13 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

Let’s start a pool on Issue 1. My guess is 70-30 NO. Voters aren’t keen on voting away their own rights. I think the anti-gerrymandering votes from a few years back are my primary point of reference. Reply with your voting results projections. 

It will be 63-37 No. When given a Y/N vote and people do not completely understand an issue, the default is always to vote no and preserve the status quo

I’ll go 58-42 no. I think the church crowds will put up some surprisingly strong turnout for yes, but it’s too little too late.  
 

I do think the exit polling is going to be really weird.

Like latte-sipping millennials and rural militia types voting no, and country-club 55-yo white guys and older black folks voting yes

Edited August 2, 20231 yr by 10albersa

27 minutes ago, 10albersa said:

Like latte-sipping millennials and rural militia types voting no, and country-club 55-yo white guys and older black folks voting yes

Uh, why on earth would Black folks in Ohio be voting yes on this?

1 hour ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

Let’s start a pool on Issue 1. My guess is 70-30 NO. Voters aren’t keen on voting away their own rights. I think the anti-gerrymandering votes from a few years back are my primary point of reference. Reply with your voting results projections. 

Argh second to last post on a thread is nearly as bad as the last post on a thread. 

56 minutes ago, X said:

I think it will be close to but below 60-40 NO.  It's hard to get anything more than 55% these days, so 60-40 would still be quite a powerful result.

 

@X  the Ohio legislature anti-gerrymandering issue in 2015 was 71%-29 for and the 2018 Federal house lines issue was nearly 75%-25 for.  This bill is even more clear cut. I think those votes are the baseline. 

https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-ohio-election-2015-ballot-redistricting.html?_amp=true

[2015] “The passage of Issue 1, with 71 percent voting in favor, is a remarkable political feat because both the state Republican and Democratic parties supported it.”

https://bolderadvocacy.org/story/redistricting-in-ohio/

“This effort culminated with Issue 1 on the May 2018 ballot, a bi-partisan effort garnering 74.85% of support from voters.”

8 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

Uh, why on earth would Black folks in Ohio be voting yes on this?

I have no evidence, just hypothesizing that most churches will push a yes vote. I’m not saying it’s going to be a majority of older black people, but that their % of yes votes will be higher than their % of votes for Trump in 2020.

They should really get rid of August elections. Oh wait …

 

51-49 yes.   The state GOP has been pretty solidly behind it, and let's not forget that the state leans Republican with the exception of Sherrod Brown.    Were it just an increase in the required margin, it would pass strongly, but a lot of people don't like the pre-qualification changes.

 

The side election makes a difference.   Younger voters and minority voters (except the church crowd) are less likely to show up.

Edited August 3, 20231 yr by E Rocc

9 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

51-49 yes.   The state GOP has been pretty solidly behind it, and let's not forget that the state leans Republican with the exception of Sherrod Brown.    Were it just an increase in the required margin, it would pass strongly, but a lot of people don't like the pre-qualification changes.

 

The side election makes a difference.   Younger voters and minority voters (except the church crowd) are less likely to show up.

I would love to know your source on younger voters less likely to show up.

3 minutes ago, WindyBuckeye said:

I would love to know your source on younger voters less likely to show up.

 

well of course thats generally true for any election, but roccy has no source for this one. if he posted anything from his darkweb innuendo you would laugh him out of here. so that post is just pushing his gqp agenda.

42 minutes ago, mrnyc said:

 

well of course thats generally true for any election, 

 

Exactly.   It's even more true for a special election.   History is the "source".

58 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

Exactly.   It's even more true for a special election.   History is the "source".

I think Bernie Sanders found that out the hard way in the last 2 presidential elections. 

2 hours ago, E Rocc said:

51-49 yes.   The state GOP has been pretty solidly behind it, and let's not forget that the state leans Republican with the exception of Sherrod Brown.    Were it just an increase in the required margin, it would pass strongly, but a lot of people don't like the pre-qualification changes.

 

The side election makes a difference.   Younger voters and minority voters (except the church crowd) are less likely to show up.

This post will not age well.

2 hours ago, E Rocc said:

51-49 yes.   The state GOP has been pretty solidly behind it, and let's not forget that the state leans Republican with the exception of Sherrod Brown.    Were it just an increase in the required margin, it would pass strongly, but a lot of people don't like the pre-qualification changes.

 

The side election makes a difference.   Younger voters and minority voters (except the church crowd) are less likely to show up.

 

I don't know. I certainly wouldn't say it's in the bag for No, but this is asking people to give up their rights to the government, a historically very unpopular position. Look at how the removal of abortion rights have gone for Republicans even in red states. Republicans have been gaslighting and lying incredibly hard in their Vote Yes advertising, throwing everything from parental rights to child sex changes to the 2nd Amendment into the mix, but as effective as I think this kind of fear propaganda usually is, Republicans may just be complicating the message too much to the point where a lot of people are confused. The alternative message is very simple- maintain majority rule and existing citizen democratic rights. 

I put in my No vote yesterday, along with 2 others from family.

Turnout is good for a non-November, non-presidential election, including strong turnout in blue counties. Republicans should be worried their attacks on democracy are going to fail.

^"forced child sex changes" are the new "white women will get raped"

32 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

Republicans should be worried their attacks on democracy are going to fail.

 

They can't defeat democracy if they don't try!

1 hour ago, ryanlammi said:

 

They can't defeat democracy if they don't try!

 

That's the thing, isn't it. Even if Issue 1 fails spectacularly, we will almost certainly see another version of this in a future election. Or they'll simply attempt to ignore the results. Again, Republicans won't abandon their agenda, they will abandon the rules, constitutional norms and democracy. 

1 hour ago, jonoh81 said:

don't know. I certainly wouldn't say it's in the bag for No,

I think when you have an issue such as this, no matter how it is framed, it is certainly something that is not clear as day on either end. Yes, some groups argue passionately about it from both sides, but nobody really knows how the mechanics of such a change will play out if enacted. Therefore, given that, and given the fact that many voters often do not take the time to deeply research many of the pros and cons of each issue, the natural reflex action of voters is almost always going to be NO. This is why it will likely fail 60-40 range (or more).  

 

While the special election was a path to sneak it in to try and stop the abortion measure (which I am not convinced will definitely pass and think it would stand a better chance of being defeated than Issue 1 passing), for such an issue like issue 1 to pass, it would need to have been litigated and debated (and even brought to the ballot multiple times) over a period of years so that people are more comfortable with the idea of it passing.  It would be unheard of for something like this to pass within a 3-4 month period such as this. 

 

 

Just now, jonoh81 said:

Again, Republicans won't abandon their agenda, they will abandon the rules, constitutional norms and democracy. 

I think most people know this will fail, but it is interesting because if you listen to the messaging on the Pro-Issue 1 side, a lot of the messaging is focused on the abortion issue in the Fall. The Pro-Issue 1 crowd gets 2 cracks of the apple to defeat the abortion measure and allows it more exposure on its message for November, and more time to find a message that resonates.

 

While most people favor a pro-abortion position in Ohio. That is not universal and certainly a lot of support for abortion has caveats and a lot of the pro-choice crowd does not favor abortion without restrictions.  The big thing that the pro-abortion crowd risks is miscalculating by trying to pass an overly broad amendment instead of a very narrow amendment that would enshrine the right to an abortion up to 15-20 weeks (or viability) or if the life of the mother were in danger.  What I anticipate hearing in the fall is a campaign that touches on transgender issues and a lot of other concerns that are not really related to abortion that could limit support for what would otherwise be an easy amendment to pass if it were narrowly tailored. 

7 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

I have heard Sloan's position for a while now. I understand where he is coming from but I happen to disagree. The abortion issue has made this the major political row that it has become now. Also, at the end of the day, many progressives are not against this on principle and if they had the power, they would certainly be in favor of such a measure. The biggest thing for most Democrat leaning voters is that given that they have zero control on the levers of power, this is the only way they have a chance to exercise some control in the legislative process. 

 

For me, I do not think the Constitutional Amendment is the place to handle matters such as the abortion issue. They are better off being done via citizen referendum which will still remain at 50%.  This is where I disagree with Sloan's position. If pro-abortion proponents wanted an abortion issue on the ballot, they could do so through the referendum process at 50.1%. A citizen referendum is a law too. We do not need to enshrine rules into the Constitution that are best meant to be legislative issues and better handled on the referendum level. 

32 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

I have heard Sloan's position for a while now. I understand where he is coming from but I happen to disagree. The abortion issue has made this the major political row that it has become now. Also, at the end of the day, many progressives are not against this on principle and if they had the power, they would certainly be in favor of such a measure. The biggest thing for most Democrat leaning voters is that given that they have zero control on the levers of power, this is the only way they have a chance to exercise some control in the legislative process. 

 

For me, I do not think the Constitutional Amendment is the place to handle matters such as the abortion issue. They are better off being done via citizen referendum which will still remain at 50%.  This is where I disagree with Sloan's position. If pro-abortion proponents wanted an abortion issue on the ballot, they could do so through the referendum process at 50.1%. A citizen referendum is a law too. We do not need to enshrine rules into the Constitution that are best meant to be legislative issues and better handled on the referendum level. 

What is your source for this statement about progressives? Seems like a fantasy idea on your part.

 

And referendums SHOULD be law, but that doesn't happen when the GOP is in charge. They simply change the law. They consistently work against the will of the majority or even directives from the state supreme court. Have you hit your head? Have you been sleeping Mr Van Winkle??? Are you unaware of all the geryymandering and school funding issues the GOP simply ignores?

 

Why is it so hard to see that the Ohio GOP is corrupt and power hungry?????

3 hours ago, ryanlammi said:

 

They can't defeat democracy if they don't try!

If issue 1 passes it would almost certainly give them their goal of destroying the Ohio constitution/ government so their Billionaire Masters could take over.

 

Amazing how many rubes will vote for sycophants and fascists. Our state is screwed. 

Edited August 3, 20231 yr by Clefan98

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

For me, I do not think the Constitutional Amendment is the place to handle matters such as the abortion issue. They are better off being done via citizen referendum which will still remain at 50%.  This is where I disagree with Sloan's position. If pro-abortion proponents wanted an abortion issue on the ballot, they could do so through the referendum process at 50.1%. A citizen referendum is a law too. We do not need to enshrine rules into the Constitution that are best meant to be legislative issues and better handled on the referendum level. 

The problem with the referendum is that the legislature can immediately overturn it. So something like the marijuana issue is probably fine as a referendum, because even though the legislature is unlikely to make marijuana legal, they are also unlikely to pass a new law making it illegal if voters have already voted to legalize it. Therefore, I think the marijuana petitioners were correct to petition it as legislation instead of amendment. It’s different for an issue like abortion where the legislature is clearly out of alignment with the majority of Ohio voters. Abortion rights must be enshrined in the Ohio Constitution so that the legislature doesn’t overrule the will of the people.

 

Only 17 citizen led petition amendments have been passed in the 110+ years of the current system. The petition led amendment system is fine.

Marijuana referendum appears to have qualified for the November ballot. This is NOT an amendment, so even if Issue 1 manages to pass (which it won’t), the marijuana law would only require a simple majority. 

 

But the Ohio Legislature could just repeal it, right?

3 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

But the Ohio Legislature could just repeal it, right?

Recreational marijuana? Yes, they could. I don’t think they would, but I also wouldn’t be surprised. 

5 hours ago, Clefan98 said:

Amazing how many rubes will vote for sycophants and fascists. Our state country is screwed. 

 

FTFY

Does the Ohio GOP honestly think they can keep the “evils” of cannabis out of Ohio if they overturn what I believe will be a vote for legalization? There are a ton of Ohioans who are going to other states to get what we want. Millions in Ohio sales and tax money is going to other states … especially Michigan. My wife and I enjoy using cannabis recreationally and we enjoy it in a responsible manner. We’re tired of “family values” Republicans and church groups trying to cram their version of morality down our throats. Oh well, we’ll just keep supporting Michigan’s economy. 

No Democrats here are complaining about the crazy credit card rules and Court of Chancery in Delaware because it's a solidly D-controlled state.  There is no ability for Delaware's citizens to directly reign in that state's credit card industry or the Court of Chancery.   If it were an R-controlled state, we'd see mean tweets and perfunctory protests. 

 

We have chaos almost every year in Cincinnati because of the charter amendment provision allows extremists like COAST and Josh Spring to lob ill-intentioned amendments on every ballot.  We often have contradictory amendments on the same ballot!  These ballot issues serve mostly to give free publicity to the stooges who concocted them. 

 

Many of the people who post here endured the chaos of Issue 9 in 2009 and Issue 48 in 2011 in Cincinnati but are quick to oppose Issue 1. 

 

Ballot issues aren't representative democracy, they are scams and dog-and-pony shows. 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Lazarus said:

No Democrats here are complaining about the crazy credit card rules and Court of Chancery in Delaware because it's a solidly D-controlled state.  There is no ability for Delaware's citizens to directly reign in that state's credit card industry or the Court of Chancery.   If it were an R-controlled state, we'd see mean tweets and perfunctory protests. 

 

We have chaos almost every year in Cincinnati because of the charter amendment provision allows extremists like COAST and Josh Spring to lob ill-intentioned amendments on every ballot.  We often have contradictory amendments on the same ballot!  These ballot issues serve mostly to give free publicity to the stooges who concocted them. 

 

Many of the people who post here endured the chaos of Issue 9 in 2009 and Issue 48 in 2011 in Cincinnati but are quick to oppose Issue 1. 

 

Ballot issues aren't representative democracy, they are scams and dog-and-pony shows. 

 

 

 

 

 

You're arguing against the wrong thing. It's not a problem that people can put ballot initiatives up for vote. That's literally democracy even if we might disagree with individual positions. That's why we vote. Don't like outside money, why not ban that? Why not ban lobbying? Instead, you'd argue that we should give up our democratic voice instead? Doesn't make any sense at all. 

 

BTW, a 6-week abortion ban is extremist, and it made it on the ballot in part through out-of-state special interests and funding. 

Edited August 4, 20231 yr by jonoh81

13 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

I have heard Sloan's position for a while now. I understand where he is coming from but I happen to disagree. The abortion issue has made this the major political row that it has become now. 

 

no, say it truthfully, the private world of abortions did not make anything an issue, republicans made abortion an issue.

 

because their core belief is upholding the white patriarchy.

 

’member way back when republicans stood for getting big gov out of your life?

 

so of course issue one should fail.

 

and there should be an new ballot issue next time to make it even easier to get things on the ballot, along with the obvious pro choice rights issue (and a weed issue lol).

 

a true old school republican would have been all for that, but not today.

5 hours ago, Lazarus said:

We have chaos almost every year in Cincinnati because of the charter amendment provision allows extremists like COAST and Josh Spring to lob ill-intentioned amendments on every ballot.  We often have contradictory amendments on the same ballot!  These ballot issues serve mostly to give free publicity to the stooges who concocted them. 

 

Many of the people who post here endured the chaos of Issue 9 in 2009 and Issue 48 in 2011 in Cincinnati but are quick to oppose Issue 1. 

 

Ballot issues aren't representative democracy, they are scams and dog-and-pony shows. 

This is not what is happening at the state level in Ohio. References to Cincinnati’s rules (or California’s rules, as in your previous posts) is irrelevant, unless Ohio was trying to make it easier to get a ballot amendment done. That’s not what’s happening with Issue 1. They are trying to make it virtually impossible - no citizen led petition drive drive would be able to get 5% of voters in all 88 counties to sign. And it’s not like Ohioans are passing every initiative that comes up. There have been 71 citizen proposed amendments make the ballot in the 110 years of this system and only 17 have passed. It is already very difficult to get a citizen amendment passed in this state and there is no good reason to make it harder. 

 

8 hours ago, Lazarus said:

No Democrats here are complaining about the crazy credit card rules and Court of Chancery in Delaware because it's a solidly D-controlled state.  There is no ability for Delaware's citizens to directly reign in that state's credit card industry or the Court of Chancery.   If it were an R-controlled state, we'd see mean tweets and perfunctory protests. 

 

We have chaos almost every year in Cincinnati because of the charter amendment provision allows extremists like COAST and Josh Spring to lob ill-intentioned amendments on every ballot.  We often have contradictory amendments on the same ballot!  These ballot issues serve mostly to give free publicity to the stooges who concocted them. 

 

Many of the people who post here endured the chaos of Issue 9 in 2009 and Issue 48 in 2011 in Cincinnati but are quick to oppose Issue 1. 

 

Ballot issues aren't representative democracy, they are scams and dog-and-pony shows. 

 

 

 

 

 

No Democrats here are complaining about anything in Delaware because this is the Miscellaneous Ohio Politics discussion on UrbanOhio.

Proponents of Issue 1 love to call out issues in other places (California, Cincinnati Charter, Delaware, etc) because there is no issue with the Ohio Amendment process.

7 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

Proponents of Issue 1 love to call out issues in other places (California, Cincinnati Charter, Delaware, etc) because there is no issue with the Ohio Amendment process.

 

Bringing up the US Constitution is another one. "If it's good enough for national amendments, why not Ohio!?" But even the Founders thought a simple 50+1 majority at the national level was okay, as that's all it takes for a US constitutional amendment to pass any individual state. The vast majority of states also require just a simple majority for a state constitutional amendment to pass. Issue 1 would make Ohio's standards harder than any of the 49 other states, and the hardest of any of the states that allow citizen-led initiatives. State legislatures, including in Ohio, are responsible for almost all initiatives that make it to ballot, so Issue 1 would essentially punish Ohioans for a problem with the legislature's abuse. 

 

How much easier is it to get a citizen ballot initiative under the Cincinnati Charter versus the Ohio Constitution?

10 hours ago, Cleveland Rising said:

Does the Ohio GOP honestly think they can keep the “evils” of cannabis out of Ohio if they overturn what I believe will be a vote for legalization? There are a ton of Ohioans who are going to other states to get what we want. Millions in Ohio sales and tax money is going to other states … especially Michigan. My wife and I enjoy using cannabis recreationally and we enjoy it in a responsible manner. We’re tired of “family values” Republicans and church groups trying to cram their version of morality down our throats. Oh well, we’ll just keep supporting Michigan’s economy. 

 

You must not have any idea how easy it is to qualify for medicinal marijuana in Ohio lol

10 hours ago, Cleveland Rising said:

We’re tired of “family values” Republicans and church groups trying to cram their version of morality down our throats.

This!!!

Have not paid attention much...does the pro-issue 1 stance basically come down to "there are people in this state who have opinions I don't like, therefore their votes should count for less?"

1 minute ago, DarkandStormy said:

Have not paid attention much...does the pro-issue 1 stance basically come down to "there are people in this state who have opinions I don't like, therefore their votes should count for less?"

That's essentially it. 

7 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

It's not a problem that people can put ballot initiatives up for vote. That's literally democracy even if we might disagree with individual positions. That's why we vote. Don't like outside money, why not ban that? Why not ban lobbying? Instead, you'd argue that we should give up our democratic voice instead? Doesn't make any sense at all.

 

Representative democracy versus direct democracy aren't the same thing at all.  When I was young, direct democracy sounded like a great thing because...I was young and didn't understand that ballot issues are often poison pills. 

 

I didn't understand that issues were often lobbed onto the ballot in order to get various constituencies out to the polls in order to achieve the real goal.  For example, in 2004 this Ohio amendment helped re-elect George Bush:

https://ballotpedia.org/Ohio_Issue_1,_Definition_of_Marriage_Initiative_(2004)

 

Unfortunately, both the pro and con sides of Issue 1 have short memories and don't remember this issue, but I remember it vividly since I was working in news at the time and helped cover some Bush and Kerry (and Edwards!) campaign events.

 

 

27 minutes ago, GCrites said:

How much easier is it to get a citizen ballot initiative under the Cincinnati Charter versus the Ohio Constitution?

 

It's pretty easy for any outside group to hire people to go get the signatures. 

1 hour ago, DarkandStormy said:

 

You must not have any idea how easy it is to qualify for medicinal marijuana in Ohio lol

You must not know the price differential between MI recreational and OH medical. Its most certainly worth the drive.

2 hours ago, Lazarus said:

 

Representative democracy versus direct democracy aren't the same thing at all.  When I was young, direct democracy sounded like a great thing because...I was young and didn't understand that ballot issues are often poison pills. 

 

I didn't understand that issues were often lobbed onto the ballot in order to get various constituencies out to the polls in order to achieve the real goal.  For example, in 2004 this Ohio amendment helped re-elect George Bush:

https://ballotpedia.org/Ohio_Issue_1,_Definition_of_Marriage_Initiative_(2004)

 

Unfortunately, both the pro and con sides of Issue 1 have short memories and don't remember this issue, but I remember it vividly since I was working in news at the time and helped cover some Bush and Kerry (and Edwards!) campaign events.

 

 

 

We have had direct democracy in the state for over a century. the reason it was created was because the state legislature was corrupt and not responsive to the citizens. If you want the current state legislature (responsible for a corrupt energy bill) to have less accountability to the people then you should vote yes. 

19 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

The problem with the referendum is that the legislature can immediately overturn it. So something like the marijuana issue is probably fine as a referendum, because even though the legislature is unlikely to make marijuana legal, they are also unlikely to pass a new law making it illegal if voters have already voted to legalize it. Therefore, I think the marijuana petitioners were correct to petition it as legislation instead of amendment. It’s different for an issue like abortion where the legislature is clearly out of alignment with the majority of Ohio voters. Abortion rights must be enshrined in the Ohio Constitution so that the legislature doesn’t overrule the will of the people.

 

Only 17 citizen led petition amendments have been passed in the 110+ years of the current system. The petition led amendment system is fine.

I know that theoretically the legislature could overturn a referendum but it would not be easy on them. Going against a citizen led referendum is tough politically to override, especially if one passes in a manner of around 60/40. Yes, there is gerrymandering but to immediately overturn it would be politically costly so it should give any legislature pause. 

 

Also, while the legislature may be able to repeal the law, what you will likely see is a legislature working around the edges of a bill. Some of the provisions of a referendum or amendment may be unworkable and need to be revised. It would be perfectly reasonable for the legislature to do this. So yes, you may have the legislature nibbling on the edges or you would have the GOP majority who sees a referendum come across and moderating it some yet still respecting the will of the people. It would be hard to see them outright overturning it and completely thrwarting the will of the people since many of them tend to be GOP voters anyway. 

3 hours ago, DarkandStormy said:

Have not paid attention much...does the pro-issue 1 stance basically come down to "there are people in this state who have opinions I don't like, therefore their votes should count for less?"

 

One guy elsewhere literally told me that if the Democrats are against it, it must be good. Not exactly deep thinkers. It's basically the "I'll jump off a bridge if Democrats tell me it's dangerous" logic. 

Edited August 4, 20231 yr by jonoh81

If the abortion amendment was going to be a state statute, it doesn't matter if the vote was 51/49 or 70/30 in favor. The legislature would immediately repeal it, and they would face no consequences because the state house and state senate are gerrymandered. 

3 hours ago, Lazarus said:

 

Representative democracy versus direct democracy aren't the same thing at all.  When I was young, direct democracy sounded like a great thing because...I was young and didn't understand that ballot issues are often poison pills. 

 

I didn't understand that issues were often lobbed onto the ballot in order to get various constituencies out to the polls in order to achieve the real goal.  For example, in 2004 this Ohio amendment helped re-elect George Bush:

https://ballotpedia.org/Ohio_Issue_1,_Definition_of_Marriage_Initiative_(2004)

 

Unfortunately, both the pro and con sides of Issue 1 have short memories and don't remember this issue, but I remember it vividly since I was working in news at the time and helped cover some Bush and Kerry (and Edwards!) campaign events.

 

 

 

Again, you're still arguing about things that aren't the actual issues. The problem is not that people have a vote. We should be banning lobbying and outside money, and perhaps requiring clean bills, not for the end of Ohioans having a democratic voice. You're not fixing anything. You're just taking away a right and ensuring even more corruption at the top.

28 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

I know that theoretically the legislature could overturn a referendum but it would not be easy on them. Going against a citizen led referendum is tough politically to override, especially if one passes in a manner of around 60/40. Yes, there is gerrymandering but to immediately overturn it would be politically costly so it should give any legislature pause. 

 

Also, while the legislature may be able to repeal the law, what you will likely see is a legislature working around the edges of a bill. Some of the provisions of a referendum or amendment may be unworkable and need to be revised. It would be perfectly reasonable for the legislature to do this. So yes, you may have the legislature nibbling on the edges or you would have the GOP majority who sees a referendum come across and moderating it some yet still respecting the will of the people. It would be hard to see them outright overturning it and completely thrwarting the will of the people since many of them tend to be GOP voters anyway. 

The legislature and Republican leaders blatantly ignored the anti-gerrymandering legislation despite voters approving it with 75% - 25% margins. This legislature would overturn an abortion rights referendum immediately.

25 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

The legislature and Republican leaders blatantly ignored the anti-gerrymandering legislation despite voters approving it with 75% - 25% margins. This legislature would overturn an abortion rights referendum immediately.

I think it depends on your definition of overturn. If an abortion rights referendum passes in the current form of the amendment, I think it would give the legislature pause and they would seek to tinker with the edges. If you have something that the voters across all political parties prefer, it is hard to really go against their wishes. Taking abortion, I think the majority of Ohioans would prefer that there be at least some access to abortion available. Does this mean that the legislature would fully respect a referendum that provided abortion on demand up until the baby is delivered? Probably not. However, it also means that the legislature would have a hard time repealing such a measure and going back to a heartbeat type bill. So what you would end up with is the legislature would cut back a fully expansive abortion bill and come up with a compromise version allowing access with a lot of restrictions through the state and likely cutting things off at viability at around 15-20 weeks. While there will be those on the far right and far left that will not be satisfied by this result, the majority of people will find it to be a reasonable compromise and be fine with it.