Issue 1 is a ‘bald-faced transfer of power’ from people to lawmakers
Elections have consequences. One need only look at the latest rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court to understand that concept. Because judges are pledged not to weigh into political discussions, judicial officers are extremely wary of doing so.
However, some non-partisan issues arise that pose such a fundamental threat to democracy, that failing to point out the potential harm to our constituency could be viewed by some as constituting judicial malpractice.
We are concerned that adoption of this proposal eliminates any democratic check on the unfettered exercise of legislative power, when either party amasses veto-proof, super majorities in both houses of the state legislature.
A General Assembly with such majorities could legislate onerous restrictions on the allocation and/or distribution of public education resources, for example.
As the state constitution is currently written, however, a reasonable number of electors could propose that the legislature’s action be rescinded and prohibited to ensure equity and fairness.
The current language of the Ohio Constitution, which the amendment seeks to alter has served the state extremely well in the almost 111 years since it was originally enacted.
There is no evidence that special interests, run amuck, have had their way with the initiative procedures now in place. In fact, the opposite is true.
Under the current scheme, which requires at least half the state’s counties to secure enough signatures to place a proposal on the ballot and 50% plus one vote of those voting for passage, more than ninety percent of citizen-proposed amendments fail.
The proposed change to require a percentage of signatures from all 88 of Ohio’s counties has the potential of giving any one county a veto over the will of the voters in the other 87 counties. Requiring a sixty percent (60%) threshold for passage renders the initiative procedure functionally unworkable for all practical purposes.
Why, then, is it necessary, now, to change a procedure that by all measures has functioned well to protect the constitution, one which allows the people to directly participate in preventing legislative overreach?
The proponents would have you believe that they are enhancing the integrity of our constitution by protecting it from big money outside interests with secret agendas.
Some opponents see the real reason as an effort to prevent a looming attempt to protect reproductive rights.
That view is too myopic and fails to see the big picture.
If passed, this provision will virtually eliminate ALL citizen-led efforts to change the terms of Ohio’s Constitution, by making it exponentially harder to get a proposal on the ballot, let alone passed, regardless of how worthy the proposal. It is a bald-faced transfer of power from the people to the legislature. Once that transfer is accomplished, it will be virtually impossible to reverse.
One need only look at past successful amendments to Ohio’s constitution that would have failed, if the 60% requirement had been in place in the past to realize the dangerousness of this proposal. Only 10% of all citizen-initiated constitutional amendments proposed since 1912 have received 60% of the vote. Those that failed to reach that threshold include:
● Raising the minimum wage from $6.85 an hour to $10.10 an hour
● Legalizing gambling at casinos
● Removing the phrase “white male” from parts of the constitution, effectively granting women the right to vote
● Integrating the Ohio militia by removing the word “white” from eligibility criteria
● Allowing affordable housing initiatives
It is for these reasons that the Ohio Black Judges Association urges Ohio voters to reject this ill-advised attempt to take power from the people.
Judge Emanuella D. Groves, 8th District Court of Appeals, and Judge Casandra Collier-williams, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, are cochairs of Ohio Black Judges Association, Inc.