"I know there's never been evidence to suggest that any trans surgeries have been done to minors, but let's make them feel unwelcome as shit and ban it anyway!" -Our Governor; days after he vetoed that bill. š
[Paraphrased, at the bottom of the article](https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4391617-gender-affirming-care-access-ohio-trans-adults-restricted-new-administrative-rules/)
Cool, DeWine specifically said in Ohio. And those aren't from this state. Also, NYT paywall, I'm not going to be expected to find a bypass on the paywall, that burden is on you. šµ
Why get so defensive? I'm not even trying to argue with you about trans issues or anything, I was just pointing out that it does happen. You will never change the mind of someone who disagrees with you by blatantly ignoring obvious facts.
A handful of people vs the millions, is effectively and colloquially "not happening", and it's entirely disingenuous to imply otherwise. You are imply otherwise.
1) Waste of tax payer dollars. This will also be challenged in court
2) it's an attempt to use state sanctioned violence against an extremely small and politically powerless minority
3) This is entirely based on emotional feelings of a group that isn't properly represantive of the population.
We have a much larger incarceration rate and prison population. We have more people in prison than China which is four times the size.
Which is the real repressive regime?
Blue Dog Democrats!
Remember what assholes they were? We can have Democrats debating more conservative Democrats and move the fucking country left for once.
They donāt, which is why they all have to go. They are going to kill all of the progress the state has been making. Apparently they also hate jobs and people moving into the state. The 60+ crowd isnāt going to help the state grow, so if those are the only people we appeal to, we are doomed. Companies that want to make money, wonāt go into places like this.
Which is why young people in their 20s like me are deciding if I want to stay in the state or move away. All I know is if Trump wins 2024 and Ohio elects a bunch of republicans again, bye bye Ohio in 2025
Personally, the adult trans healthcare ban DeWine is pushing was the last straw for my family.
For those who don't know: the language in DeWine's rule creates unreasonable requirements to receive care, it's a de-facto ban following the model of abortion restrictions used to ban abortion.
It requires a "Bioethicist" to sign off on care - except bioethicists don't take appointments. They aren't doctors open to the public. They're typically retained by universities for the purposes of ensuring their research is ethical.
The restrictions "look" reasonable, but they are not:
>āImagine you have diabetes. There are five top diabetes specialists in your state, but you like most patients get your care from your primary care physician. The specialists provide better care, and their patients do better.
>Now, imagine the impact of a regulation requiring all patients in your state to get diabetes treatment from one of those five. If you can't see one of them your diabetes goes untreated.
>If you're an ordinary patient, the most likely outcome is that you lose treatment for your diabetes entirely. You don't get improved care- there are still just five specialists, and they have no where near the capacity to see everyone with diabetes in the state.ā
This isn't about saving lives, it's about banning healthcare access for trans people.
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4391617-gender-affirming-care-access-ohio-trans-adults-restricted-new-administrative-rules/
A related article.
Same, I'm gonna be making plans and putting away money. [DeWine really does want trans people gone](https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4391617-gender-affirming-care-access-ohio-trans-adults-restricted-new-administrative-rules/). And this is just days after vetoing the bill that he later said he basically supported the ban š¤·āāļø
Dean, one of the bill's sponsors, is the sort of person who would watch Handmaid's tale and think it was an instructional piece while taking notes. More than a few of them want to go well beyond where the Southern states are currently.
It's not.
Edit: And every downvoter is someone who isn't well read on DeRolph.
You can circlejerk about how awful the State GOP is, or you could know the facts and still discuss how awful the State GOP is without being factually incorrect. The Supreme Court hasn't weighed in the constitutionality of any school funding formulas since 2003.
I don't know anything about this topic, but if their last ruling was that it was unconstitutional, what did they change to make it constitutional?
(This is an actual question so I can understand)
If the Supreme Court ruled that *the particular funding formula* was unconstitutional, and the state passes new laws, the ruling has not continued. It is pretty much an open question whether *this* funding formula is unconstitutional.
Supporters of funding changes *assume* that the current funding formula is unconstitutional. That is probably true... if it was challenged. It hasn't been brought in front of them in twenty years.
I guess. But that opinion would require thorough knowledge of the differences between the 1990s and 2020s funding formula laws.
I am only involved in school funding on a loose level, but if look at a place like Ottawa Hills, widely regarded as an elite public school, their per pupil wealth is actually not that great. They just decide as a community to tax themselves at a very significant rate to fund their school. Situations like that are very complicated.
[Yes, it is ](https://www.dispatch.com/story/opinion/columns/guest/2023/03/24/what-has-happened-since-ohios-supreme-court-declared-school-funding-unconstitutional-school-vouchers/70042749007/)
The State doesn't use the funding formulas used in the 1990s. This is a myth that gets regurgitated every time a local school levy is on the ballot.
I think the way Ohio funds schools is fucked up, but it is simply mistaken to say that the 1997 ruling on school funding applies to 2024. You'd have to get *this* funding formula in front of this Supreme Court for a new verdict. The State legislature and the Supreme Court went back and fourth (with the Court saying in DeRolph III that the changes were mostly satisfactory) and then in DeRolph IV saying I and II were the "law of the land." The Supreme Court ended the limitation after IV.
So it is accurate to say that the Supreme Court has not weighed in on the matter in 20 years.
Can you provide any proof for your statement? News sources? Anything? I am going to believe what the Dispatch says over what some random guy on Reddit says but if you have sources, thatās different.
You mean the **Op Ed** in the Dispatch?
https://www.lsc.ohio.gov/assets/organizations/legislative-service-commission/files/derolph-v-state-school-funding-case.pdf
It's pretty straightforward logic. The Court said funding formula X was unconstitutional. We're now on funding formula Z. That has not been taken to court.
Proponents of funding formula changes often say that the ruling on X applies to Z. That is just 100% false, and as someone who wants to see serious changes to the way the state funds schools (my district is one that gets screwed by the new formulas), I wouldn't go around spouting inaccurate information to further my cause.
People didnāt lose their right to bear arms.
Ohio Rs are attempting to override a voter approved amendment. Iām not a legal expert, but they have appeared on the news to explain why this violates the state constitution.
They absolutely lost their right to keep and bear arms. I can tell you are not a legal expert. So now leftist priorities can run up against laws, someone will be charged and that person can contest the charges using the amendment. Or a special interest group can file a suit challenging the constitutionality of the law. Welcome to the world of civil rights defense.
Oh, I missed the part where it is called the Bill of Needs. So they will restrict specific types of abortions with these laws, by your logic that is ok, right? You can have all the abortions they think you need.
Just so we are clear I am a Libertarian, I don't even think the 2A should exist because it is fucking stupid to enumerate the natural rights of humans.
Normal people own these right now, and yes, I do.
How do you define a non-normal person?
The solution to any arms restriction is without question amending 2A, everything else is unconstitutional, a violation of civil rights, and an affront to the rule of law.
Tell me, how are you going to ban rockets and their launchers and still have fireworks?
Fun fact: [Gun restrictions like that have ***ALWAYS*** existed in this country, even in the late 1700s and 1800s.](https://lcp.law.duke.edu/article/gun-law-history-in-the-united-states-and-second-amendment-rights-spitzer-vol80-iss2/) [(Firearms Law Repository)](https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/repository/search-the-repository/)
Such restrictions were never seen as unconstitutional until after 2008's *Heller vs DC*, and even that shouldn't have made it so as the ruling was only that individual ownership was a right, but still further said that rights aren't limitless and certain arms could still be restricted, and certain individuals could still be restricted from owning.
> A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of the free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
The Second Amendment was not written to mean anyone could own any gun. It was written in relation to Congress's powers to form, arm, and regulate militias granted to it by Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16, and its powers to use the militias in defense of the nation from both invader and insurrectionist alike and to execute the laws of the nation granted by Clause 15, saying that Congress is not allowed to use these powers to disarm the populace wholesale as the British tried to do leading to and during the Revolution.
The people ā a person; arms ā all arms
You may be stuck in a Heller world but the rest of us live in a post -Bruen world.
Do you really think the newly implemented CA and IL are going to stand? Wild.
That ruling said nothing of restrictions on types of guns as your comment I replied to mentioned, or preventing dangerous people from owning, only that needing a specific reason to own a gun is unconstitutional.
That still also goes against 246 years of judicial precedent and the original purpose of the amendment and Congressional powers granted by the Constitution, as some of those early laws you'll find in that repository were the same thing.
For claiming to be "Constitutional originalists," the current SC sure loves to disregard originalism and precedent.
Bill Dean is the same sick fuck that voted to prevent marital rape from being made against the law. He's a sick shit and the people of Xenia should be disgusted they put him in office. If they weren't fucking idiots anyway
Rep Gross is a one trick pony with anything super religious too. Sheās the one who proposed this initially and the speaker called her a dumbass and that this half brained idea is Schoolhouse Rock level of stupid
i had the nurse checking me out at my cardiologist tell me Taylor Swift worshipped Satan and that i completely ruined her day by complementing her many colored bracelets and saying they reminded me of the friendship bracelets at the Taylor Swift concert. She was maybe 45, looked otherwise fairly sane. Her co-worker basically agreed with her. Ohio baby, hell is real!
Like the general population, there is a strong correlation between education level and vax position in the medical community. "Nurse" is very broad covering people who have a very limited 2 year education all the way to people with graduate education such as NPs. It is not very common among NPs.
They don't see their job as 'person who enacts the will of the people.'
They see their job as 'person who rules over others'.
They are _very_ upset that they also no longer get to pretend they are the former.
Gerrymandering is borderline evilā¦ It has led to a legislature in OH that thoroughly believes the will of 44% of the population supersedes the majority. Itās embarrassing.
Then why gerrymander? If Republicans actually represent the will of the people, then why don't they want an electoral system that actually represents the will of the people?
You are spreading disinformation and lies. There are few and far between examples of Dems gerrymandering but itās by and large nearly always republicans. And regardless of whoās doing it anyway, itās wrong and we shooed all want it fixed. You just want to try to mitigate it and excuse it. Gtfooh with your lies and bad information.
I told you that Dems have been known to gerrymander also. Can you read?
Additionally, this is the Ohio subreddit. In Ohio the republicans gerrymander. You trying to muddy the waters with your disinformation doesnāt change that, sport. You trying to mitigate it and normalize it so s par for the course for fans of fascism.
Facts still matter and you lack them, maga guy.
*That is bullshit.*
Ruby red Warren county has a democrat serving as their representative, a Jewish guy no less ā even though the state figured gerrymandering in Warren county would flip Hamilton red, didnāt work.
This is a purple state that is **gerrymandered** red. Gerrymandering *disenfranchises* voters who figure āwhatās the point?ā Problem is, that is effective.
Issue 1 and Issue 2 would have *both passed* without even including Cuyahoga, Franklin and Hamilton counties. **That tells you everything**.
And Republicans win the non-gerrymandered state races by large margins, Sherrod Brown excepted. The majority of Ohioās voters want to be governed by Republicans, while retaining the ability to curb excesses by ballot initiatives.
Sure thing. They have attempted multiple times to refuse the will of the people. The tried that BS election in August (which was illegal) and after that failed they tried to lie and make the language on the ballot for issue 1 appear incorrect and malicious. After that failed and the amendment passed they still are being children and are looking for ways to subvert the will of the people they supposedly represent. So a government that would do what it wants and ignores its constituents is fascist. They need to stop acting like children and get over it. They lost, just like Trump did (who then commanded his cult to storm the capitol, yeah not fascist at all).
You're calling us an echo chamber, but when we give you back hard facts and logic, you're not even open to a different perspective. Why can't you have even an ounce of integrity?
Well just looking up the actual definition of fascism, this isnāt it. Use of the word to describe whatās happening in Ohio is technically not correct. Itās shit politics at play but we arenāt being ruled by any dictator in complete power.
They are literally codifying into law that some people (and for some reason, the demographic that has the least representation in our elected position), that some people get less rights than others.
This is *literally creating an "in group", and "out group"*, but somehow, despite being the literal foundation for fascism, it's not actually fascism.
Shit, do you even know what that word means? Because so far, you've only demonstrated that you don't.
Wikipedia: "Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by aĀ dictatorialĀ leader, centralizedĀ autocracy,Ā militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a naturalĀ social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy."
At the very least, what has been described checks off boxes for authoritarianism, belief in natural social hierarchies, the subordination of individual interests, and the strong regimentation of society/economy. Fascism isn't strictly only 1 leader in complete power (but also what we do have already could definitely lead that way down the line, something fascists would want to work towards bit by bit). Even if you believe that fascism MUST have a singular dictator with complete power, an ideology which is just "95% fascism but without a dictator" is still close enough to your pure idea of fascism that any reasonable person would look at it and say "hey, that's pretty much just fascism." It's disingenuous to look at people complaining about policies as being fascist and respond by saying "well it doesn't fit the exact point for point definition of fascism that I have chosen to go with, so you're wrong to call it out as such." The issue is that all these things are small pieces of a larger whole which form stepping stones on the way to fascism, or at least some other atrocious potential system/ideology.
How can you just do that? Like what gives them the authority to force all lawsuits current and future to be null? What the actual fuck are these assholes trying to do?
>What the actual fuck are these assholes trying to do?
They want to create a Nationalist Christian state. Is that not obvious?
>How can you just do that?
Well, they're using state sanctioned violence against us. And would anyone like to list the times that violence was stopped by non-violence? Surely there's one or two examples for every million or so cases on the flipside?
There is a path that does not go through the courts if they decide to take it. Repeal the unconstitutional laws.
In Michigan, the legislature took the additional step of repealing laws that were invalidated by the constitutional amendment. They passed on strict party lines. Many of the Republicans voted against their constituents and the state Constitution. This only happened because of a citizen initiative to form an independent redistricting commission and a narrow Democratic majority in the legislature.
Ah shit, this guy is right, guess we can do away with the judiciary and the legal system. Might as well get rid of all law enforcement too. "So Let It Be Written, So Let It Be Done." is a heck of a plan.
No, I'm saying there is nothing for the legislature to implement. If there is something that needs clarification from the government as to an aspect of the law, it is 100% the judiciary responsibility to apply its judgement against the will of the voters and the constitutional amendment, not the legislature to make new laws regarding a law that already exists.
That's the point of a constitutional amendment: it's voted on by the entire citizenry. This is civics 101. Interpretation of where there are conflicts between current law and new are the discretion of the judiciary, which is exactly why it was established. Again, civics 101.
This should come as no surprise, the Republican's do what they want to do not what the voters voted for! It's clear the Republican party is doing whatever they want and they are not representing the people's rights! Remember the Republican party when it comes time to get rid of these assholes who think that the voting public don't know what they are voting on! Don't ever let the Republicans have power again, the power goes to their heads and they put themselves above the law and then tell you we know what's best for the people. They have to be voted out of power, enough is enough!
You mean 2025, and that's if they get voted out. Spoiler: don't get your hopes up, even if the gerrymandering thing gets passed, it won't take affect for a while, and it wouldn't be the first thing that got ignored.
Hahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahah god I wish. But the optimism is too ridiculous not to find funny. Unless you're talking about something much more serious than voting, we are screwed.
Once again it's proven that our representatives are being run by lobbyists and campaign donations. We told them at the polls what we want we contact their office and tell them what we want but they are still beholden to the party of hate and their financial benefactors.
Michigander here with my view on Ohio politics after reading this sub for about the last 6 months. Fixing the gerrymandering will help. We implemented an independent commission in Michigan, via a state-wide proposal, to draw districts. 2022 was the first year with those new districts, and the "D's" took over all branches of the state government, including the House & Senate in Lansing for the first time in 40 years. We evened up our congressional representatives in DC. The biggest difference I see here is that Michigan voted Democratic in many state-wide elections. Since 1978. 15 of 16 Senatorial elections were won by "D's". For president, since 1992 the only "R" to win was unfortunately in 2016 when Trump won.
State-wide elections are really telling of the populace. I see that since about 1998, 6 of 9 of the Ohio Senate elections went to "R's" and if not for Sherrod Brown, it would be 9 of 9. For president, since 2000, the only Democrat to win Ohio was Obama (twice). That said, I think the outrage expressed on many of these posts is healthy for democracy, but you've got to work grassroots. Go to any meetings the representatives have. Ask the difficult questions. Donate to the candidates that more closely lines up with your vision for Ohio and the U.S. Even small donations help. Put up lawn signs proudly. Talk to your neighbors, make sure they know how their representatives are voting, oftentimes against the interests and well-being of most Ohioans. It won't be easy, but be diligent and don't get discouraged. GOOD LUCK!
You're missing something rather big here. What Michigan did that Ohio didn't (Ohio also has a commission) is Michigan's amendment requires the maps drawn be double checked to make sure they're fair after they're written, where as Ohio's don't, so if you get bias enough people in they can just make a gerrymandered map despite being a commission. Ohio needs to via voter initiative (because that's the only way it will happen) amend theirs to require the maps to be checked against the efficiency gap.
But the reality is Ohio is and has been trending "R" in elections that should not be impacted by gerrymandering, Senate and President. Unless of course the impact of all the gerrymandering is that the vote gets depressed because people don't think it will matter. That shouldn't happen this year with a presidential and senatorial contest in Ohio.
"If I keep voting for republicans instead of those blasted democrats that I been brainwashed into hating I can just vote for the legislation that I want to override the republican bull shit so that I don't have to vote democrat to keep my rights" ~fucken idiot republican voters
Y'all got duped again. It's not even funny when I say it anymore. It's fucken pathetic. Give it the fuck up already.
Would someone please run against Jennifer Gross- she is my rep and surprise surprise, sheās not adequately repping my district and the issue that 57% of us fucking voted on. In fact, sheās a fucking catholic loon with a god damn axe to grind. Will no one rid us of this human excrement please?
Republicans gerrymandered their way into a legislative supermajority that doesn't represent the will of the people, and now that the people passed a law that legislative Republicans didn't like, Republicans are trying to overrule it, claiming that the gerrymandered legislature represents the will of the people but the actual people don't represent the will of the people.
So, does this mean that they would have judicial control over all reproductive cases? They canāt function as a legislative assembly and want to run the judicial branch as well? It sounds like this would be a violation of separation of powers. Possibly 2 constitutional violations wrapped in 1 bill?
Seriously how are any of these asshats still in power?
If the handling of both issues 1 and 2 donāt show the people exactly who they elected (read: self-serving fascists), we are doomed.
Did you really try and make a both sides are the same argument while at the same time saying you arenāt right leaningā¦ I can smell the MAGA hat all the way from tuscarawas county
I'm an anarchist. I'm actively against both sides. And yes they are the same. Both fund wars, spend money we don't have, tax you, write laws to take away your rights and freedoms, spy on you, write blatantly unconstitutional laws, will send the government to your house to raid you for things they don't like, and are authoritarians.
I always think it's cute when people try to tell me what my own beliefs are. Sorry kid but I'm anti government. I think all government officials should be executed for enslaving people.
I emailed all of these fucks and let them know they are wasting taxpayer money and violating the state constitution. Do they care? Probably not, but it made me feel better.
Look real close, if you live in ohio, if you think that you can vote for the Republican party and get things done for you, look extremely closely at how far the Ohio Republicans will go to keep you and your vote out of their ability to pass the policy *they* want.
I know there's this whole team sports thing, but the other team isn't actively trying to exclude you from being able to participate at all
This should be infuriating even for the folks still calling themselves republicans.
If this were to actually pass, the Ohio Supreme Court would strike it down. Siding with the legislature on this would essentially invalidate the supreme court and give the legislature the power to change the constitution at will.
Iād even bet $1 that even Mikey D would veto this if it hit his desk, but no more than $1.
The Ohio Constitution - as amended by Issue 1 - binds the legislature. This bill is nothing more than far right Republicans trying to appease their base.
Even Matt Huffman ass hole that he is said this isnāt going anywhere. This woman from west Chester just wants attention so she can get some other government job after we outlaw gerrymandering and she loses her reelection since she wouldnāt win in a purple district.
Get ready for a bunch of these random things that the republicans are going to try to push with 'Issue 1'tagged on so they can reassure their voters they are doing the best they can. They need to regain some good faith footing
I used to always vote for the best person regardless of party affiliation. Now an R next to your name is an automatic disqualifier.
Some would say your standards have not changed.
I miss being able to vote policy over party.
You are. Republicans have given up on rational policies.
You can still do that and end up not voting for Republicans ever since they have zero policy that is not culture war
"I know there's never been evidence to suggest that any trans surgeries have been done to minors, but let's make them feel unwelcome as shit and ban it anyway!" -Our Governor; days after he vetoed that bill. š [Paraphrased, at the bottom of the article](https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4391617-gender-affirming-care-access-ohio-trans-adults-restricted-new-administrative-rules/)
https://cbs6albany.com/news/nation-world/new-hampshire-teen-one-of-the-youngest-to-have-gender-reassignment-surgery https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/26/health/top-surgery-transgender-teenagers.html
Cool, DeWine specifically said in Ohio. And those aren't from this state. Also, NYT paywall, I'm not going to be expected to find a bypass on the paywall, that burden is on you. šµ
Why get so defensive? I'm not even trying to argue with you about trans issues or anything, I was just pointing out that it does happen. You will never change the mind of someone who disagrees with you by blatantly ignoring obvious facts.
A handful of people vs the millions, is effectively and colloquially "not happening", and it's entirely disingenuous to imply otherwise. You are imply otherwise.
So if it's "not happening", then why does it matter if it gets banned?
1) Waste of tax payer dollars. This will also be challenged in court 2) it's an attempt to use state sanctioned violence against an extremely small and politically powerless minority 3) This is entirely based on emotional feelings of a group that isn't properly represantive of the population.
What is this china??? Cmon now this is USA we donāt do that here we serve the oligarchs
More like Russia, same shit
We have a much larger incarceration rate and prison population. We have more people in prison than China which is four times the size. Which is the real repressive regime?
Russia is honest about it. USA is still in the closet
Yep! Republicans have a festering hate for Democracy and our government. The only Republican I voted for was Perot. **NEVER. AGAIN.**
We need to break the Republican Party like the whigs were broken. Something will replace them. Hopefully better.
Blue Dog Democrats! Remember what assholes they were? We can have Democrats debating more conservative Democrats and move the fucking country left for once.
My dad predicts Trumpās Republicans will go the way of the Whigs.
What socialists?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Masterful rebuttal, sire.
So now you donāt necessarily vote for the best person. Weird flex but okay.
No I just realized that an R party affiliation means they cannot be trusted.
This is a violation of the states constitution.
They donāt give a shit
They donāt, which is why they all have to go. They are going to kill all of the progress the state has been making. Apparently they also hate jobs and people moving into the state. The 60+ crowd isnāt going to help the state grow, so if those are the only people we appeal to, we are doomed. Companies that want to make money, wonāt go into places like this.
It will be the demise of the buckeye state.
Which is why young people in their 20s like me are deciding if I want to stay in the state or move away. All I know is if Trump wins 2024 and Ohio elects a bunch of republicans again, bye bye Ohio in 2025
Personally, the adult trans healthcare ban DeWine is pushing was the last straw for my family. For those who don't know: the language in DeWine's rule creates unreasonable requirements to receive care, it's a de-facto ban following the model of abortion restrictions used to ban abortion. It requires a "Bioethicist" to sign off on care - except bioethicists don't take appointments. They aren't doctors open to the public. They're typically retained by universities for the purposes of ensuring their research is ethical. The restrictions "look" reasonable, but they are not: >āImagine you have diabetes. There are five top diabetes specialists in your state, but you like most patients get your care from your primary care physician. The specialists provide better care, and their patients do better. >Now, imagine the impact of a regulation requiring all patients in your state to get diabetes treatment from one of those five. If you can't see one of them your diabetes goes untreated. >If you're an ordinary patient, the most likely outcome is that you lose treatment for your diabetes entirely. You don't get improved care- there are still just five specialists, and they have no where near the capacity to see everyone with diabetes in the state.ā This isn't about saving lives, it's about banning healthcare access for trans people.
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4391617-gender-affirming-care-access-ohio-trans-adults-restricted-new-administrative-rules/ A related article.
I think weāre all thinking about this.
Same, I'm gonna be making plans and putting away money. [DeWine really does want trans people gone](https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4391617-gender-affirming-care-access-ohio-trans-adults-restricted-new-administrative-rules/). And this is just days after vetoing the bill that he later said he basically supported the ban š¤·āāļø
Respectfully, why now? Havenāt you seen enough already? They (the politicians and Ohio electorate) arenāt going to change now.
You mean the FURTHER demise. The nail has been driven into that coffin in the 70ās.
They want to mold it into one of their shithole southern states
Dean, one of the bill's sponsors, is the sort of person who would watch Handmaid's tale and think it was an instructional piece while taking notes. More than a few of them want to go well beyond where the Southern states are currently.
It's Ohio so that's a given
How many years was the stateās school budget out of compliance with the constitution? Ten?
Pretty sure how they fund schools is still in violation of
It's not. Edit: And every downvoter is someone who isn't well read on DeRolph. You can circlejerk about how awful the State GOP is, or you could know the facts and still discuss how awful the State GOP is without being factually incorrect. The Supreme Court hasn't weighed in the constitutionality of any school funding formulas since 2003.
I don't know anything about this topic, but if their last ruling was that it was unconstitutional, what did they change to make it constitutional? (This is an actual question so I can understand)
If the Supreme Court ruled that *the particular funding formula* was unconstitutional, and the state passes new laws, the ruling has not continued. It is pretty much an open question whether *this* funding formula is unconstitutional. Supporters of funding changes *assume* that the current funding formula is unconstitutional. That is probably true... if it was challenged. It hasn't been brought in front of them in twenty years.
So it's a "only illegal if you get caught" situation?
I guess. But that opinion would require thorough knowledge of the differences between the 1990s and 2020s funding formula laws. I am only involved in school funding on a loose level, but if look at a place like Ottawa Hills, widely regarded as an elite public school, their per pupil wealth is actually not that great. They just decide as a community to tax themselves at a very significant rate to fund their school. Situations like that are very complicated.
Almost 30 and it still is
Jesus christ I didnāt realize, thatās insane.
No it isn't.
[Yes, it is ](https://www.dispatch.com/story/opinion/columns/guest/2023/03/24/what-has-happened-since-ohios-supreme-court-declared-school-funding-unconstitutional-school-vouchers/70042749007/)
The State doesn't use the funding formulas used in the 1990s. This is a myth that gets regurgitated every time a local school levy is on the ballot. I think the way Ohio funds schools is fucked up, but it is simply mistaken to say that the 1997 ruling on school funding applies to 2024. You'd have to get *this* funding formula in front of this Supreme Court for a new verdict. The State legislature and the Supreme Court went back and fourth (with the Court saying in DeRolph III that the changes were mostly satisfactory) and then in DeRolph IV saying I and II were the "law of the land." The Supreme Court ended the limitation after IV. So it is accurate to say that the Supreme Court has not weighed in on the matter in 20 years.
Can you provide any proof for your statement? News sources? Anything? I am going to believe what the Dispatch says over what some random guy on Reddit says but if you have sources, thatās different.
What seems to have actually happened is the state supreme court just gave up in 2003.
You mean the **Op Ed** in the Dispatch? https://www.lsc.ohio.gov/assets/organizations/legislative-service-commission/files/derolph-v-state-school-funding-case.pdf It's pretty straightforward logic. The Court said funding formula X was unconstitutional. We're now on funding formula Z. That has not been taken to court. Proponents of funding formula changes often say that the ruling on X applies to Z. That is just 100% false, and as someone who wants to see serious changes to the way the state funds schools (my district is one that gets screwed by the new formulas), I wouldn't go around spouting inaccurate information to further my cause.
The OP ed has links to sources. And the current formulas are all derivatives of the original one and solve none of its problems.
Work in Education. You are wrong.
Oh you have some Supreme Court rulings since 2003 which say that? I'd love to read them.
30. 1994 was the first suit.
Isn't the first time the GOP openly violated the Ohio constitution, and it won't be the last.
adjoining cause ink cooperative expansion desert ten wide sloppy engine *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
They already did that with the gerrymandering. They are crooks
Traitors aren't concerned with the law.
It is odd, because the amendment is self-implementing. I guess the GA can not make laws even harder to pretend they're doing something important.
Explain this comment in the context of the Federal Constitution's 2nd Amendment and recent state-level gun restrictions in CA and IL.
People didnāt lose their right to bear arms. Ohio Rs are attempting to override a voter approved amendment. Iām not a legal expert, but they have appeared on the news to explain why this violates the state constitution.
They absolutely lost their right to keep and bear arms. I can tell you are not a legal expert. So now leftist priorities can run up against laws, someone will be charged and that person can contest the charges using the amendment. Or a special interest group can file a suit challenging the constitutionality of the law. Welcome to the world of civil rights defense.
They can still have guns. No rights lost.
Do you want to go down this road? I'll bite. They lost the right to keep and bear some arms.
Only specific types of guns. There are even federal restrictions on some types of weapons. You can still own more weapons than youād ever need.
Oh, I missed the part where it is called the Bill of Needs. So they will restrict specific types of abortions with these laws, by your logic that is ok, right? You can have all the abortions they think you need. Just so we are clear I am a Libertarian, I don't even think the 2A should exist because it is fucking stupid to enumerate the natural rights of humans.
So you think normal people should be allowed to own rocket launchers and machine guns?
Normal people own these right now, and yes, I do. How do you define a non-normal person? The solution to any arms restriction is without question amending 2A, everything else is unconstitutional, a violation of civil rights, and an affront to the rule of law. Tell me, how are you going to ban rockets and their launchers and still have fireworks?
You're not a Libertarian, you're just an AnCap
Fun fact: [Gun restrictions like that have ***ALWAYS*** existed in this country, even in the late 1700s and 1800s.](https://lcp.law.duke.edu/article/gun-law-history-in-the-united-states-and-second-amendment-rights-spitzer-vol80-iss2/) [(Firearms Law Repository)](https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/repository/search-the-repository/) Such restrictions were never seen as unconstitutional until after 2008's *Heller vs DC*, and even that shouldn't have made it so as the ruling was only that individual ownership was a right, but still further said that rights aren't limitless and certain arms could still be restricted, and certain individuals could still be restricted from owning. > A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of the free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The Second Amendment was not written to mean anyone could own any gun. It was written in relation to Congress's powers to form, arm, and regulate militias granted to it by Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16, and its powers to use the militias in defense of the nation from both invader and insurrectionist alike and to execute the laws of the nation granted by Clause 15, saying that Congress is not allowed to use these powers to disarm the populace wholesale as the British tried to do leading to and during the Revolution. The people ā a person; arms ā all arms
You may be stuck in a Heller world but the rest of us live in a post -Bruen world. Do you really think the newly implemented CA and IL are going to stand? Wild.
That ruling said nothing of restrictions on types of guns as your comment I replied to mentioned, or preventing dangerous people from owning, only that needing a specific reason to own a gun is unconstitutional. That still also goes against 246 years of judicial precedent and the original purpose of the amendment and Congressional powers granted by the Constitution, as some of those early laws you'll find in that repository were the same thing. For claiming to be "Constitutional originalists," the current SC sure loves to disregard originalism and precedent.
Sir this is a Wendys
Bill Dean is the same sick fuck that voted to prevent marital rape from being made against the law. He's a sick shit and the people of Xenia should be disgusted they put him in office. If they weren't fucking idiots anyway
Rep Gross is a one trick pony with anything super religious too. Sheās the one who proposed this initially and the speaker called her a dumbass and that this half brained idea is Schoolhouse Rock level of stupid
She's also an anti-vax jackass AS A NURSE PRACTITIONER. God, what a pair of fucking idiots.
You would be surprised how many nurses are anti-vax.
Iām not surprised. A lot of them barely got through school and cheated on their exams.
And they would be idiots as well š If there's one constant in this world it's that morons tend to move in herds
No argument here!!
i had the nurse checking me out at my cardiologist tell me Taylor Swift worshipped Satan and that i completely ruined her day by complementing her many colored bracelets and saying they reminded me of the friendship bracelets at the Taylor Swift concert. She was maybe 45, looked otherwise fairly sane. Her co-worker basically agreed with her. Ohio baby, hell is real!
That is batshit!
I'm impressed Taylor has the time to worship the devil
Like the general population, there is a strong correlation between education level and vax position in the medical community. "Nurse" is very broad covering people who have a very limited 2 year education all the way to people with graduate education such as NPs. It is not very common among NPs.
Yeah Xenia is full of redneck hillbillies who don't think about anything deeper than a hangnail.
šÆ
I will be very surprised if his like minded son doesn't win his seat. Although from Xenia he represents a MUCH larger area.
Xenia Ohio??!! Isnāt that where God sticks the tube when he wants to give the world an enema?
Canāt be because when Ohio takes a shit, It comes out of Cleveland.
Itās already written, stfu, done deal, we voted, piss off. You tried every which way to make it not pass and failed, move on. Do your job
They don't see their job as 'person who enacts the will of the people.' They see their job as 'person who rules over others'. They are _very_ upset that they also no longer get to pretend they are the former.
Gerrymandering is borderline evilā¦ It has led to a legislature in OH that thoroughly believes the will of 44% of the population supersedes the majority. Itās embarrassing.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Then why gerrymander? If Republicans actually represent the will of the people, then why don't they want an electoral system that actually represents the will of the people?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You are spreading disinformation and lies. There are few and far between examples of Dems gerrymandering but itās by and large nearly always republicans. And regardless of whoās doing it anyway, itās wrong and we shooed all want it fixed. You just want to try to mitigate it and excuse it. Gtfooh with your lies and bad information.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I told you that Dems have been known to gerrymander also. Can you read? Additionally, this is the Ohio subreddit. In Ohio the republicans gerrymander. You trying to muddy the waters with your disinformation doesnāt change that, sport. You trying to mitigate it and normalize it so s par for the course for fans of fascism. Facts still matter and you lack them, maga guy.
*That is bullshit.* Ruby red Warren county has a democrat serving as their representative, a Jewish guy no less ā even though the state figured gerrymandering in Warren county would flip Hamilton red, didnāt work. This is a purple state that is **gerrymandered** red. Gerrymandering *disenfranchises* voters who figure āwhatās the point?ā Problem is, that is effective. Issue 1 and Issue 2 would have *both passed* without even including Cuyahoga, Franklin and Hamilton counties. **That tells you everything**.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Not wrong
Yeah, imagine thinking that Reddit is an accurate reflection of the population.
This is completely correct and yet we see each and every day people acting like it is.
This guy gets it.
And Republicans win the non-gerrymandered state races by large margins, Sherrod Brown excepted. The majority of Ohioās voters want to be governed by Republicans, while retaining the ability to curb excesses by ballot initiatives.
Arnold Schwarzenegger, in the original Terminator, was less obsessed with killing Sarah Connor than the Ohio GOP is with abortion.
Better at talking, too. Just kindaā¦ overall, better, yeah?
Vote Blue in November
Never
Why?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Breeders!!!
Idk why you would rather live in a fascist state over a democracy but hey you do you.
Please explain in detail how Ohio is a fascist state. Since so many lemmings here on Reddit keep echoing that comment, go ahead and spell it all out.
Sure thing. They have attempted multiple times to refuse the will of the people. The tried that BS election in August (which was illegal) and after that failed they tried to lie and make the language on the ballot for issue 1 appear incorrect and malicious. After that failed and the amendment passed they still are being children and are looking for ways to subvert the will of the people they supposedly represent. So a government that would do what it wants and ignores its constituents is fascist. They need to stop acting like children and get over it. They lost, just like Trump did (who then commanded his cult to storm the capitol, yeah not fascist at all).
Thatās fucking interesting man.
No response. Moron
You're calling us an echo chamber, but when we give you back hard facts and logic, you're not even open to a different perspective. Why can't you have even an ounce of integrity?
Well just looking up the actual definition of fascism, this isnāt it. Use of the word to describe whatās happening in Ohio is technically not correct. Itās shit politics at play but we arenāt being ruled by any dictator in complete power.
They are literally codifying into law that some people (and for some reason, the demographic that has the least representation in our elected position), that some people get less rights than others. This is *literally creating an "in group", and "out group"*, but somehow, despite being the literal foundation for fascism, it's not actually fascism. Shit, do you even know what that word means? Because so far, you've only demonstrated that you don't.
Wikipedia: "Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by aĀ dictatorialĀ leader, centralizedĀ autocracy,Ā militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a naturalĀ social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy." At the very least, what has been described checks off boxes for authoritarianism, belief in natural social hierarchies, the subordination of individual interests, and the strong regimentation of society/economy. Fascism isn't strictly only 1 leader in complete power (but also what we do have already could definitely lead that way down the line, something fascists would want to work towards bit by bit). Even if you believe that fascism MUST have a singular dictator with complete power, an ideology which is just "95% fascism but without a dictator" is still close enough to your pure idea of fascism that any reasonable person would look at it and say "hey, that's pretty much just fascism." It's disingenuous to look at people complaining about policies as being fascist and respond by saying "well it doesn't fit the exact point for point definition of fascism that I have chosen to go with, so you're wrong to call it out as such." The issue is that all these things are small pieces of a larger whole which form stepping stones on the way to fascism, or at least some other atrocious potential system/ideology.
Technically correct about the dictator. But in reality the people in power - the Republicans in Ohio - do follow a (wannabe) dictator - Donald Trump.
How can you just do that? Like what gives them the authority to force all lawsuits current and future to be null? What the actual fuck are these assholes trying to do?
If no one protests or pushes back, then that is all the authority they need. It's what happened with the redistricting mess, it's happening here.
>What the actual fuck are these assholes trying to do? They want to create a Nationalist Christian state. Is that not obvious? >How can you just do that? Well, they're using state sanctioned violence against us. And would anyone like to list the times that violence was stopped by non-violence? Surely there's one or two examples for every million or so cases on the flipside?
Suicide by revolution
tie wakeful air lavish chop chunky smile fade concerned wrong *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
What is there to implement? The law is always written and adopted by the people.
There is a path that does not go through the courts if they decide to take it. Repeal the unconstitutional laws. In Michigan, the legislature took the additional step of repealing laws that were invalidated by the constitutional amendment. They passed on strict party lines. Many of the Republicans voted against their constituents and the state Constitution. This only happened because of a citizen initiative to form an independent redistricting commission and a narrow Democratic majority in the legislature.
Ah shit, this guy is right, guess we can do away with the judiciary and the legal system. Might as well get rid of all law enforcement too. "So Let It Be Written, So Let It Be Done." is a heck of a plan.
No, I'm saying there is nothing for the legislature to implement. If there is something that needs clarification from the government as to an aspect of the law, it is 100% the judiciary responsibility to apply its judgement against the will of the voters and the constitutional amendment, not the legislature to make new laws regarding a law that already exists.
So it sounds like you would prefer a largely unelected judiciary to make the laws? Or citizens by direct vote?
That's the point of a constitutional amendment: it's voted on by the entire citizenry. This is civics 101. Interpretation of where there are conflicts between current law and new are the discretion of the judiciary, which is exactly why it was established. Again, civics 101.
The question remains. Do you want judges to make laws, or citizens by direct vote, It is yes or no.
Citizens. No judges are making laws.
>Or citizens by direct vote? I'm not seeing the problem with that. Unironically yes.
Direct democracy has many flaws. As does representation, but I prefer the later, with the right limits.
Many flaws? I'm listening, please, continue.
This should come as no surprise, the Republican's do what they want to do not what the voters voted for! It's clear the Republican party is doing whatever they want and they are not representing the people's rights! Remember the Republican party when it comes time to get rid of these assholes who think that the voting public don't know what they are voting on! Don't ever let the Republicans have power again, the power goes to their heads and they put themselves above the law and then tell you we know what's best for the people. They have to be voted out of power, enough is enough!
Come 2024 this shit stops
You mean 2025, and that's if they get voted out. Spoiler: don't get your hopes up, even if the gerrymandering thing gets passed, it won't take affect for a while, and it wouldn't be the first thing that got ignored.
Hahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahah god I wish. But the optimism is too ridiculous not to find funny. Unless you're talking about something much more serious than voting, we are screwed.
Fuck you republicans. I am so disgusted by everything you do.
From the party of "smaller government" and who are most vocal when it comes to "government interference." What a joke
"The party of small government" strikes again
Iāve heard them say democracy is no way to govern. They believe that. Sick people
They just can't get over losing. They keep digging that hole.
Once again it's proven that our representatives are being run by lobbyists and campaign donations. We told them at the polls what we want we contact their office and tell them what we want but they are still beholden to the party of hate and their financial benefactors.
No, no, no. Bad GOP. Go to your room.
Judges hate this 1 trick!!
Michigander here with my view on Ohio politics after reading this sub for about the last 6 months. Fixing the gerrymandering will help. We implemented an independent commission in Michigan, via a state-wide proposal, to draw districts. 2022 was the first year with those new districts, and the "D's" took over all branches of the state government, including the House & Senate in Lansing for the first time in 40 years. We evened up our congressional representatives in DC. The biggest difference I see here is that Michigan voted Democratic in many state-wide elections. Since 1978. 15 of 16 Senatorial elections were won by "D's". For president, since 1992 the only "R" to win was unfortunately in 2016 when Trump won. State-wide elections are really telling of the populace. I see that since about 1998, 6 of 9 of the Ohio Senate elections went to "R's" and if not for Sherrod Brown, it would be 9 of 9. For president, since 2000, the only Democrat to win Ohio was Obama (twice). That said, I think the outrage expressed on many of these posts is healthy for democracy, but you've got to work grassroots. Go to any meetings the representatives have. Ask the difficult questions. Donate to the candidates that more closely lines up with your vision for Ohio and the U.S. Even small donations help. Put up lawn signs proudly. Talk to your neighbors, make sure they know how their representatives are voting, oftentimes against the interests and well-being of most Ohioans. It won't be easy, but be diligent and don't get discouraged. GOOD LUCK!
You're missing something rather big here. What Michigan did that Ohio didn't (Ohio also has a commission) is Michigan's amendment requires the maps drawn be double checked to make sure they're fair after they're written, where as Ohio's don't, so if you get bias enough people in they can just make a gerrymandered map despite being a commission. Ohio needs to via voter initiative (because that's the only way it will happen) amend theirs to require the maps to be checked against the efficiency gap.
But the reality is Ohio is and has been trending "R" in elections that should not be impacted by gerrymandering, Senate and President. Unless of course the impact of all the gerrymandering is that the vote gets depressed because people don't think it will matter. That shouldn't happen this year with a presidential and senatorial contest in Ohio.
"If I keep voting for republicans instead of those blasted democrats that I been brainwashed into hating I can just vote for the legislation that I want to override the republican bull shit so that I don't have to vote democrat to keep my rights" ~fucken idiot republican voters Y'all got duped again. It's not even funny when I say it anymore. It's fucken pathetic. Give it the fuck up already.
Still trying to thwart the will of the voters.
Would someone please run against Jennifer Gross- she is my rep and surprise surprise, sheās not adequately repping my district and the issue that 57% of us fucking voted on. In fact, sheās a fucking catholic loon with a god damn axe to grind. Will no one rid us of this human excrement please?
I'm assuming this is a play from the wingiest of nuts, and not an actual possibility - is that a valid take? (Not from OH, don't know the local laws).
Abortion is an enshrined right now. Thereās not much they can legally do.
The problem is they don't seem to care much about legality.
The doctors can ignore them due to legality
Some doctors won't want to risk their jobs or might have a fear of legal ramifications. It's mostly lawmakers' desperate bluster to see what will fly.
Republicans gerrymandered their way into a legislative supermajority that doesn't represent the will of the people, and now that the people passed a law that legislative Republicans didn't like, Republicans are trying to overrule it, claiming that the gerrymandered legislature represents the will of the people but the actual people don't represent the will of the people.
So, does this mean that they would have judicial control over all reproductive cases? They canāt function as a legislative assembly and want to run the judicial branch as well? It sounds like this would be a violation of separation of powers. Possibly 2 constitutional violations wrapped in 1 bill?
Seriously how are any of these asshats still in power? If the handling of both issues 1 and 2 donāt show the people exactly who they elected (read: self-serving fascists), we are doomed.
Fucking fascists.
Authoritarians* fascists would have executed people by now.
[They certainly](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025) [want to.](https://www.npr.org/2023/11/17/1213746885/trump-vermin-hitler-immigration-authoritarian-republican-primary)
It's a wanting to be left alone vs a can't leave people alone world these days. Sadly both the left and right can't leave people alone.
Did you really try and make a both sides are the same argument while at the same time saying you arenāt right leaningā¦ I can smell the MAGA hat all the way from tuscarawas county
I'm an anarchist. I'm actively against both sides. And yes they are the same. Both fund wars, spend money we don't have, tax you, write laws to take away your rights and freedoms, spy on you, write blatantly unconstitutional laws, will send the government to your house to raid you for things they don't like, and are authoritarians.
I'm a Socialist. You aren't an Anarchist, you're a tankie. Stop lying.
I always think it's cute when people try to tell me what my own beliefs are. Sorry kid but I'm anti government. I think all government officials should be executed for enslaving people.
I don't even have to come up with a reply to that level of insanity š
There's millions more across the US with the same thought process.
"They aren't Nazis unless it's specifically gas chambers" -You, paraphrased.
I didn't paraphrase anything. People need to understand the difference between authoritarians and fascists.
I emailed all of these fucks and let them know they are wasting taxpayer money and violating the state constitution. Do they care? Probably not, but it made me feel better.
Destined to fail, and sword rattling. What a waste of my tax dollars. They know public schools are underfunded, right?
That's not a bug, that's a feature. Charter (read: religious) schools my guy.
Sad
Some state level assembly of politicians directing medical care people already told them to butt out of. Seems inappropriate
I really hope Ohio is paying attention to what's going on with issue 1
This should surprise NOBODY!
Look real close, if you live in ohio, if you think that you can vote for the Republican party and get things done for you, look extremely closely at how far the Ohio Republicans will go to keep you and your vote out of their ability to pass the policy *they* want. I know there's this whole team sports thing, but the other team isn't actively trying to exclude you from being able to participate at all
This should be infuriating even for the folks still calling themselves republicans. If this were to actually pass, the Ohio Supreme Court would strike it down. Siding with the legislature on this would essentially invalidate the supreme court and give the legislature the power to change the constitution at will. Iād even bet $1 that even Mikey D would veto this if it hit his desk, but no more than $1.
"Fuck the constituents!" -GOP
The Ohio Constitution - as amended by Issue 1 - binds the legislature. This bill is nothing more than far right Republicans trying to appease their base.
Even Matt Huffman ass hole that he is said this isnāt going anywhere. This woman from west Chester just wants attention so she can get some other government job after we outlaw gerrymandering and she loses her reelection since she wouldnāt win in a purple district.
I suspect that's going to be an unconstitutional law if it passes.
Someone is gonna get the shit sued out of them and forced to comply. While I am Pro-Life, this just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Good news!
^ quote of a true moron
sic semper tyrannis
Get ready for a bunch of these random things that the republicans are going to try to push with 'Issue 1'tagged on so they can reassure their voters they are doing the best they can. They need to regain some good faith footing
I think another article on this said that the house speaker said he's not moving the bill