Ohio Ballot Issue 1 Megathread (August 8)

[TML]

Early voting has started on Ohio's Issue 1 in August. This ballot measure would increase the threshold of passage for future ballot measures from 50%+1 to 60%, and would also increase the number of counties from which signature collection is required from 44 to 88. For the purposes of this poll, I've also included options to predict the vote share that you expect the winning side to receive.

[NewYorkExpress]

Yes wins, but I'm not sure what the margin will be.

[JGibson]

No wins 54%-46%.

[Tekken_Guy]

This very issue was on the ballot in Arkansas last November and lost by nearly 20 points. I don’t see any way this will even come close.

[Minnesota Mike]

This is a defacto abortion question. In November there is an abortion rights  amendment on the ballot, Republicans put this on the primary ballot so that it is less likely to pass. My guess is No 55-45.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Unfortunately, I think it will fail. 

Constitutional Amendments SHOULD have to reach a higher threshold than just 50%.  Frankly, I think more bad ideas get voted in through such referenda than through the acts of the worst legislatures.

[progressive85]

Just a question: Does the measure to increase the threshold have a threshold?  In other words, can this pass with just 50%+1?

[TML]

Just a question: Does the measure to increase the threshold have a threshold?  In other words, can this pass with just 50%+1?

Currently, the threshold for passing ballot measures is 50%+1. So that’s the requirement for this particular ballot measure, but if this one passes, the threshold for future ballot measures would go up to 60%.

[Oryxslayer]

Accidentally voted Yes >60% when I meant No by the same margin. The hesitant folks will point to this being a vote on more than what is written. The simple truth is your average voter just doesn't like have power stripped from them, and loves getting more power over politicians - see things like term limits and public redistricting commissions.

This very issue was on the ballot in Arkansas last November and lost by nearly 20 points. I don’t see any way this will even come close.

In addition to this, we had somewhat similar issues rejected by SD voters in 2022 by 67-33, ND voters 62-38 in 2020, AR 56-44 in 2020, and SD again by 54-46 in 2018.

[LabourJersey]

Unfortunately, I think it will fail. 

Constitutional Amendments SHOULD have to reach a higher threshold than just 50%.  Frankly, I think more bad ideas get voted in through such referenda than through the acts of the worst legislatures.

On the state level I strongly disagree. State constitutions are simply too hard to charge, and too often state constitutions are Frankenstein monsters that are mixtures of different eras of a state's political history. Most states need to honestly just start fresh as a certain point. Making them harder to change is just ludicrous.

[Vice President Christian Man]

Unfortunately, I think it will fail.  

Constitutional Amendments SHOULD have to reach a higher threshold than just 50%.  Frankly, I think more bad ideas get voted in through such referenda than through the acts of the worst legislatures.

The states should have more autonomy in most situations.

[CityofSinners]

I predict the No vote will get 60%. This is just too obvious of an powergrab.

[Vosem]

No by more than 60% for sure, and plausibly more than 70%. The No campaign is far more active than the Yes campaign and efforts to make it harder to pass referendums basically always go down in flames with more than 60% opposed.

This very issue was on the ballot in Arkansas last November and lost by nearly 20 points. I don’t see any way this will even come close.

In addition to this, we had somewhat similar issues rejected by SD voters in 2022 by 67-33, ND voters 62-38 in 2020, AR 56-44 in 2020, and SD again by 54-46 in 2018.

Yeah, and my understanding is that at least in South Dakota the 'Yes' effort actually campaigned, which it basically isn't doing in Ohio.

[Pollster]

"No" is almost always every voter's default vote on ballot initiatives, and usually overperforms its polling. It is the burden of the "yes" campaign to change those things and it looks like the "no" campaign here is blowing them out in terms of organizing and spending.

[politicallefty]

Unfortunately, I think it will fail.

Constitutional Amendments SHOULD have to reach a higher threshold than just 50%.  Frankly, I think more bad ideas get voted in through such referenda than through the acts of the worst legislatures.

It's worse than just implementing a 60% threshold (as much as I may disagree with that in and of itself). It also requires a set number of signatures from every single county in the state, compared with half under the current setup. I think the part that makes it particularly insidious though is that it also removes the cure period. Under the current system, organizers have 10 days to get the necessary signatures if they fell short after submitting them to the state. In other words, if organizers gathered a million signatures from across the state and missed the requisite target in one county by just a single signature, they would have to start over from scratch (and almost certainly not in the same year).

I'm not sure how this will end up. However, it seems like abortion rights groups are rightly treating this as a life or death issue. With a likely abortion rights initiative on the ballot this November, a 60% threshold would make it far more difficult to pass. (The signature collection provisions wouldn't go into effect until next year.) From what I've read, this initiative is also about preventing a new redistricting amendment from passing.

[Oryxslayer]

Unfortunately, I think it will fail.

Constitutional Amendments SHOULD have to reach a higher threshold than just 50%.  Frankly, I think more bad ideas get voted in through such referenda than through the acts of the worst legislatures.

It's worse than just implementing a 60% threshold (as much as I may disagree with that in and of itself). It also requires a set number of signatures from every single county in the state, compared with half under the current setup. I think the part that makes it particularly insidious though is that it also removes the cure period. Under the current system, organizers have 10 days to get the necessary signatures if they fell short after submitting them to the state. In other words, if organizers gathered a million signatures from across the state and missed the requisite target in one county by just a single signature, they would have to start over from scratch (and almost certainly not in the same year).

I'm not sure how this will end up. However, it seems like abortion rights groups are rightly treating this as a life or death issue. With a likely abortion rights initiative on the ballot this November, a 60% threshold would make it far more difficult to pass. (The signature collection provisions wouldn't go into effect until next year.) From what I've read, this initiative is also about preventing a new redistricting amendment from passing.

Yeah a redistricting amendment that produces a process which isn't led by politicians is the next thing in the pipe for activists. Though that itself is a big unknown since there is potentially a remap occurring in the fall with the body having undergone some member changes since 2021/22.

There's a world where the issue drops to the backburner if the process is orderly and the product acceptable.  There is also a world where the new constitutional body is called to order before 2026.

[Fuzzy Bear]

"No" is almost always every voter's default vote on ballot initiatives, and usually overperforms its polling. It is the burden of the "yes" campaign to change those things and it looks like the "no" campaign here is blowing them out in terms of organizing and spending.

It's my default position, and it generally should be.  Most ballot initiatives are falsely marketed to voters, and a "yes" vote for the voter has unforseen consequences (although the consequences were not just forseen, but PLANNED by the moneyed interests that usually frame these ballot questions).

[Minnesota Mike]

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2023/07/19/ohio-issue-1-poll-finds-most-ohio-voters-oppose-august-ballot-issue/70383816007/

A USA TODAY Network/Suffolk University poll released Thursday found 57% of likely voters are against Issue 1, including some Republicans and opponents of abortion. Twenty-six percent back the issue, while 17% are undecided with just weeks to go before the Aug. 8 election.

[Nyvin]

I'll be very surprise if No doesn't reach 60%.   People generally hate power grabs by politicians and this absolutely reeks of one.

[It’s so Joever]

No, 63-37

[xavier110]

Guessing high 60s for No, wouldn’t be surprised if it breaks 70s.

[politicallefty]

It would be quite ironic if the abortion amendment broke 60% Yes in November. Michigan's amendment didn't even hit that threshold, but the silent majority may have been awoken.

[Oryxslayer]

Updating thread of campaign finance for issue 1:


https://twitter.com/AndrewJTobias/status/1684627121149222913?t=3fAByRR_fKfAgXXKd...


https://twitter.com/AndrewJTobias/status/1684652673117671425?t=M0VfAZ43VyWorHrHd...

https://twitter.com/AndrewJTobias/status/1684655781365350400?t=gSSSeX2nSnx3tsNGN...

https://twitter.com/AndrewJTobias/status/1684661078339239936?s=20

[Badger]

No by more than 60% for sure, and plausibly more than 70%. The No campaign is far more active than the Yes campaign and efforts to make it harder to pass referendums basically always go down in flames with more than 60% opposed.

This very issue was on the ballot in Arkansas last November and lost by nearly 20 points. I don’t see any way this will even come close.

In addition to this, we had somewhat similar issues rejected by SD voters in 2022 by 67-33, ND voters 62-38 in 2020, AR 56-44 in 2020, and SD again by 54-46 in 2018.

Yeah, and my understanding is that at least in South Dakota the 'Yes' effort actually campaigned, which it basically isn't doing in Ohio.

I wish I was as optimistic - or perhaps pessimistic? - as you that issue one will fail that hard. I believe it will fail, by probably at least close to 10 points, and it wouldn't shock me if the no vote was closer to 60% than 50%.

 I was unaware of these prior referendums in other more conservative states where a similar ballot measure went down in flames. I will say that I think the vote Yes campaign has been very active and, although notably outspent as demonstrated in the post above, they've hardly been sleeping as well.

The Republican Party State organization, notwithstanding some has beens like kasich, taft, and the recently stepped down chief justice, are all totally in the tank to pass this measure. Even beyond the abortion rights and likely marijuana legalization referendums in november, they are more concerned about a redistricting Amendment with teeth being passed and de-Wisconsining our horrendously gerrymandered legislative and Congressional Maps. Also don't underestimate the impact of their having very specifically chosen an early August election- after passing a law prohibiting future August elections, and then turning around and scheduling this one for August and having the four to three Republican majority on the state supreme court say that's a okay -- in order to decrease turnout.

I accidentally voted that yes would get greater than 50% of out, but I think no will do so of course. It would not Shock Me, though I would be pleasantly surprised, if the no vote topped 60%.

[Badger]

Yes wins, but I'm not sure what the margin will be.

I would be interested in your opinion as to why as you are one of the few individuals believing it will pass. Any thoughts?