Ohio voters will determine the level of ease for pro-abortion interest groups to amend their constitution.

Protecting Ohio​ Against Special Interest‍ Groups

A special election in Ohio next week will determine if⁣ Republicans’ push ‌to protect‍ their state⁢ against ‍special interest​ groups’ abortion​ activism ‌is successful.

Outside​ activist groups are aware of ​the struggles they face ⁣when ​trying to ram their ​radical‍ abortion and anti-parent agenda‌ through Republican-led states. ⁢Ohio, where ⁢the governorship, state legislature, ‍secretary ⁣of state’s office, and attorney general’s office are controlled by Republicans, is no exception.

Current state law⁤ requires⁢ a simple⁢ majority, 50 ‍percent plus one, ⁤for ⁣voter-proposed ⁣constitutional amendments to be ⁣ratified. Issue 1, which Ohio ⁢voters will settle on⁣ Aug. 8, ensures ⁣that the state’s governing document may⁢ not be⁤ so flippantly⁤ modified.

Bigger⁣ Than ⁣One Ballot Measure

Tuesday’s special election is an explicit attempt by the state GOP⁢ to prevent an ⁣outsider‍ operation like the one executed ‌in Kansas in 2022 from significantly changing Ohio’s political landscape on abortion, parental rights, and even guns, which Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb⁤ has already promised to target via⁢ ballot measure.

In Kansas, out-of-state donors and special interest groups that opposed a homegrown pro-life amendment raised⁣ millions to⁤ expand⁤ Midwestern abortion operations. Their deliberately deceptive practices led voters ‌to⁢ reject a proposal‍ that would have declared there is⁢ no constitutional right in Kansas to abortion, taxpayer-funded or‍ otherwise.

Ohio voters are already facing their‌ first hurdle in a similar battle.

National activist organizations like ‌the ACLU, Planned⁣ Parenthood, and various LGBT groups banded‍ together earlier this year​ to add a ballot ⁣proposal that ⁢would enshrine abortion up ⁢until ‍birth in the state constitution, as well as override ‍parental consent laws for minors ‍seeking irreversible gender experiments.

The deliberately vague proposal⁤ would decree that “every individual has a right” to “reproductive decisions”⁣ regardless of‌ age‌ or ‍trimester. Advocates ‌and their petitioner pawns promise ⁣abortions “may be⁣ prohibited after fetal viability,” but all a woman needs to get around ⁢such a ⁣law, thanks to the proposal’s generous language, is a‍ doctor’s opinion that she needs‍ an abortion for the sake of her⁢ “health,” which is left open to interpretation.

In February, an‌ attorney for the ACLU⁢ of Ohio,​ a member of⁤ the euphemistically-named Ohioans for Reproductive Freedom (ORF) coalition, confirmed that if⁤ their constitutional amendment⁤ passes, laws requiring parents‍ to consent ​before their teen daughter⁣ gets an abortion would not ⁤necessarily be ​enforced.

Unite for Reproductive​ & Gender ‌Equity, another member of the ORF coalition and proud supporter of “sex-positive, gender-expansive, and⁤ abortion⁢ positive” policies, also openly opposes parental consent legislation.

The ballot proposal won’t be up⁤ for ⁤a vote until ​November but ⁣is directly ‌intertwined with the ⁢special⁤ election‌ next week.

The Battle for Ohio

Ohio Republicans‌ recognize the‌ long-term ⁣consequences a proposal‌ like the one scheduled to appear on the ballot in November would have ‌for their state and constituents, ‌so they passed a resolution⁤ in May that asked voters to decide this ⁣month if constitutional ‌amendments should require a supermajority — a 60 percent⁢ threshold vote — to be ratified.

Issue 1 also asks voters to sign off on “elevating⁣ the standards” ‌for constitutional amendments by requiring petitions “be signed by at least five percent of the electors of ⁢each county based on⁢ the total vote ‌in the county” for the latest gubernatorial election and banning the addition of signatures to a petition after submission to the Ohio secretary of state.

For their​ efforts to ⁣protect their elections from external forces, the GOP ‍government was smeared by local ⁢papers, corporate media outlets, and the groups⁣ touting the‍ pro-abortion and gender ideology proposal.⁢ Planned Parenthood activist‍ and⁤ ORF chair Lauren Blauvelt went so far as to accuse ⁣lawmakers of “working overtime to dismantle democracy as we know it.”

Intrastate polling yields conflicting data on⁢ how‌ Ohioans plan to vote on Issue 1. Yet​ even the competing results of polls from Ohio Northern University and USA Today/Suffolk University, the latter of which was ‍ criticized for overinflating​ opposition to Issue​ 1, both acknowledge that a significant portion of voters were still undecided on⁤ the issue in the weeks⁣ preceding the election.

Pro-life ⁢and pro-parent groups in the state who have a vested interest in the November ballot proposal ‌capitalized on⁤ this gap by​ rolling out millions of dollars of‌ ads that ‌expose the ⁤leftist campaign to transform Ohio’s constitution.

“The secret is out: Ohio has some of the ⁣weakest requirements​ in the country for passing constitutional amendments and greedy, out-of-state special interest groups ⁢with deep pockets​ know it,” Protect Women Ohio board member Molly Smith said in a statement. “That makes ‌Ohio a prime target for⁣ radical special interest groups, like the ACLU,‍ to parachute into the state and strip parents of their rights. Enough is⁤ enough. It’s time ⁣to ​pass Issue 1 and put long overdue, common-sense protections in place.”