Letters: Ohio Issue 1 is where irony and heir of legendary Milwaukee beer collide
Where Richard Uihlein and irony meet
A recent article stated that the "purpose" of issue 1 is to keep outside moneyed interests from influencing our constitution.
May I point out that a major supporter of Issue 1, to the tune of millions of dollars, is billionaire Richard Uihlein, an Illinois resident, who inherited the Schlitz brewing fortune.
More: Ex-Ohio GOP Govs. John Kasich, Bob Taft blast plan to make it harder to amend constitution
It is also ironic that while Issue 1 proposes an increase to 60% to amend our constitution, it will only need 50% plus 1 to do so.
Marian Harris, Columbus
40% shouldn't decide for the rest of us
It’s really very simple. If you believe that Ohio constitutional issues should be approved by a simple majority (50% +1) vote of the people, then you should vote NO on Issue 1 on Aug. 8.
On the other hand, if you think it’s OK for a minority of voters (40%) to control what happens to Ohio Constitutional issues, then you vote yes on Issue 1.
More: 'Power-hungry hypocrites' trying to con Ohio. Issue 1 about dominance, deceit| Our view
When you raise the threshold to require 60% approval for a win — that means that the other 40% of the voters get to determine the outcome for everyone.
That inevitably means that special interests with just 40% of the vote have more power than the majority of the people. Keeping power in the hands of the people — instead of special interests — has always been a nonpartisan issue. That’s why the League of Women Voters, along with numerous other nonpartisan organizations, including various unions and churches, are joining together and asking you to vote NO on Issue 1.
Letters: There's hypocrisy, irony and an out-of-state billionaire behind Issue 1
In addition, former governors Bob Taft, John Kasich, Ted Strickland, and Dick Celeste are all speaking out against Issue 1. Please get out and vote on August 8. And in the interest of preserving the voice of the people, vote "no" on Issue 1.
Cheryl Roller, president, League of Women Voters, Metro Columbus
Their hypocrisy is evident and disgusting
I will vote "no" on State Issue 1 in this special August election.
The procedure for proposing changes to the Ohio Constitution has been in place for more than 100 years. The Republicans in the legislature want to make huge changes to that procedure.
Just a few months ago, they voted against having special elections in August. Low voter turnout and cost were the reasons given for the change.
Business leader: An end to majority rule in Ohio? Issue 1 an unprecedented affront to democracy
So, why are we having a special election this August? They want this change now to cripple an initiative concerning abortion that will be on the ballot in November. Their hypocrisy is evident and disgusting.
Vote "no" on Issue 1.
Ben Freudenreich, Columbus
What happened to separation of church and state?
The “Pro-life” anti-abortion position certainly isn’t for the freedom that women with unwanted pregnancies deserve and who (for many reasons) wish to control their reproductive health without government interference.
Women living in “red” states are especially in jeopardy, where many have no access to family planning. The USA has the highest maternal mortality rate of any industrialized nation (including the postpartum year.), and deaths are about 3 times higher for women of color.
It certainly isn’t for the child who probably won’t get the loving start in a two-parent home that a wanted child generally has. Furthermore, society provides little social support after birth — especially for the male child of color who rarely finds that “equal opportunity for all” applies — and is likely to enter the pipeline from schoolhouse to jailhouse as young as kindergarten.
So, whose life is it for?
Religious right-wing patriarchal believers who wish to control women and who view her as a biological incubator rather than a human being with rights to decide her reproductive choices. What happened to the concept of freedom of religion (separation of church and state) promised in our constitution?
What does “pro-life” really mean?
Where did this ideology originate? Abortion is not directly addressed in the Bible. How did it become such a divisive politicized culture war with one conservative religious faction dominating the current scene?
Mary Warner, Ashville
What discrimination?
Re "Blatant discrimination against the non-believer," July 9: Letter writer Jacquelyn K. Thompson states that “employers must give special dispensation to religious workers” and that “this forces the non-religious to work in their place.”
How so?
If worker requests time off for religious observance, he or she must use their vacation time or other paid-time-off. In the absence of PTO, the worker must either make up the lost time by working additional hours on other days, or must forfeit pay.
The work is still there and must be completed upon the worker’s return. Nobody is being “forced to work in their place.”
Discrimination against the non-believer? Hardly.
Anne Neiwirth, Bexley
Ohio's constitution is not a toy
Vote "no" on State Issue 1.
A right guaranteed by the state constitution is at risk of being taken away from Ohioans of every political persuasion. State Issue 1 practically abolishes citizen driven initiatives, and permanently ends the popular vote to amend the state constitution.
Claiming it is too easy to collect signatures, architects of Issue 1 wanted to increase the difficulty of collecting signatures to place a proposal on the ballot.
Instead of 44 counties, citizen groups would need to gather names for all 88 counties. This specific provision could be deadly to any future citizen initiative since it would be possible for just one exceptionally liberal or extremely conservative county to prevent an initiative from being placed on the ballot.
Since 1912, a simple majority vote (50% + 1) has been the rule to amend Ohio’s constitution.
Issue 1 undermines Ohio's popular voting system by mandating 60% voter approval for constitutional amendments. In other words, Issue 1 grants just 40% of voters a stronger say in constitutional amendments than the majority of voters. If you vote for Issue 1, you will be voting to make your vote less valuable.
The Ohio constitution is not broken, and it is not a toy to be played with. Stand with democracy, and vote to protect it. Vote NO on Issue 1.
Sam Morrow, Middlefield
Boldness in the name of climate-friendly transportation
Columbus e-bike incentive is forward-thinking policy. The city must make good on promises of better bike infrastructure and public transit.
E-bikes have completely changed how my family — including our two children — get around for our short daily trips. It is not an exaggeration to say that they’ve changed our lives, giving us more joy as we move through our days.
We bear less of the frustration and anger that so often come with driving, and spend less money on gas and car maintenance. I hope other Columbus residents will seize the exciting opportunity granted by the city’s pilot e-bike incentive program, which follows successful programs in other cities/states.
Our view: 'Inadequate, antiquated or nonexistent.' People deserve better ways to get around
At the same time, some reactions to the program have rightly highlighted the city’s lackluster accommodations for cyclists as well as for pedestrians.
Recent comments from council members are encouraging. They promise movement towards a Columbus where children are safe to walk to school or go trick-or-treating; where we have frequent and dignified public transit; where fewer cars pollute our air and threaten our lives for trips that could be done by bicycle.
City leaders must make good on those promises and be bold in restructuring the city’s priorities away from only the automobile and towards more efficient, economical, healthy, equitable, and climate-friendly transportation.
Lauren Squires, Columbus
This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: What is Schlitz brewing heir Richard Uihlein's connection to Ohio Issue 1
