Buckeye Reporter

The Ohio Constitution Protection Amendment, as reintroduced by State Rep. Brian Stewart (R-Ashville), had its first hearings this week before the Constitutional Resolutions Committee. Proponents of the amendment argued that the amendment was necessary to curtail the influence of outside special interests of Ohio’s Constitution.

"It seems over time the Ohio Constitution has become the vehicle for bad policies related to casinos, marijuana and other things that Ohioans have not asked for—because if we had, our elected representatives would have been the proper avenue for accomplishing those things," Nilani Jawahar, legislative liaison for the Center for Christian Virtue, said in a statement.

According to the Buckeye Reporter, the Ohio Constitution Protection Amendment seeks to establish a supermajority requirement for ballot initiative-driven constitutional amendments as is required in many states.

In a news release, the Ohio Secretary of State’s office also reports that in just the past three petition-based amendment campaigns, special interests have spent more than $50 million on ads and political expenses to support their passage. Only one of these amendments was successfully passed. According to that data, there have been 16 proposed petition-based constitutional amendments since 2000. Of those 16, only five passed, and three of the five passed with more than 60% of the vote.

A 2018 proposed constitutional amendment would've lowered the penalties for certain drug offenses and offenders. The amendment was ultimately defeated, however, the Dayton Daily News reported that supporters of the amendment raised $9.8 million, plus an additional $1.4 in in-kind support. Nearly $6 million of that came from out-of-state organizations, including groups tied to the Zuckerbergs and George Soros. According to that report, less than $4,000 came from inside Ohio.

On the other hand, opponents raised $1 million with most coming from the Ohio-based group, Ohioans for a Healthy Economy.

In her testimony before the committee at the April 18 hearing, Jawahar argued that the Constitution, as a foundational document, should not be overly easy to alter, stating, "The Ohio Constitution is not for sale and not to be subject to exploitation, and a simple majority should not be enough to alter our foundational charter. HJR 1 strikes the important balance of protecting the integrity of this document, while maintaining the ability of Ohio citizens to directly engage in the policy-making process."

In addition to Jawahar, representatives from Buckeye Firearms, the Ohio Sportsmen's Alliance, Cincinnati Right to Life, End Abortion Ohio, the Ohio Restaurant Association and others were on hand to voice their support for the amendment.

In his Sponsor Testimony before the Committee on March 22, Stewart criticized opponents of his proposal. He argued that the Ohio Constitution "has become bloated to over 67,000 words" due to constant amendments, and took issue with the claim that raising the threshold for passing an amendment would make new amendments virtually impossible.

"This is nonsense," he said. "In fact, since 2008, 14 of the 21 proposed constitutional amendments have passed with a 60% or better vote margin. In 2022, both proposed constitutional amendments passed with a 77% vote margin. This is as it should be."

Stewart continued, stating that if any outside group believed that an issue was worthy of inclusion in Ohio's Constitution, it should have no problem receiving 60% of public support.

"Stated simply, under the Ohio Constitution Protection Amendment, good ideas will pass," Stewart said.