Ohio Prohibit Re-Submitting Twice Rejected Constitutional Amendments for Six Years Initiative (1915)

Ohio Prohibit Re-Submitting Twice Rejected Constitutional Amendments for Six Years Initiative
Election date November 2, 1915
Topic Ballot measure process and Initiative and referendum process
Status Defeated
Type Initiated constitutional amendment	Origin Citizens

Ohio Prohibit Re-Submitting Twice Rejected Constitutional Amendments for Six Years Initiative was on the ballot as an initiated constitutional amendment in Ohio on November 2, 1915. It was defeated.

A "yes" vote supported prohibiting the submission of any constitutional amendment that has been rejected more than once, unless six years have passed since the last rejection.

A "no" vote opposed this ballot measure, thus continuing to allow constitutional amendments to be submitted regardless of previous voter rejections.

Election results

Ohio Prohibit Re-Submitting Twice Rejected Constitutional Amendments for Six Years Initiative
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		417,384	46.39%
No		482,275	53.61%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Prohibit Re-Submitting Twice Rejected Constitutional Amendments for Six Years Initiative was as follows:

“

Article XVI, Section 4 To limit Elections on Twice Defeated Constitutional Proposals and to prevent the abuse of the Initiative and Referendum.

”

Constitutional changes

See also: Ohio Constitution

The ballot measure would have added the following underlined language to the Ohio Constitution:

No amendment of the constitution shall be submitted to the electors which involves any proposal or part of any proposal which, since Sept. 4, 1912, shall have been rejected more than once by the electors, unless six years shall have elapsed since the last rejection.

Support

Arguments

• Former U.S. President William Howard Taft (R): “The danger of injustice in the operation of the initiative and referendum is in the possibility of changing the fundamental law by a comparatively small minority. … The power of 10 percent to compel the continuous submission from year to year of a Constitutional change gives to that small minority an opportunity to tire the people out and to carry the amendment through the mere inertia of the majority of the electorate and through their natural irrigation at being called upon to vote upon an issue so often decided. … [this amendment] makes less likely the carrying of an amendment by default through the inertia of a disgusted majority."
• Former Gov. Judson Harmon (D): "If we are to make progress with popular government the minority must yield, not forever but for a reasonable time, so that, if the subject be brought up again, actual experience and not mere theory will be available for a decision. Six years would be none too long to wait after one rejection of an amendment. It is certainly not an unreasonable time after two rejections in short succession.”

Opposition

Arguments

• John Voll, President of the Ohio State Federation of Labor: “The amendment is a restriction of the initiative and referendum, narrows the scope of democracy and is not in accordance with the spirit of our new constitution, and is, therefore, inimical to just government.”
• Thomas S. Farrell, Secretary of the Cleveland Federation of Labor: “The amendment is not only undemocratic, but misleading, especially that part of it which provides that any proposal, or any part of any proposal, which has been twice defeated cannot be resubmitted again for six years. It leaves the way open to throw into the realm of uncertainty, and later the courts, any amendment to the constitution which we might propose thru the initiative.”
• Rev. Herbert S. Bigelow, chairperson of the Initiative and Referendum Defense Committee: “[Voters of Ohio] do not have to destroy their own power to make the laws they want when they want them, in order to prevent themselves from imposing upon themselves laws which they know they do not want.”

Path to the ballot

See also: Signature requirements for ballot measures in Ohio

An initiated constitutional amendment is a citizen-initiated ballot measure that amends a state's constitution. Eighteen (18) states allow citizens to initiate constitutional amendments.

In Ohio, the number of signatures required for an initiated constitutional amendment is equal to 10% of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial election. A simple majority vote is required for voter approval.

Ohio also requires initiative sponsors to submit 1,000 signatures with the initial petition application. Ohio has a signature distribution requirement, which requires that signatures be gathered from at least 44 of Ohio's 88 counties. Petitioners must gather signatures equal to a minimum of half the total required percentage of the gubernatorial vote in each of the 44 counties. Petitions are allowed to circulate for an indefinite period of time. Signatures are due 125 days prior to the general election that proponents want the initiative on.

The Constitutional Stability League filed 175, 861 signatures for this ballot initiative. At least 112,922 valid signatures were required in 1915.

The Fulton County Tribune published an article on October 15, 1915, which said, "Records show that practically all circulators of Stability League petitions were connected with liquor business. ... It is common knowledge that Stability League petitions were placed in the saloons of the state and that the liquor element was aiding in their circulation, but the records of the canvassers leaves no doubt that brewers are responsible for the proposal." The Constitutional Stability League issued a statement in response to “the assertion of the Anti-Saloon League that [95%] of the signers of the Stability amendment petitions were saloon-sleepers.” The League said, “There were 178,000 names on these petitions, and there are but 6,000 saloons in the state…”

See also

1915 Measures

• 1915 Measures
• Initiative and referendum process on the ballot
• Ballot measure process on the ballot
• 1915 legislative sessions

Ohio

• Ohio ballot measures
• Ohio ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls

External links

• Cleveland State University Law Library, "Ohio Constitution - Law and History: Table of Proposed Amendments," June 2, 2023