Ohioans boost pace of making, changing laws at ballot boxes

11/28/2011

COLUMBUS — Who needs a legislature?

Ohioans from both ends of the political spectrum are increasingly doing away with the middleman by turning directly to the ballot to amend the Constitution, undo laws they don’t like, and — in rarer cases — write their own.

The Buckeye State is no California or Oregon, the national leaders in citizen-driven referendums, but already Ohio is looking at definite and potential issues in 2012 that would affect medical marijuana, organized labor, elections, congressional maps, abortion rights, and even a constitutional convention.

“I think [lawmakers] are very frustrated by this, because it removes them as the center of political power,” said Chris Littleton, former president of the Ohio Liberty Council, the closest thing to a statewide Tea Party organization.

He was part of the coalition that led to the overwhelming passage on Nov. 8 of Issue 3, a constitutional amendment largely presented as a push-back against President Obama’s health-care law. He’s also allied with some of the same players in an effort to make Ohio a right-to-work state, under which employees could not be required to join or pay dues to a workplace union.

“It’s very frustrating for the more established political community,” Mr. Littleton said. “I will be the first to admit that this can be abused with huge amounts of money walking in, powerful special interests who want to make sure something is carved out to their benefit. They should revolve around personal and economic freedom for everyone.”

The success of the two citizen-initiated ballot issues Nov. 8 — with success measured as a “no” vote for Issue 2 backers that killed Senate Bill 5, the collective-bargaining law — seems to promise more of the same.

While conservatives such as Mr. Littleton have learned to use referendums to move their agenda, Democrats have used them as a way to return to political relevance after being swept from statewide office and losing their grasp on the General Assembly.

State Democrats await certification, for the 2012 ballot, of their proposed repeal of a GOP-enacted election-law overhaul, and are holding a referendum threat over Republicans’ heads to try to force change in a controversial U.S. congressional redistricting map that favors the GOP in 12 of Ohio’s 16 districts.

“This has been on the increase for over a decade now,” said Jennie Bowser, a senior fellow with the National Conference of State Legislatures. Citizen-driven ballot measures spiked in the early 1990s and peaked late in that decade, but the numbers have plateaued at a level higher than previously seen.

Ohio has had 78 citizen-initiated proposed laws and constitutional amendments since they got that right in 1912, according to data from the National Conference of State Legislatures. Michigan has had 73 since 1908. The numbers do not include referendums about existing laws.

“Citizen frustration with government is a piece of the pie, but it’s not all of it,” Ms. Bowser said. “I think that since initiatives sort of exploded in the 1990s, a whole industry has grown up around it: People who write initiatives, do polling and focus groups, gather signatures, and run ads once it’s on the ballot. They make money off the initiative process. If initiatives go away, their income goes away.”

She pointed to the proposed “Personhood amendment” that voters rejected Nov. 8 in Mississippi as an example of outside interests pushing similar amendments in multiple states.

Proposed petition language was submitted recently to Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine for a similar constitutional amendment declaring a fetus to be a person from conception, with all pertinent legal rights attached.

In the past, Ohioans have successfully turned to direct democracy to enact one of the nation’s strictest bans on indoor public smoking, introduce Las Vegas-style casino gambling, ban gay marriage, repeal taxes, raise the minimum wage, and protect private-property water rights.

But they’ve often also said “no.”

Before the 2009 amendment of the Ohio Constitution to establish four casino locations statewide, Ohio voters rejected several casino issues and defeated changes in how congressional and state legislative districts are redrawn, workers’ compensation reform, and changes in how judges are selected.

“The perception is that this is a very useful tactic,” said John Green, director of the Ray C. Bliss Institute of Applied Politics at the University of Akron. “It can be useful as a bargaining chip, as a way to actually enact laws, and to do policy.

“When Issue 3 [the health-care amendment] came up, questions were raised as to its legality, of whether a state can opt out of a federal law,” he said. “But their answer to that was: ‘We want to get into court. We want the Supreme Court to rule on the individual mandate.’ This is a tactic that can achieve many goals.”

A recent Bliss survey showed an overwhelming majority of voters prefer having that right of direct democracy as opposed to not having it, despite the potential drawbacks.

Mr. Littleton is of a like mind.

“The framers of the Constitution probably did not envision this,” he said. “They wanted the idea of allowing citizens to make fundamental change. If Ohioans are tired of seeing this, they have the freedom or choice not to sign. I’m confident that the marketplace of ideas can handle that. I like that.”

After facing voter rejection of Senate Bill 5 on Election Night, Ohio House Speaker Bill Batchelder (R., Medina) pondered Democrats’ new proclivity to turning to the ballot to undo what Republicans have done.

“They have a right to do that,” he said. “I think at some point, sooner or later, the public will become unhappy with that, and for good reason.”

Contact Jim Provance at: jprovance@theblade.com or 614-221-0496.