U.S. News

2233 readers

23 users here now

News about and pertaining to the United States and its people.

Please read what's functionally the mission statement before posting for the first time. We have a narrower definition of news than you might be accustomed to.

Guidelines for submissions:

Post the original source of information as the link.
If there is a paywall, provide an archive link in the body.
Post using the original headline; edits for clarity (as in providing crucial info a clickbait hed omits) are fine.
Social media is not a news source.

For World News, see the News community.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

rs5th@beehaw.org

Powderhorn@beehaw.org

104

Voters in Ohio reject change to state’s constitution (www.msn.com)

submitted 1 year ago by darthfabulous42069@lemm.ee to c/usnews@beehaw.org

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Delivering a win for abortion rights advocates, Ohio’s Issue 1 will fail, the Associate Press projects. The Republican-backed ballot initiative would have increased the threshold to amend the state's constitution, making it more difficult for a measure that would enshrine abortion rights into the state's constitution to pass later this year.

A "yes" vote on Issue 1 meant that constitutional amendments, including the abortion amendment, would have needed 60% support, rather than the existing minimum of 50% plus one. The increased threshold would have been put into place immediately if Issue 1 had passed.

Issue 1 also would have created more strict signature requirements for citizen-led measures to appear on the ballot. Currently, organizers must collect a number of signatures equal to 5% of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial election from half of Ohio’s 88 counties. If Issue 1 had passed, organizers would have needed signatures from all 88 counties.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would support a system in which enshrining rights in a constitution takes 50% + 1 but taking rights away requires a supermajority. Unfortunately, that's not in the cards.

[–] HalJor@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Semantics. It's too easy to rephrase taking away a right as granting another right (or not mentioning rights at all).

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And thus, which is the safer place to land? 40% of voters or a majority?

[–] HalJor@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Constitutions are supposed to reflect supreme will of the people, not by just a bare majority. Amendments should be hard to pass for that reason. I favor 60% to pass an amendment.

That said, I'm arguing only the percentage threshold -- the will of the people, all people in the jurisdiction considered equally for this purpose. The "signatures from all counties" portion of this Ohio issue violates that by giving greater weight (and impedance) to rural communities where organization is hard and populations are smaller. It would take only one county with low turnout to block serious consideration of meaningful issues that affect the entire state.

[–] ricecake@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

Heh, well as a nice twist, the will of the Ohio populace is that the constitution is not intended to be the "supreme will" of the people.