By Faith Fistler reporting for the Kent State-Ohio News Connection Collaboration.

Since 1912, Ohioans have been able to change the state constitution with just over 50 percent of the vote. Passage of Issue 1 on the ballot Aug. 8 would increase the threshold to 60 percent.

Supporters of Issue 1 think Ohio's constitution will be protected from out-of-state special interests. While opponents worry that Issue 1 will take away citizen-driven ballot initiatives.

"When you take in the grand scheme of things, and you understand that our maps are drawn unfairly, that we do not have fair representation at the statehouse, it makes things a lot more challenging in the state when people's voices aren't being heard directly because they are being silenced by lawmakers who gerrymandered their way into position," said Kayla Griffin, a state director for All Voting is Local Action Ohio, an organization that focuses on the voting rights of communities who historically have been disenfranchised. These communities include young voters, low-income people, people of color, people with disabilities and people living in rural areas.

If Issue 1 is passed, 5% of the eligible voters of each county would need to sign a petition establishing any initiative to change the constitution. Griffin said she worries that would make it harder for specific interests, like minimum wage, to appear on the ballot. This November, Ohio voters may be able to vote to increase the minimum wage to $10.50 in 2025 and $15 an hour by 2028.

"Minimum wage has not been brought up by our state lawmakers because they do not want to increase the earnings of our citizens here in the state," she said. "And so that's something that has gone to the ballot because we're trying to make sure that everybody has a living wage in our state and we wanted to make sure that people have the right to advocate for themselves in order to get that."

All Voting is Local Action Ohio is not focused on the issue of raising the minimum wage. Griffin just provided it as one example.

If Issue 1 succeeds, it would also be more difficult for a proposed abortion-rights initiative to pass this November.

Protect Our Constitution is a coalition of many groups that seek to defend Ohio's constitution from outside special interests groups and are supporters of Issue 1.

Spencer Gross, spokesperson for Protect Our Constitution, said Issue 1 adds more weight to the people's vote.

"This really brings Ohio more in line with other states to have a more traditional legislative process, and one that actually empowers people even more than allowing an outside special interest to come in and try to buy their policy in the state constitution," Gross said.

The groups argue that many issues protected by the state's constitution should be under Ohio's Revised Code. Some of these issues include casinos, livestock care standards and out-of-state investors who want to sell medical and recreational marijuana, Gross said.

Protect Our Constitution has spread its message by utilizing their many partners in the business community, such as the Farm Bureau, Hotel and Lodging Association and the Ohio Restaurant Association.

Gross also argues that the idea of raising the threshold is not a radical or new idea, but has been talked about in the statehouse for a while now.

"It's one that was actually endorsed by a group of bipartisan lawmakers," he said "Just five years ago, there was a bill introduced in the state legislature by Republicans and Democrats to raise the threshold to 60% for passage of constitutional issues."

If Issue 1 passes, Gross said, the future of Ohio will be one with a stronger legislative process.

"It's one that protects the citizens from special interests who just simply want to buy their way into the Constitution rather than go through the legislative process, which you know receives a more thorough vetting," he said.

All Voting is Local is campaigning around different counties, putting on events and paying for advertisements to spread the word as to why people should vote no on Issue 1. Griffin said the response has been tremendous.

"If we want to live in a state where we have the opportunity and the right to govern ourselves, then we should vote no," she said.

The League of Women Voters has been advocating against Issue 1 through media outreach and community events. The group is a nonpartisan political organization that works to educate voters and defend democracy.

Jen Miller, executive director of the League of Women Voters of Ohio, said Issue 1 takes power away from the citizens.

"Again, Ohio voters have been using ballot initiatives to improve the daily lives of each of us in our 88 counties for over a century," Miller said. "...When the state government is not acting in our best interest, we need to preserve majority rule, because we do not want to let a small minority of Ohio be able to block what a majority of Ohio voters want."

Issue 1 would only make it possible for people with strong financial backings to put something on the ballot, Miller said. A higher threshold would leave behind a majority of Ohio citizens and their interests.

As election day approaches, Miller worries that not enough people are aware of the election in general, or that there is a strict photo I.D. policy in place or that there are schedule changes for absentee and early ballots.

"Even though there's only one issue on the ballot, voters cannot afford to sit this one out," she said. "Because our very freedom to pass policies that benefit our lives when the Ohio government is not being responsive is at stake here."

This collaboration is produced in association with Media in the Public Interest and funded in part by the George Gund Foundation.


get more stories like this via email

Wisconsinites overwhelmingly voted 'yes' on a record number of school funding measures, according to a new Wisconsin Policy Forum study. The appeals essentially asked voters to increase their own property taxes to fund school operations across the state. Voters favored a record number 169 referendums, authorizing a record total of $4.4 billion in new funding for 145 school districts.

Denise Gaumer Hutchison, Northwest regional organizer with the Wisconsin Public Education Network, said districts are being forced to take their needs to the ballot box to fund gaps between prioritizing students and overdue bills.

"The first responsibility of our public schools across the state is to educate children and to take care of the kids and the families they serve, every single day," she said. "So, that means any available funds that public schools have they put toward educating children. And so, if that means a boiler has to be patched rather than replaced, that's what they're going to do."

Almost half of the state's 421 school districts passed a referendum in April or November. Hutchison blames the state for not adequately funding school priorities, from building maintenance, to student mental-health services. The state superintendent announced last week the proposed 2025-27 budget would include $4 billion more in spending for public schools.

Despite 78% of the ballot measures passing, Hutchson said the districts where voters turned them down are in dire need of support to keep their doors open. Regardless of whether taxpayers have children in public schools, she says, the focus should be on providing every Wisconsin student with a quality education.

"I want their experience in public schools to be as awesome as my 25 and 26-year-old's were. I want them to get to be able to participate in sports, in theater, in drama and DECA, and learn about the history of our state and our country, and think about what our state and our country can be," she continued.

The study found factors like inflation outpacing the state allocated per-student revenue limits, the loss of pandemic aid and staff competition in a tight labor market are all factors that contributed to the record number of referendums.


get more stories like this via email

The presidential vote was close in Nevada and with the results in, local organizations leaning more progressive believe the re-election of Donald Trump could put much of the progress made in the Silver State in jeopardy.

Shelbie Swartz, executive director of Battle Born Progress, said Nevadans should take Trump's campaign promises seriously. She called on leaders in Carson City and in Congress to "stand up for their constituents," whom she argued a Trump administration could target, from immigrants to people who identify as transgender.

"If your values change based on polling, if your willingness to fight for the dignity of all Nevadans does not extend to our transgender siblings, then those are not values," Swartz contended. "They're talking points drafted in pencil."

Swartz stressed she has faith in the Nevada Legislature to pass bills to uphold and protect the rights of Nevadans but added the biggest challenge will be seeing what can make it across Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo's desk. Last year, Lombardo, who endorsed Donald Trump, vetoed a record 75 bills passed by the Legislature's Democratic majority.

Trump campaigned on the idea of mass deportations and has doubled down on the threat since his win.

Leo Murrieta, executive director of the group Make the Road Action Nevada, said it is time for leaders who are ready to move beyond what he calls "fear-based policies," to advocate instead for immigration reform, including clearer, earned pathways to citizenship.

"It is time for leaders to see our community as an integral part of this country's fabric, not just a political talking point," Murrieta argued. "We are standing united with many other groups ready to resist any of the policies and any of the other threats that we're certainly going to face."

A new report from the American Immigration Council found a one-time mass deportation operation would cost the United States at least $315 billion to remove more than 13 million people.

California good governance experts are warning the expansion of presidential power under a second Trump administration could cast aside expertise and the public good to further purely political aims.

Over the past week, President-elect Donald Trump has nominated multiple candidates known more for their personal support for him than for relevant expertise.

Bill Resh, associate professor of public policy at the University of Southern California, said Trump appears to be following the blueprint set by Project 2025.

"Project 2025 puts into place principles such as loyalty, first and foremost, to the President as a criterion for placement into these agencies, and often with the intention of undermining those missions."

Supporters of President-elect Trump say voters have given him a mandate to govern as he sees fit. So far, he has nominated people strongly aligned with the oil industry to run the U.S. Interior Department and be Energy Secretary. He has nominated a climate change skeptic to run the Environmental Protection Agency, a television host with no executive experience as Defense Secretary, an election denier for Attorney General and a vaccine skeptic to run the Department of Health and Human Services.

Resh noted Trump has already suggested using recess appointments to avoid what could be bruising confirmation hearings for some of his nominees.

"His stars are aligned to consolidate executive power and bring what used to be either quasi- or fully independent agencies, that were not subject to political whims, to bring those agencies to heel toward his policy preferences," Resh contended.

This year, the U.S. Supreme Court found presidents cannot be prosecuted for most actions in office. And come January, both houses of Congress will be controlled by allies of President-elect Trump.