COLUMBUS, Ohio — Ohio senators passed on Wednesday the controversial resolution to make it harder to amend the state constitution. Chants that echoed around the Ohio statehouse all had the same goal: shaming the GOP lawmakers.
Fast Facts
House Joint Resolution 1 is the revived resolution to make it harder to amend the Ohio constitution. Its companion bill in the Senate is Senate Joint Resolution 2. Previously called H.J.R. 6 in the previous General Assembly (the 134th, for those keeping count), it would require those petitions to receive a 60% supermajority vote to pass, instead of the simple 50% +1. This means that about 40% of the state would get to choose the law.
More than 200 bipartisan groups have joined together to fight against this.
Chaos on Wednesday
Andrea Yagoda was set to give testimony against House Joint Resolution 1 (H.J.R. 1), the resolution that would make it harder to amend the Ohio constitution — but she didn’t get to.
The hearing ended after just a few speakers and then the Republican majority voted to approve the resolution. The Senate committee hearing the bill passed it, as well.
Ohioans will likely vote if abortion should be legal this November, but supporters of the bill are trying to streamline the resolution to get out ahead of that vote. During the last general assembly, GOP lawmakers chose to eliminate special elections in August because they cost about $20 million and have low turnout. Now, a new GOP bill has been introduced that would allow these elections.
Both the resolution and the election addition bill passed the Senate Wednesday.
"The greater good here is that we give some predictability and stability to focus on what the Constitution is going to say," Senate President Matt Huffman said.
Citizens don’t always know what they want, he added.
"We don't want a temporary emotion of a majority to change or take away folks rights," he said. "That happens all the time — it's called the tyranny of the majority."
Republicans in the Senate argued the resolution would remove powerful special interest group's influence over constitutional amendments in Ohio, and give more power to elected officials to establish policy through the legislative process governed by elected, largely conservative, representatives.
"Why put it in statute, if you can put it in the constitution?" Sen. Rob McColley asked from the Senate floor. "We all need to recognize that that perversion of our constitution has been going on for over a decade."
University of Cincinnati political science professor David Niven pushed back on that narrative, however.
"No," Niven said. "This proposal has nothing to do with special interests."
Niven said Ohio Republicans were, instead, rushing the proposals through to make a potential abortion bill of rights initiative harder to pass in the November election.
"If this were to occur in August," he said, "in November an abortion rights ballot question could be supported by 59.99% of voters, and it would fail."
"That's why the timing is so critical. That's why they're putting this as a special election in August," Niven continued.
Republican Senator Andy Brenner directly mentioned the abortion initiative during debate on the Senate floor relating to state constitution changes, and later said the constitution shouldn't be a battleground for specific policies.
"It should only be done for things to protect our rights from a standpoint of humans who are living and breathing, and I believe that includes the unborn."
But for Yagoda and the more than 225 groups who have spoken out against the resolution, the tyranny is coming from the government.
Now, each bill heads over to the House.
For previous in-depth reporting by Morgan Trau on this issue, see below:
