ the threshold for⁢ constitutional amendments as an‌ “anti-democratic proposal.”

Protecting Ohioans’ Freedom

“Politicians ‌in Columbus​ are launching this⁣ attack on democracy because⁢ they’re out‍ of ⁤touch ‍with⁢ Ohioans, and they’re scared of being⁢ held ​accountable,”⁤ Kellie ​Copeland, ⁢the ⁣group’s​ spokesperson said.⁣ “These politicians​ know that ​their radical ⁣views​ on abortion⁢ care⁤ can’t ‌win a ‌fair​ vote,‍ so they’re ⁢rigging the ‍system. ‌Now,⁣ those ‍same ⁤politicians are​ trying to silence⁤ the ​voice‍ of the majority in order to strip Ohioans of ⁣the freedom to access​ the‌ reproductive healthcare they need.”

For‍ his part,⁤ LaRose sees a bit of irony⁣ that​ the group is ‍outraged​ at ⁤the 60%​ threshold proposal when most⁤ of‍ the organizations in the​ coalition​ require ⁣similar‌ thresholds to amend their bylaws.

⁣‌

Joining⁤ the Mainstream

“Any smart organization, I ​think, realizes the ⁤danger of allowing ‌your ‌foundational rules​ to ⁤be ⁤changed by a‌ simple​ majority,”⁤ LaRose said. ‌”States‌ like Illinois, Massachusetts, ⁣Florida, Nevada,‌ many others‌ have elevated thresholds‌ and protections in‌ place to ‍make​ sure ​that ⁢it’s not too easy ‍to⁤ amend their constitution,⁣ and‍ Ohio ​would⁣ be⁢ joining the mainstream of other states by ⁣voting yes on Issue 1.”

CLICK HERE‍ TO READ ⁤MORE FROM⁤ THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER



" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

Related Articles

Sponsored Content
Back to top button
Available for Amazon Prime
Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker