Ohio Issue 1, the Marriage Amendment (2004)
|Ohio Issue 1 (2004)|
Text of measure
The language that appeared on the ballot:
(Proposed by Initiative Petition)
Be it Resolved by the People of the State of Ohio:
That the Constitution of the State of Ohio be amended by adopting a section to be designated as Section 11 of Article XV thereof, to read as follows:
Section 11. Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this state and its political subdivisions. This state and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage.
Shall the proposed amendment be adopted?
Arguments in favor
The following reasons were given in support of Issue 1 by the Ohio Campaign to Protect Marriage:
Vote YES on Issue 1 to preserve in Ohio law the universal, historic institution of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and to protect marriage against those who would alter and undermine it.
WHAT ISSUE 1 DOES:
WHAT ISSUE 1 DOES NOT DO:
The wisdom of the ages tells us that marriage between one man and one woman is critical to the well being of our children and to the maintenance of the fundamental social institution of the family. Please vote to preserve marriage on November 2, 2004.
The official ballot book arguments in favor of Issue 1 were signed by Reverend K.Z. Smith, Lori Viars, and Phil Burress.
Two committees supported the amendment, the Ohio Campaign to Protect Marriage and the Traditional Marriage Crusade. The first committee spent $1,194,808, while the latter spent less than $10,000.
The principal donors to the Ohio Campaign to Protect Marriage was a group called "Citizens for Community Values," which gave $1.182 million. The size of the next largest contribution was $2,000.
The following reasons were given in opposition of Issue 1 by Ohioans Protecting the Constitution:
|“|| It Hurts Families.
If passed, Issue 1 will eliminate rights, benefits and protections for all unmarried couples in Ohio. Claims that it merely restates Ohio’s long-standing definition of marriage are untrue. Even Defense of Marriage Act author State Representative Bill Seitz said the amendment is poorly written and too ambiguous. Governor Taft and Attorney General Petro say it goes too far.
If this amendment passes, even an unmarried person’s right to leave property to a partner could not be recognized by Ohio courts.
It Hurts Ohio’s Economy.
The article concluded the editorial by saying...
The ballot book arguments opposing Issue 2 were written by Alan Melamed and Mary Jo Hudson.
The committee opposing the amendment was called Ohioans Protecting the Constitution, or Ohioans for Fairness. The largest donors to this committee, which spent $942,421 altogether, were:
- Human Rights Campaign, $384,145.
- David Maltz, $101,383.
- Bruce Bastian, $25,000.
- Nationwide Mutual Insurance, $20,000.
- Gerald Springer, $20,000.
- Ohio 2004 ballot measures
- 2004 ballot measures
- List of Ohio ballot measures
- List of ballot measures by year
- List of ballot measures by state
- ↑ Ohio Secretary of State, "2004 Official Election Results," accessed July 29, 2013
- ↑ Ohio Secretary of State, "A History of Statewide Issue Votes in Ohio," accessed July 29, 2013
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Ohio Issues Report, "State Issues Ballot Information for the November 2, 2004 General Election," accessed July 29, 2013
- ↑ Followthemoney.org, "Donors to Ohio Campaign to Protect Marriage," accessed July 29, 2013
- ↑ Followthemoney.org, "Donors to Ohioans Protecting the Constitution," accessed July 29, 2013