[November 7, 2023] Ohio Abortion Referendum Megathread

[WalterWhite]

https://ballotpedia.org/Ohio_Right_to_Make_Reproductive_Decisions_Including_Abortion_Initiative_(2023)

This is on the ballot.

In essence, a "YES" vote will amend abortion rights into the Ohio Constitution, and a "NO" vote will not put abortion rights into the Ohio Constitution.

Prediction (as of August 11, 2023): Yes+6.3%

[The Economy is Getting Worse]

I am guessing somewhere between Yes +5 to Yes +10. The abortion referendum will probably underperform "No" in the last referendum, because usually the "No" side has an inherent advantage, and there are probably more pro-life people who voted "No" (not wanting to give up direct democratic powers) than pro-choice people who voted "Yes".

[Pollster]

As I've mentioned before elsewhere on this board, voters have a strong tendency to default to NO on ballot measures, even on high salience issues like this one. This will be a tougher campaign than many are probably anticipating, even if it is likely to ultimately pass.

[WalterWhite]

As I've mentioned before elsewhere on this board, voters have a strong tendency to default to NO on ballot measures, even on high salience issues like this one. This will be a tougher campaign than many are probably anticipating, even if it is likely to ultimately pass.

I say Yes+6.3% because Michigan passed a pro-choice Constitutional amendment in 2022 by a margin of 13.3%. Exit poll data from 2022 indicates that Ohio is 7 points less pro-choice than Michigan. Applying a 7-point shift to Yes+13.3% gives Yes+6.3%.

[wbrocks67]

As I've mentioned before elsewhere on this board, voters have a strong tendency to default to NO on ballot measures, even on high salience issues like this one. This will be a tougher campaign than many are probably anticipating, even if it is likely to ultimately pass.

Do you think that's why Michigan's was only +13? (compared to Kansas' +19)?

[Oryxslayer]

The Marijuana Initiative, which will also be on the same ballot pending approval of their cured signatures, I think should also be discussed here.

[WalterWhite]

I think this will be the county map for the referendum:

https://www.yapms.com/app/?m=t9v

[CityofSinners]

It will pass with around 5-10% of the vote. Getting people to vote no on a ballot measure is inherently easier.
People are also more polarized on abortion then the right threshold for ballot measure. Easier to convince republicans to vote No on measure 1 then the abortion measure.

[wbrocks67]

The Marijuana Initiative, which will also be on the same ballot pending approval of their cured signatures, I think should also be discussed here.

That's a "yes" too, right? That should help things too.

[Skill and Chance]

As I've mentioned before elsewhere on this board, voters have a strong tendency to default to NO on ballot measures, even on high salience issues like this one. This will be a tougher campaign than many are probably anticipating, even if it is likely to ultimately pass.

Do you think that's why Michigan's was only +13? (compared to Kansas' +19)?

I think that's mainly because Michigan is a lot more Catholic than Kansas.  In general, abortion referenda have been blowouts for the pro-choice side in the Plains states and close one way or the other in Appalachia.  In Louisiana, pro-life was a yes vote on the referendum in 2020 and it still outran Trump.  If there is ever an abortion referendum in Rhode Island, I would expect pro-life to outrun Trump (not by enough to win).  With this in mind, Ohio strikes me as the kind of conservative state where pro-life could actually win, but my expectation going in is a narrow pro-choice win.  I don't think it will be that different from Kentucky, though.

[SnowLabrador]

Please stop calling them "pro-life." The vast majority of anti-choice politicians don't get an eff about people who are already here.

[Alben Barkley]

Please stop calling them "pro-life." The vast majority of anti-choice politicians don't get an eff about people who are already here.

Rare SnowLabrador W.

[politicallefty]

I think that's mainly because Michigan is a lot more Catholic than Kansas.  In general, abortion referenda have been blowouts for the pro-choice side in the Plains states and close one way or the other in Appalachia.  In Louisiana, pro-life was a yes vote on the referendum in 2020 and it still outran Trump.  If there is ever an abortion referendum in Rhode Island, I would expect pro-life to outrun Trump (not by enough to win).  With this in mind, Ohio strikes me as the kind of conservative state where pro-life could actually win, but my expectation going in is a narrow pro-choice win.  I don't think it will be that different from Kentucky, though.

The Appalachian part of Ohio isn't that large in terms of the overall population (most of OH-02 and OH-06 and a good chunk of OH-12). That's not even the part of the state that vote will end up with the biggest No votes anyway. For that, it'll be the area of the state bordering Indiana north of Dayton. Those counties pretty much maxed themselves out on this.

I think the vote on Tuesday is a good baseline, both on the margins and on overall turnout. Turnout will likely be significantly higher in November, which is also when college will be back in session. We're in the tail end of summer, but we're still very much in summer right now. Is anyone in this topic expecting lower turnout in November? I certainly doubt it. I wouldn't be surprised to see turnout at or exceeding the 2022 general election. It was a less polarized time, but note the turnout (and overall vote) on the veto referendum on collective bargaining in Ohio in November 2011.

I think the vote will look something like the vote on Tuesday, maybe a bit less. I don't think it'll be that different from Michigan on the overall margin. The pro-choice side should win so long as the northeastern part of the state holds its ground, and they just came out in force for an election in early August.

It's also worth looking at Cuyahoga County. Every single city/municipality in the county voted No on 1, despite the fact that the areas south of the city were pretty pro-Trump. Turnout was driven by the core areas around Cleveland, not Cleveland itself. Turnout in Cleveland itself was actually quite awful. I would say that means there's a potential treasure trove of voters waiting to be tapped for November.

[Oryxslayer]

I think that's mainly because Michigan is a lot more Catholic than Kansas.  In general, abortion referenda have been blowouts for the pro-choice side in the Plains states and close one way or the other in Appalachia.  In Louisiana, pro-life was a yes vote on the referendum in 2020 and it still outran Trump.  If there is ever an abortion referendum in Rhode Island, I would expect pro-life to outrun Trump (not by enough to win).  With this in mind, Ohio strikes me as the kind of conservative state where pro-life could actually win, but my expectation going in is a narrow pro-choice win.  I don't think it will be that different from Kentucky, though.

The Appalachian part of Ohio isn't that large in terms of the overall population (most of OH-02 and OH-06 and a good chunk of OH-12). That's not even the part of the state that vote will end up with the biggest No votes anyway. For that, it'll be the area of the state bordering Indiana north of Dayton. Those counties pretty much maxed themselves out on this.

I think the vote on Tuesday is a good baseline, both on the margins and on overall turnout. Turnout will likely be significantly higher in November, which is also when college will be back in session. We're in the tail end of summer, but we're still very much in summer right now. Is anyone in this topic expecting lower turnout in November? I certainly doubt it. I wouldn't be surprised to see turnout at or exceeding the 2022 general election. It was a less polarized time, but note the turnout (and overall vote) on the veto referendum on collective bargaining in Ohio in November 2011.

I think the vote will look something like the vote on Tuesday, maybe a bit less. I don't think it'll be that different from Michigan on the overall margin. The pro-choice side should win so long as the northeastern part of the state holds its ground, and they just came out in force for an election in early August.

It's also worth looking at Cuyahoga County. Every single city/municipality in the county voted No on 1, despite the fact that the areas south of the city were pretty pro-Trump. Turnout was driven by the core areas around Cleveland, not Cleveland itself. Turnout in Cleveland itself was actually quite awful. I would say that means there's a potential treasure trove of voters waiting to be tapped for November.

Most of this is correct,  at least for a starting baseline.  Even though the coalitions will shift, with less Republicans voting Yes, the increased turnout among low-income urban minority groups that naturally comes from having elections at normal times will counteract that shift.

Additionally,  on Appalachia, there are reasons a lot or the really ancestral Dem areas were small wins for Yes this Tuesday when compared to the modest wins in other rural areas or even normal GOP blowouts in the western counties. Compared the the German Catholic or Evangelical Protestant sections of the state, Appalachia has a higher percentage of people who are agnostic/secular.  Abortion isn't the reason they vote overwhelmingly GOP these days, so don't expect the results or turnout there to dramatically change.

[Schiff for Senate]

Agreed with the others, the margin of passage will probably be in the 5-10% range. Also a chance that the margin of passage is under 5 points (that's definitely likelier than a double-digit victory for the Yes team).

[Schiff for Senate]

As I've mentioned before elsewhere on this board, voters have a strong tendency to default to NO on ballot measures, even on high salience issues like this one. This will be a tougher campaign than many are probably anticipating, even if it is likely to ultimately pass.

Do you think that's why Michigan's was only +13? (compared to Kansas' +19)?

I think that's mainly because Michigan is a lot more Catholic than Kansas.  In general, abortion referenda have been blowouts for the pro-choice side in the Plains states and close one way or the other in Appalachia.  In Louisiana, pro-life was a yes vote on the referendum in 2020 and it still outran Trump.  If there is ever an abortion referendum in Rhode Island, I would expect pro-life to outrun Trump (not by enough to win).  With this in mind, Ohio strikes me as the kind of conservative state where pro-life could actually win, but my expectation going in is a narrow pro-choice win.  I don't think it will be that different from Kentucky, though.

Related to this theory of yours, I compared the swings between 2020-PREZ and the 2022 abortion referendum, in Ellis County (the official "German Capital of Kansas;" as the name suggests, it's home to a sizable Catholic population), with the swings between those two elections in Kansas as a whole. Statewide, liberals did just under 33 points better in 2022 than in 2020 (R+14.65 -> D+18.32). In Ellis, the result went from R+43.45 to R+17.2, a leftward shift of about 26 points.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Yes by nine points is my prediction.

[Aurelius2]

Yes by 5-6.

[Rjjr77]

The Marijuana Initiative, which will also be on the same ballot pending approval of their cured signatures, I think should also be discussed here.

Lock it in guaranteed prediction, Marijuana will out pace abortion by at least 5%.

I think abortion will be close, marijuana wont be and will see plenty of crossover support. Lets not forget one of the top congressmen in support of legalizing marijuana is a republican from NE Ohio

[Ferguson97]

Yes by 10-15 points, closer to 10 than 15.

[Tartarus Sauce]

Yes by 2-3%.

[Dave Hedgehog]

Yes, but I am convinced it will be by a single-digit margin. There are just too many counties in the state which are simply going to vote exactly how the GOP tells them to, end of story; none of them are utterly deserted like a lot of counties in, say, Kansas and Nebraska are so it is certain to hold down the margins from the urban areas substantially. Putnam County’s “Yes” margin in August was almost identical to the margin Trump won it by in 2020. If any Ohio county cracks 90% R in next year’s presidential, it will be that one.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

I think yes wins a close race (hope I'm wrong).  I don't think we can directly compare "no right to abortion" referendums like KS or KY to "right to abortion" referendums like MI or CA.  There seem to be some people who would vote "no" on both of those for whatever reason.  I don't think "yes" would have won this referendum in Kentucky last year, despite the fact that "no" barely won the "no right to abortion" one.

I'll say 53-47 yes.  Hope I'm wrong.

[BigZuck08]

I'm going to go with between Yes +5 and Yes +10 (likely yes).

[politicallefty]

Republicans, being their typical selves, want to force loaded language and mislead the voters [Link]:

The Ohio Ballot Board approved language Thursday for a fall measure seeking to establish abortion access as a fundamental right, but one Democratic member blasted it as “rife with misleading and defective language.”

Key among opponents’ objections is language developed by Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose, an abortion opponent, amid warnings the language could face a legal challenge even before the proposal goes before Ohio voters in November.

Among the new language, the word “fetus” in the Democrats’ proposal was changed to “unborn child” in the ballot measure.

The original summary language seeks to assure access to abortion through what is called viability, when the fetus is able to survive outside the womb. It stated, “abortion may be prohibited after fetal viability,” but not in cases where a treating physician deems the procedure necessary to protect the life or health of the pregnant person.

LaRose’s summary turned that section on its head. It now says the amendment would “always allow an unborn child to be aborted at any stage of pregnancy, regardless of viability if, in the treating physician’s determination” the life and health exception applies.

“The entire summary is propaganda,” said Lauren Blauvelt, co-chair of Ohioans United for Reproductive Rights.

She noted that the state’s Republican attorney general, Dave Yost, certified the group’s original wording as fair and accurate and that 700,000 Ohioans read it when they signed petitions to get the measure on the fall ballot.

The petitioners were asking to use the actual text of the proposed constitutional amendment. The summary Republicans want to use is actually longer than the text of the proposal itself. I assume there will be a lawsuit over this, though I'm not sure what to expect out of the new majority at the OH Supreme Court. They really have nothing to lose with a lawsuit. Worst case scenario seems to be this language.

My initial response to the poll was Yes by 11-12%. I'd probably revise that down to 8-9% if that language ends up holding. I don't think ballot language matters all that much except on the margins (especially on a subject such as this).

(On a side, I find it annoying that certain states reset ballot numbering after every election and Ohio is apparently one of them. Somewhat confusingly, the abortion amendment will be Issue 1 in November. Marijuana legalization will be Issue 2.)