Ohio Abortion Measure Tests Impact of ‘Unborn Child’ on Ballot

Abortion advocates nationwide are focused on red-leaning Ohio, which will show on Nov. 7 which arguments—and ballot wording—resonate with voters.

The measure (Issue 1), seeks to bake reproductive rights into the state constitution and wipe away many of the restrictions imposed in recent years by the Republican-majority legislature. That includes a law, since blocked by a judge, effectively banning abortions after six weeks of pregnancy.

The Nov. 7 election comes after Ohioans in August soundly rejected a measure to make it harder to change the state constitution, which many said was an effort to hamstring the abortion proposal.

Though Ohio voters surveyed in multiple polls expressed support for the proposed amendment, Ohio Northern University found backing declined when its pollsters used the language that will be on the ballot rather than the exact constitutional proposal.

A couple describes their experience with an unviable pregnancy in a television ad by Ohioans United for Reproductive Rights.

Source: AdImpact

The ballots use a summary—approved by the Republican-controlled Ohio Ballot Board, led by Secretary of State and US Senate candidate Frank LaRose (R)—that repeats “unborn child” four times. That phrase doesn’t appear at all in the proposed constitutional language.

“The framing of Issue 1 will be critical to its outcome,” said Robert Alexander, a political science professor at Ohio Northern University who led the polling project. “While we find relatively strong support for abortion rights, the actual ballot language of Issue 1 receives the lowest amount of support among the various ways we asked respondents about the ballot measure.

“Democrats show almost unanimous support for Issue 1 while Republicans are more divided,” he said in a written statement.

Abortion Dominates Supreme Court Race in Pivotal Pennsylvania

Ohio’s outcome could have an impact on activists in other states with restrictive abortion policies where citizens have the ability to put constitutional amendments in front of voters, including Missouri and Oklahoma, said Paula Lantz, a professor of health policy at the University of Michigan and the director of undergraduate programs at the institution’s Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy.

“If citizens can be successful in a state like Ohio, then maybe they can in these other states as well,” Lantz said.

(Subscribe to Ballots & Boundaries to follow voter initiatives, congressional campaign trends, and more)

Last year, in reaction to the US Supreme Court striking down the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, abortion-related measures were on the ballot in six states, and the side favoring access came out ahead in all of them, including Kansas and Kentucky. A state Supreme Court election this year in Wisconsin provided more evidence that it’s an issue that motivates turnout by those who favor abortion rights.

Activists in Florida are working on obtaining signatures to get an abortion-rights measure on that state’s ballot, and efforts to add reproductive rights amendments to state constitutions will be on the 2024 ballots in New York and Maryland.

The anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America said it’s also monitoring potential initiatives in Arizona, Idaho, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and South Dakota.

Outside Money

Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine (R) appears with his wife Fran in an opposition ad, saying “Issue 1 just goes too far.”

“Issue 1 would allow an abortion at any time during a pregnancy and it would deny parents the right to be involved when their daughter is making the most important decision of her life,” DeWine says in the ad placed by opposition group Protect Women Ohio.

The commercial is part of $14.6 million in advertising by opponents of the ballot measure and a $22.8 million broadcast and digital ad campaign by supporters, according to data compiled by AdImpact.

Gov. Mike DeWine (R) and his wife Fran appear in an ad by the group Protect Women Ohio urging voters to reject a proposed abortion rights ballot question.

Source: AdImpact

DeWine also has suggested that Ohio’s abortion law can be revised to be less restrictive, something that would require a change of sentiment in the statehouse.

Both sides of the ballot question debate have been encouraging early voting, and as of Oct. 26, more than 384,000 Ohioans had cast ballots, according to the Secretary of State’s Office. That’s slightly ahead of the pace set at the same point before the August special election, when nearly 355,000 had already voted.

“Times are changing,” said Amy Natoce, a spokeswoman for Protect Women Ohio. “We’re no longer a party that’s encouraging people to wait until Election Day. We know that we need to do what the Democrats have done for years.”

Protect Women Ohio reported taking in more than $9.9 million for the campaign as of Oct. 18, including $6.1 from The Concord Fund and more than $1.4 million from Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America.

The main proponent organization, Ohioans United for Reproductive Rights, reported receiving more than $28 million. Michael Bloomberg, the majority owner of Bloomberg Government’s parent company, gave the group $1 million.

Messaging

On television and social media, the advertisements are testing the kind of warnings that resonate with voters.

Protect Women Ohio’s campaign includes ads that focus on parental rights.

“Under their proposed amendment to the Ohio Constitution, the state shall not interfere with individuals getting abortions or sex changes,” one ad said. “Meaning you could be cut out of the biggest decision of her life.”

One of the spots by Ohioans United for Reproductive Rights highlights the case of a young rape victim who at age 10 traveled to Indiana to get an abortion.

Another features a couple who describe an unviable pregnancy.

“At 18 weeks, doctors told us there was no way she was going to be able to live. An abortion was our only option,” says a woman identified in the commercial as Beth from Columbus. “But the government here in Ohio took that decision away from us. We had to leave the state in order to get the care that I needed because the law in Ohio is broken.”