Panicked they’re going to lose at the polls, shady Ohio Republicans filed a new lawsuit Friday asking the conservative state Supreme Court to block the abortion rights constitutional amendment from the November ballot on a technicality. I asked Celeste Perry— a now retired, celebrated voice in radio/tv and a Bay Area Radio Hall of Fame inductee— to give us the latest rundown on the battle over Choice in Ohio.
Issue One
-by Celeste Perry
Ever since last summer’s Dobb’s decision, state legislatures have been angling to restrict abortion access to women. As expected, it’s been a year of chaos, anxiety and terrible healthcare outcomes. Yes, we’ve had some victories— Kansas and Michigan come to mind— but the struggle is as real as it gets in Ohio.
In a win for reproductive healthcare, a measure to codify abortion access to the state’s constitution qualified for the November ballot. But while abortion rights activists were gathering signatures for the measure the Republican-controlled State Legislature authorized a special August election designed to change the rules governing the passage of constitutional amendments. This was a stunning, but not surprising about-face from Ohio lawmakers who last year eliminated special August elections recognizing how few people pay attention when elections are held in the summer. Not surprisingly, with abortion on the November ballot the state legislature changed its tune and the rules, authorizing a special August 8 election to consider what they call Issue 1.
Proponents of Issue 1 claim the measure keeps deep-pocketed special interest groups from advancing their policies. Yeah right, file that reason under H for Hypocrisy. So, it was an unexpectedly refreshing and remarkably candid moment when Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose revealed the absolute truth when he said, “This (Issue 1) is 100% about keeping the radical pro-abortion amendment out of our constitution. The left wants to jam it in there this coming November.”
Voting Yes on Issue 1 would raise the threshold to amend the state’s constitution to 60% as opposed to the longstanding (since 1912) 50% now required. If voters approve this measure it immediately becomes more difficult, but not impossible for the abortion measure to pass in the November election.
Voting No on Issue 1 keeps the power in the hands of Ohio voters where the value of majority rule is a hallmark of democracy. A 50% plus 1 vote is the practice that engages civic participation. Issue 1 is yet another blatant example of the tilt toward one-party rule that seems to define the current Republican party.
An August election is guaranteed to deliver low turnout and the language is deliberately confusing. We are conditioned to think a Yes vote is affirming what we believe, but in this case a NO vote is the affirmation of our values. With a defeat of Issue 1 Ohio voters move forward to the November elections with a chance to enshrine a woman’s right to abortion in the state’s constitution.
Despite the motivations in this case, I don't think it's a bad thing to make a constitution hard to amend. It shouldn't sway in the wind of popular opinion, it should represent bedrock values of the people, and it should change slowly. What good would it do to win (defeat) Prop 1, win the pro choice amendment, and then have the pro choice amendment on the ballot every election? And rather than complain about the wording, develop effective education campaigns to warn about confusing wording and thwart the intentions of those trying to manipulate the process. It's not like the average voter likes to be confused by the ballot.
Dear Celeste, Thank you for your clear headed analysis and well laid out contribution. I hope you write more here in the future.
As you're observing along with Jack, the nazis don't give a zeptofuck about the will of voters unless voters are electing them.
It is this disdain (loathing) of democracy that will justify in their zeptominds that america needs a reich ruled by them and only them.
who was it that said "The (nazis) don't want to govern, they want to RULE"? I read that quote at least 30 years ago. It was true long before that, I'm sure.
Too bad nobody else who votes is electing anyone who loves democracy all that much either.
It’s impossible to exaggerate the threat to the popular will posed by a threshold of 60%. Consider the history of medical marijuana questions in Florida.
In 2014, 57.62% of the voters approved it, but that wasn't enough to pass it. Two years later, with the larger turnout of the 2016 presidential election, it passed with 71.32% of the vote.
Now let’s look at the elections where abortion was on the ballot in the past year. The pro-choice side won with more than 60% in only two states: California, with 66.82%, and Vermont, with 76.80%.
But Kansans rejected an amendment to take the right to abortion out of their constitution by only 59.16%. (If they had been voting for something instea…