Boosters of Ohio's controversial Issue 1 are increasingly connected to election denial: analysis https://www.rawstory.com/ohio-issue-1-2662739675/ Critics of Issue 1 have long said it’s an anti-democratic measure because it saps voters’ power over the Ohio Constitution compared to that of the state’s highly gerrymandered legislature. They say it would make it all but impossible to force an unrepresentative state government to enact policies supported by majorities of Ohioans. Seeming to bolster that argument is the growing number of top supporters of Issue 1 who lie about election outcomes they don’t like — or who support politicians who do. After all, it’s hard to do something more undemocratic than reject an election just because your favored candidate didn’t win. It’s like saying a football game doesn’t count just because your team lost. Issue 1 is increasingly associated with people who take that approach to elections. The vast majority of funding for it is being provided by an Illinois billionaire who also has spent millions supporting politicians who spread the lie that the 2020 presidential election was rigged against Donald Trump. And this week the controversial measure’s most vocal supporter in Ohio compared Trump’s indictment for trying to overturn the election to what’s done “in third-world dictatorships.” To top it off, an Arizona politician who has lied both about Trump’s 2020 loss and her own loss last year plans to come to Ohio to promote Issue 1 — to “protect” the Ohio Constitution. Voters have been casting early ballots for weeks over whether to accept or reject Issue 1 and on Tuesday they’ll go to the polls in a nationally watched election. Those pushing Issue 1 say their goal is to protect the state Constitution from corrupting outside influences. But in Ohio’s recent history, those influences have gotten a much warmer reception from the General Assembly than from the voters. Just ask FirstEnergy. In reality, Issue 1 would change the state constitution to radically limit a power reserved for voters that was incorporated 111 years ago as part of an anti-corruption movement championed by Theodore Roosevelt. Issue 1 was put on the ballot by a legislature that is in place after the Republican-dominated Ohio Redistricting Commission ignored five orders from the state Supreme Court to produce less-gerrymandered districts. As an example of how gerrymandered the legislature is, Trump won Ohio by eight percentage points in 2020, but Republicans control 79% of the seats in the state Senate — a 15-point differential. If Issue 1 passes with just 50% of the vote, it will raise the bar to pass future constitutional amendments to 60%. Crucially, Issue 1 also would make it much more difficult — critics say almost impossible — for voters to put proposed amendments on the ballot in the first place. At the same time, it wouldn’t increase the burden for Ohio’s gerrymandered legislature to do the same. It’s already really hard for citizen-initiated amendments to make the ballot. For an abortion-rights amendment that will go to a vote in November, supporters had to gather more than 400,000 verified signatures from registered voters — and a portion of them had to come from 44 of Ohio’s 88 counties. Starting Jan. 1, 2024, Issue 1 would require that a portion come from each of Ohio’s 88 counties — ranging from Franklin with its 1.3 million people to Vinton with its 12,500. And it would eliminate a 10-day “cure” period to fix deficiencies officials find with any of those signatures. Critics have said Issue 1 is an attempt to further disempower the majority of Ohio’s voters in at least three ways: By giving the gerrymandered legislature more power relative to voters — perhaps most notably by making it much harder to initiate and pass a more airtight anti-gerrymandering amendment By giving 41% of voters the ability to defeat an amendment at the ballot box that is supported by the other 59% And by giving a county 0f 12,500 just as much power to keep an amendment from making the ballot as a county that has more than 100 times as many people. Democracy is founded on the idea that candidates accept the will of the voters and peacefully acknowledge when they lose. In fact, George Washington had a great fear of dying in office. He didn’t want to give his successors the notion that the presidency was for life — as opposed to submitting to regular elections and peacefully ceding power if they lose. Thanks to this system, with the notable exception of the Civil War, we’ve avoided armed conflict every four years and had a government that has paid at least some attention to the wants and needs of the electorate. Lots of people think that’s what has made the United States so strong economically, militarily and culturally. All of Ohio’s former governors and attorneys general — no matter which party they belong to — oppose Issue 1. They’ve also acknowledged that whatever their preferred outcome, Trump lost the 2020 election, just as they acknowledged Hillary Clinton’s loss four years earlier. But the views of the people working hardest to push Issue 1 are murkier. The effort’s major funder, Illinois billionaire Richard Uihlein, gave an initial $1 million to the campaign and by late last month, he had contributed $4 million of the $4.85 million the “yes” side had raised. Uihlein’s money also helped fund the disastrous Jan. 6, 2021 rally in Washington, D.C. that preceded the deadly attack on the U.S. Capitol that delayed congressional certification of Joe Biden’s election. In addition, he and his wife have given more than $10 million to “election integrity” projects and to support election-denying candidates such as Doug Mastriano, last year’s failed gubernatorial candidate from Pennsylvania who attended the Jan. 6 rally. Also supporting Issue 1 is Kari Lake, who has lied not only about Trump’s loss in 2020, but also about her own loss in the Arizona governor’s race last year. The Strongsville GOP excitedly announced that Lake would appear in Parma on Monday to whip up support for Issue 1. And then there’s Issue 1’s most prominent supporter, Secretary of State Frank LaRose, who is also running for U.S. Senate. In the wake of Trump’s indictment Tuesday, LaRose took to Twitter and implied that no ex-president can be prosecuted for conduct in office. He said “no American should tolerate the abuse of our justice system to prosecute and persecute political opponents. That’s what they do in third world dictatorships, but that’s not who we are as a nation.” No one is above the law, but no American should tolerate the abuse of our justice system to prosecute and persecute political opponents. That’s what they do in third world dictatorships, but that’s not who we are as a nation. It’s clear that Ohioans see what’s going on here… — Frank LaRose (@FrankLaRose) August 2, 2023 He wrote that in response to a four-count indictment saying that in trying to overturn the 2020 election, Trump violated laws by using “dishonesty, fraud and deceit” to “impair, obstruct and defeat” the government’s conduct of the election. The indictment also says that Trump broke a law prohibiting “a conspiracy against the right to vote and have one’s vote counted.” The document lists a long set of facts, the majority of which have long been public and are largely undisputed. They include Trump’s repeated lies about election fraud even after being told by his own vice president, attorney general, top Justice Department officials, White House lawyers, the Department of Homeland Security, Republican state officeholders and scores of courts — including some with judges he appointed — that his numerous conspiracy theories were false. It also describes how Trump cajoled Republican state officials to find nonexistent fraud and votes, how he conspired to create slates of fake electors, and how he relentlessly pressured former Vice President Mike Pence to “essentially to overturn the election,” as Pence himself described it Wednesday. And the indictment recounts how Trump encouraged people to come to D.C. on Jan. 6, whipped them up with violent rhetoric and even more lies about fraud, and then sent them to the Capitol. Trump then watched TV for more than three hours as the mob attacked police, stormed the building and delayed certification before he was finally persuaded to ask the crowd to exit the building. But as he did, Trump couldn’t resist saying, “We love you,” and then tried to capitalize on the violence, the indictment said. After LaRose claimed the indictment was intended to “persecute” Trump, his office was asked whether LaRose had actually read it. His office also was asked which of its allegations he disputes. Finally, LaRose’s office was asked if Ohio’s top elections official believed Trump had lied about the election he lost. LaRose’s spokesman, Rob Nichols, didn’t respond.
So who are you going to believe? They made it obvious, causing a protest they could arrest. Stealing elections is old school communism.
DeSantis Dismisses Donald Trump’s 2020 Election Theories as False After long hedging, Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida went further than he has before in acknowledging that the election was not stolen.
GOP's anti-democratic Issue 1 goes down in flames. Voters in Ohio reject GOP-backed proposal that would have made it tougher to protect abortion rights https://apnews.com/article/ohio-abo...ial-election-227cde039f8d51723612878525164f1a COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Ohio voters on Tuesday resoundingly rejected a Republican-backed measure that would have made it more difficult to change the state’s constitution, setting up a fall campaign that will become the nation’s latest referendum on abortion rights since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned nationwide protections last year. The defeat of Issue 1 keeps in place a simple majority threshold for passing future constitutional amendments. It would have raised that to a 60% supermajority, which supporters said would protect the state’s foundational document from outside interest groups. While abortion was not directly on the special election ballot, the result marks the latest setback for Republicans in a conservative-leaning state who favor imposing tough restrictions on the procedure. Ohio Republicans placed the question on the summer ballot in hopes of undercutting a citizen initiative voters will decide in November that seeks to enshrine abortion rights in the state. “Tonight is a major victory for democracy in Ohio,” Willard told a jubilant crowd at the opposition campaign’s watch party. “The majority still rules in Ohio.” A major national group that opposes abortion rights, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, called the result “a sad day for Ohio” while criticizing the outside money that helped the opposition. In fact, both sides relied on national groups and individuals in their campaigns. Other states where voters have considered abortion rights since last year’s Supreme Court ruling have protected them, including in red states such as Kansas and Kentucky. Interest in the special election was intense, even after Republicans ignored their own law that took effect earlier this year to place the question before voters in August. Voters cast nearly 700,000 early in-person and mail ballots ahead of Tuesday’s final day of voting, more than double the number of advance votes in a typical primary election. Early turnout was especially heavy in the Democratic-leaning counties surrounding Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati. One Person One Vote represented a broad, bipartisan coalition of voting rights, labor, faith and community groups. The group also had as allies four living ex-governors of the state and five former state attorneys general of both parties, who called the proposed change bad public policy. In place since 1912, the simple majority standard is a much more surmountable hurdle for Ohioans for Reproductive Rights, the group advancing November’s abortion rights amendment. It would establish “a fundamental right to reproductive freedom” with “reasonable limits.” Voters in several states have approved ballot questions protecting access to abortion since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, but typically have done so with less than 60% of the vote. AP VoteCast polling last year found that 59% of Ohio voters say abortion should generally be legal. The result came in the very type of August special election that Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose, a candidate for U.S. Senate, had previously testified against as undemocratic because of historically low turnout. Republican lawmakers just last year had voted to mostly eliminate such elections, a law they ignored for this year’s election. Voters’ rejection of the proposal marked a rare rebuke for Ohio Republicans, who have held power across every branch of state government for 12 years.
GOP attempt to stymie abortion in Ohio backfires spectacularly https://www.businessinsider.com/ohio-gop-issue-1-abortion-analysis-results-2023-8