Gov. DeWine hits new low with false claims about Ohio Issue 1 | Michael Douglas

It comes as little surprise that Mike DeWine opposes Issue 1, the proposed state constitutional amendment to secure reproductive rights in Ohio, or that he joined his wife, Fran, in an ad amplifying his opposition. The governor long has been an abortion opponent. He is popular. No doubt, the thinking is, he could help to defeat the proposal at the polls.

Why not reaffirm his familiar position, arguing that a function of government goes to protecting the most vulnerable, those he describes as without a voice? He talks about protecting life “from the beginning to the end.”

Yet, in his ad, the governor strays far from belief, policy and principle. He joins in the deceitfulness of opponents. He fans their misleading claims. It is not an attractive profile, no matter how much the pair seeks to soothe.

This is a low point of his time as governor.

How does he deceive?

First, he suggests the issue invites confusion. Actually, the choice is clear: A “yes” vote means enshrining the right of women to make their own decisions about abortion and other reproductive care. A “no” vote opens the way to Ohio all but banning abortion, and to the punishing fallout that would follow.

DeWine assures that he and Fran have “carefully studied” the issue, though the rest of the ad signals their need for a refresher.

Voter Guide: Here's our guide to the 2023 election in Summit County and Ohio Issue 1 and 2

Fran insists the proposal “would allow an abortion at any time during a pregnancy.” Not so. After the fetus reaches “viability,” at roughly 24 weeks, the state may set restrictions, as long as doctors are permitted to protect the health and life of the woman.

This part of the ad alludes to “late-term” abortions. Yet such procedures are exceedingly rare, less than 1% of all abortions, and usually involve tragic circumstances for the woman or the fetus or both.

Fran then warns, also falsely, that Issue 1 “would deny parents the right to be involved when their daughter is making the most important decision of her life.” The proposed amendment says nothing about restricting parental rights, let alone carving an exception from current limits on the rights of minors.

Ohio has a typical parental consent law regarding abortion, requiring minors to get the approval of parents, with an essential outlet for judicial intervention in extreme situations. That arrangement has been part of the legal framework for decades. It is hard to see it changing.

Michigan faced similar claims when voters there secured reproductive rights. Today, parental consent still stands.

Next in the ad, DeWine acknowledges that “Ohioans are divided on the issue of abortion.” He then portrays the proposal as extreme, arguing “whether you’re pro-life or pro-choice, Issue 1 is just not right for Ohio.”

Fran echoes the contention: “Issue 1 just goes too far.”

Recall that Issue 1 reflects the consensus for 50 years, before the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Roe v. Wade precedent in 2022. It would restore the effective compromise, reproductive rights secured until viability, the public interest in protecting life then entering the equation.

That is how we’re supposed to handle sharp divisions: Bridge the differences through compromise. Issue 1 mirrors such noble work.

By contending the proposal is “radical,” “just not right,” or “goes too far,” the governor invites the impression an alternative consensus could be found. He attempts to reassure: “If we’re able to defeat this, then I think we can come together as a state and find a place where a majority of Ohioans can, in fact, agree.”

Jon Husted, the lieutenant governor, makes a similar pitch, arguing that “we need to defeat this and then the conversation will go on about what the right policies should be.”

Their words hardly could be more disingenuous.

The Republican majorities at the Statehouse already have had the conversation.

Remember the heartbeat bill? The governor signed the measure into law four years ago. Ohio joined a half-dozen or so states in outlawing abortion at the point when a fetal heartbeat can be detected, around six weeks, before many women know they are pregnant. It contains no exceptions for rape or incest.

For 82 infamous days, following the high court striking down Roe, the law took effect. It brought turmoil, hardship and trauma to the lives of many women and physicians, most notably, a 10-year-old rape victim left no choice but to travel to Indiana for an abortion.

A judge eventually put the law on hold, the matter now pending before the Ohio Supreme Court, the conservative majority likely to take a favorable view. In short, that is why Issue 1 is necessary, and its passage so important — to ensure that women decide and to prevent the wreckage inflicted by something truly extreme.

Douglas was the Beacon Journal editorial page editor from 1999 to 2019. He can be reached at mddouglasmm@gmail.com.

This article originally appeared on Akron Beacon Journal: Issue 1: Why is Mike DeWine lying about Ohio abortion amendment?