Ohio is still an easy mark

My friend JFK and I were kibitzing about issue 1 and its failure in Ohio. He was gleeful I had moved on. His main point, the issue lost because people realized the bar was too high. He claims 60 per cent is unattainable, thus making initiatives moot. 

From my perspective that that is good, I want our Constitutional changes in Ohio to be hard to attain. He wants to have the power to change the constitution with a simple majority. He has gotten his way; we will have to look at the results in 5 or 10 years. 

Will Ohio be molded into a liberal bastion similar to California and New York? If that happens John will be sullen because he really doesn't want Ohio to be California. 

I explained if he wanted the new law in Ohio, put it in the hands of representatives Ruli, Cutrona and McNally. Get 3/5ths to agree and put it before the voters. He said no because the Republicans have a majority thru gerrymandering. 

Before our argument devolved into name calling and wrestling, I said the Red State spoke in the last election, sweeping DeWine, Husted, Larose, Yost and Faber back into office. How did the Gerrymandering work there. 

It remains to be seen who is right. Will we get a liberal abortion law? By the way JFK is Pro Life. 

Let's talk about that for a moment. If the abortion amendment would happen to pass in November, those who choose abortion in Ohio would be able to take the life of a viable baby anytime the mother decides. 5 weeks, 15 weeks or 9 months or even after delivered. I will never apologize for attempting to prevent a law that allows the taking of an innocent human life.

While I would expect 3rd trimester abortions would be rare, Ohio would memorialize the right to abort a child at any point. Abort , of course, is a euphemism for taking a helpless persons life.

We have all the tools to detect pregnancies early on. Anyone who thinks they could be pregnant has not only the morning after pill, but a myriad of tests to detect pregnancy in the first week or so, not knowing is a lazy excuse.

So back to the first point, that 60 per cent is unattainable in an election. From my perspective that is a good thing, we have hammered out our mission statement in Ohio as have the OEA, league of women's voters NAACP and countless others and all require 60 per cent to change their Bi laws.  

In the words of Frank Larose, politicians come and go but the Constitution should be the guiding principle of our state. Frank and I lost the argument, most people in Mahoning and Trumbull County disagreed.

I likely should have gone with my gut feeling, which was "they are spending how much for a special election?"

I think that likely sunk the measure after conservatives promised no more special elections, except this one? 

Conservatives fired and missed; they completely misjudged the voter. Even though Law Maker Matt Huffman insisted the measure was so important it needed a special election. 

He is correct, a super majority should be in place to change the constitution unfortunately we blew it. That miss means we are still open to the whims of those from out of state who see Ohio as a state with a constitution that is easy to change. 

Dan Rivers