A majority of Ohioans rejected the last-minute effort to make it more difficult to get proposed amendments on the ballot and change the state’s constitution. For abortion rights advocates who had already succeeded in getting an amendment on the ballot this November, the defeat of Issue 1 means they will only need 50% + 1 (a simple majority) of voters to approve it. For pro-life supporters, some of whom had been hoping for a change to a supermajority to pass state amendments, concern grows that a tip of the scales could lead Ohio to very liberal abortion rules.
A lot of gloating from those who voted “no” on Issue 1 has been countered by a good deal of finger-pointing by those on the “yes” side. What both sides should do now is focus on the next big hurdle: the November 7 general election.
The state of abortion in Ohio
Currently, Ohio allows abortions up to 22 weeks gestation, but that is only because the state’s “heartbeat law” was put on hold indefinitely by a judge last year.
The “heartbeat law,” which is favored by Ohio Republicans, says in part that an abortion cannot be performed without checking for a fetal heartbeat. If a heartbeat is detected, an abortion cannot be performed. The law does allow for three exceptions:
To prevent the death of the mother
To avoid irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant mother.
In cases of an ectopic pregnancy (This is when the fertilized egg grows outside of the uterus.)
One of the concerns about the “heartbeat law” is that it might prohibit women from getting immediate care during a miscarriage. Georgia’s “heartbeat law” has an exemption for "removing a dead unborn child caused by spontaneous abortion,” or miscarriage. That language in not found in Ohio’s law. Nor are exceptions for cases of rape or incest.
Looking for expanded rights
The proposed amendment to the constitution that will be on the November ballot seeks to do away with the “heartbeat law” for good. The proposed amendment uses broad language to ensure that abortion is as accessible as possible to women in Ohio. The amendment states that:
Every individual has a right to make and carry out one’s own reproductive decisions, including but not limited to decisions on contraception, fertility treatment, continuing one’s own pregnancy, miscarriage care, and abortion.
The State shall not, directly or indirectly, burden, penalize, prohibit, interfere with, or discriminate against either an individual’s voluntary exercise of this right or a person or entity that assists an individual exercising this right, unless the State demonstrates that it is using the least restrictive means to advance the individual’s health in accordance with widely accepted and evidence-based standards of care.
However, abortion may be prohibited after fetal viability. But in no case may such an abortion be prohibited if in the professional judgment of the pregnant patient’s treating physician it is necessary to protect the pregnant patient’s life or health.
As used in this Section, “Fetal viability” means “the point in a pregnancy when, in the professional judgment of the pregnant patient’s treating physician, the fetus has a significant likelihood of survival outside the uterus with reasonable measures. This is determined on a case-by-case basis”; and “State” includes any governmental entity and political subdivision.
Pro-lifers and people who hold more conservative abortion beliefs are concerned that this amendment has few if any boundaries. For example, a fetus that is nearly fully developed but cannot survive outside the womb could be legally aborted, even though it might be a mere week away from being able to survive outside the mother’s body.
The fight begins
What both sides need to do now is stop bragging (Democrats) or licking their wounds (Republicans) about Issue 1 and get their messages about abortion tightened up before taking them out to the public. Be ready to answer questions. Encourage challenges. Think outside the two political boxes and speak to people on a human level. And be ready to deal with the consequences should your side wind up losing.
Also, the Tuesday election results haven't even been officially certified and another potential amendment (probably for an election next year) was introduced to eliminate qualified immunity from police officers and sovereign immunity from governments in the state allowing all kinds of lawsuits. These are the kinds of amendments usually backed by very far left groups with out of state ties.
I read a summary of the issue 1 vote in Cleveland.com yesterday. They listedd 4 takeaways. One was Frank LaRose bet big, and might be the biggest loser here. He declared his Senate candidacy during the campaign for 1, and probably will be the biggest loser in it. I think his Senate campaign is virtually over. Two, was a tactical win for the pro-abortion faction. I think they are over-estimating the win. Many conservative folks in NW Ohio voted against 1 because they felt their ability to bring initiatives would be stifled too. Those people will likely not support the November amendment. The other two points were more political, but the pro-abortion people exposed themselves and the out of state dark money that paid for their campaign, which was always their claim about Republicans. The pro-issue 1 campaign had much less out of state funding (mostly from the pro-life Susan B. Anthony fund.