Letters to the Editor
Issue 1 not about a 'human rights issue'
The Gazette’s 7/19 article on State Issue 1 (“League of Women Voters Work to Educate Chillicothe on Issue 1”) quotes Ohio League of Women Voters director Jen Miller as having said that LWV “rarely” takes stances on ballot issues unless the organization “believes human rights are at stake.”
To be clear — human rights are not at stake in the matter of State Issue 1. On August 8, Ohioans will decide in a free and fair election whether future changes to our state constitution should require the kind of broad consensus that a 60% approval threshold would ensure or if the current 50%-plus-one standard still suffices. That’s it. Calling this a “human rights issue” cheapens the phrase and insults Ohioans’ intelligence. For context, consider forced (slave) Uyghur labor in communist China as a comparison. Hopefully, no elaboration is required.
Ohioans deserve better than this kind of demagoguery, especially on a matter of such significance. Our statewide debate over the process by which we amend Ohio’s founding document is worthy of far greater sincerity than Ms. Miller provides.
Here’s hoping for a more thoughtful, elevated dialogue as August 8 approaches.
Jeff LehnerRoss County Auditor
What Issue 1 is & isn't
Issue 1 is the only item on the ballot of the Aug. 8 special election. Issue 1 is not an item related to parents’ rights, children, education, reproductive rights, abortion, guns or OSU football. The issue is to determine if the Ohio Constitution can still be amended with the traditional majority vote of 50% + 1 or will need a 60% vote for approval.
Since the modern Ohio Constitution was written, only 19 amendments proposed by Ohio citizens have been approved so it is not used often. If the YES votes prevail, a hard-to-reach 60% vote will be needed to approve an amendment thus the power of individual Ohioans to make changes will be diminished. Therefore, the Ohio legislature will have much more power than the citizenry to make constitutional changes.
If the NO votes outnumber the YES votes, the amendment process simply remains the same as it has since 1912. Both former Democratic and Republican Governors and Attorneys General recommend a NO vote to preserve the 111-year tradition of the majority vote. That seems like the best course of action!
Don GatchellChillicothe
This article originally appeared on Lancaster Eagle-Gazette: Letters to the Editor
