vote_image.png
Republican-Logo.jpg

ANOTHER REASON TO VOTE REPUBLICAN ON NOVEMBER 8TH

Major State Constitution Issues on November 8th Ballot

Issue 1

Proposed Constitutional Amendment

TO REQUIRE COURTS TO CONSIDER FACTORS LIKE PUBLIC SAFETY WHEN SETTING THE AMOUNT OF BAIL

Proposed by Joint Resolution of the General Assembly

To amend Section 9 of Article I of the Constitution of the State of Ohio


A majority yes vote is necessary for the amendment to pass.

The proposed amendment would:

  • Require Ohio courts, when setting the amount of bail, to consider public safety, including the seriousness of the offense, as well as a person's criminal record, the likelihood a person will return to court, and any other factor the Ohio General Assembly may prescribe.

  • Remove the requirement that the procedures for establishing the amount and conditions of bail be determined by the Supreme Court of Ohio.

If passed, the amendment will be effective immediately.

VOTING RESULTS

A "YES" vote supports requiring courts to consider factors such as public safety, the seriousness of the offense, a person's criminal record, and a person's likelihood of returning to court when setting the amount of bail.

A "NO" vote opposes requiring courts to consider factors such as public safety, the seriousness of the offense, a person's criminal record, and a person's likelihood of returning to court when setting the amount of bail.

REPUBLICAN VS DEMOCRAT POSITIONS

REPUBLICAN - Ohio Attorney General, Dave Yost - A yes vote on Issue 1 gives clear, unambiguous direction that courts "can consider public safety, among other factors, when setting the financial conditions of bail. The presumption of innocence is a bedrock right in both our nation and our state. However, this presumption does not require the pretense that a career criminal is harmless when released back into the public." State Sen. Theresa Gavarone (R-2) argued that the amendment is about public safety, and it’s something all Ohioans can support. (Columbus Post Dispatch)

DEMOCRAT - The argument against the issue was written by two Democratic legislators − attorney David Leland and former Cincinnati police officer Cecil Thomas.

The Bail Project also opposes the issue, saying: “Judges in Ohio already have the authority to deny bail when public safety is a concern. What the amendment does is double down on the use of money as a proxy for who is detained or released before trial – a practice that discriminates against the poor and disproportionately people of color. (Columbus Post Dispatch)

Issue 2

Proposed Constitutional Amendment

TO PROHIBIT LOCAL GOVERNMENT FROM ALLOWING NON-ELECTORS TO VOTE

Proposed by Joint Resolution of the General Assembly

To amend Section 1 of Article V, Section 3 of Article X, and Section 3 of Article XVIII of the Constitution of the State of Ohio


A majority yes vote is necessary for the amendment to pass.

The proposed amendment would:

  • Require that only a citizen of the United States, who is at least 18 years of age and who has been a legal resident and registered voter for at least 30 days, can vote at any state or local election held in this state.

  • Prohibit local governments from allowing a person to vote in local elections if they are not legally qualified to vote in state elections.

If passed, the amendment will be effective immediately

VOTING RESULTS

A "YES" vote supports prohibiting local governments from allowing noncitizens or those who lack the qualifications of an elector to vote in local elections.

A "NO" vote opposes prohibiting local governments from allowing noncitizens or those who lack the qualifications of an elector to vote in local elections.

REPUBLICAN VS DEMOCRAT POSITIONS

REPUBLICAN - Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R), is a supporter of the measure. “American elections are only for American citizens," he said, "And the cities in other states that have granted non-citizens the right to vote in local elections are undermining the value of what it means to be an American … This is a smart preventative measure that will provide the certainty needed to ensure this right is protected for Ohioans. (SOS)

Rep. Jay Edwards (R-94) is one of the representatives who sponsored the measure. “This is about the integrity of our elections,” he said in a statement after the measure passed the Ohio General Assembly. “Citizenship matters. We are being proactive to ensure our election laws are clear and unambiguous. I believe this is an issue most Ohioans, regardless of party affiliation, will support.(Wosu.com)

 

DEMOCRAT - Opponents of the measure include Rep. Mike Skindell (D-13) and Rep. Michele Lepore-Hagan (D-58). Skindell argued that immigrants deserve to have a voice in their communities. “Immigrants serve as firefighters, they serve as police officers in our communities, they are homeowners, they contribute to our societies, they serve as schoolteachers, their kids go to schools in our community," he said. "And they have a right to have a voice, and we should allow that. (USNews.com) Rep Lepore-Hagan argued that the measure is not productive. "It's an effort to promote a narrative that our elections are faulty," she said. "It’s also an effort to tap into fear and it’s a political game. (Daytondailynews.com)

Subscribe for News and Events

Thanks for subscribing!