Yes, it’s double, but it is doubling it from half the counties to all the counties. There are a whole bunch of Ohio counties where the Democratic vote has been under 20%, so bad math says a Democratic proposal would need over 25% of the of the Democrats to sign the petition.
Oh that’s interesting. I don’t think I like that requirement.
My understanding as an Ohioan is that it’s 5% of the votes from the last general (presidential? Idk) election. So if 20% of the eligible voters turned up to vote in that election, and that was 100,000 votes, you would need 5,000 to sign. They don’t have to be voters who voted in the last election, either.
With no county-by-county requirement?
The county-by-county requirement seems unreasonable… if it exists.
The county by county rule IS unreasonable to me, but I can see how they’d spin it to make it seem favorable. What if the state decided to add a nuclear waste dump site to your county? If 50% of the other counties were on board, your little county is SOL. This gives the little guys a voice.
That hopefully wouldn’t be a constitutional amendment situation.
Anyway, I’m voting no on issue 1. Ohio FA and I hope they FO.
The county by county requirement exists. As vjvj said, it currently is signatures over the threshold in 50% of the counties, the proposal changes it to 100% of the counties.
1 Like
I don’t know what FA and FO mean.
Yeah, that’s a bad change then.
First F = a four letter word
A = around
2nd F = find
O = out
3 Likes
I’m fine with that IF the state also has an initiative process that allows the voters to pass laws with 50% simple majorities.
But, if the only way citizens can get a direct vote is by amending the state constitution, then I’m fine with 50% for amendments.
50% +1 on referendums is what turmed California into a colossal mess. Too many contradictory laws get passed that way.
2 Likes
Prop 13, which many argue is the worst of the California ballot measures, got 62.6% of the vote. The problem isn’t so much the 50% + 1 threshold, the problem in California is what is allowed to be voted on.
1 Like
Here’s the issue report for Issue 1 on the August ballot.
issuereport.pdf (ohiosos.gov)
1 Like
To be honest I have been questioning this “majority takes all” approach since we got this new SCOTUS.
Thanks for posting.
First bullet point is reasonable. Second two are not.
1 Like
When people complain about initiatives, they always point to California. About half the states have and initiative process for either statutes, amendments, or both. Somehow, the other states all manage.
Maybe there is something about California politics?
There are over 20M registered voters in CA. To get an initiative on the ballot you need about 500K signatures and for a constitutional amendment about 800K so any lobbiest worth his salt with any kind of corporate backing can get an initiative on the ballot and any grass roots movement that’s reasonable organized can also get one on the ballot. That’s a long way of saying, it’s not a very high bar to get an initiative on the ballot in CA.
I don’t know how it works in other states.
Is it possible to walk in a public venue in CA without getting harassed to sign an initiative petition?
I’ve encountered such folks in other states on a very few occasions, but I don’t remember having traveled to California without having had to say a couple of times each trip “sorry, I’m just a visitor”.