House Bill 548: Fixing Imaginary Problems, Causing Real Ones
October 30, 2024
By: Shane Vaughn
As a populous sometimes-swing state, Ohio is considered to have an outsized influence on national politics. For decades, a presidential candidate taking Ohio meant you could expect to see them walking into the White House that coming January (a trend that was just recently bucked when losing candidate Trump won the state in 2020). The downside? Voters in the Buckeye state are met with roadblock after roadblock when trying to actually put this influence to use.
This is not a new problem. Looking back at 2004’s presidential election, voters in Ohio’s Gambier precinct shockingly waited as long as 11 hours to cast their ballot for either George W. Bush or John Kerry. Even in the 2020 presidential election, voters in the state’s most populous urban centers showed up hours before the polls opened to claim their spot in lines that spanned multiple blocks. Some Ohio voters may wait in similar lines this upcoming election, only to find that their voter registration was purged earlier in the year for supposed “inactivity,” a move that civil rights activists claim targets minority voters.
Amid the build-up to the hotly contested 2024 presidential election, Substitute House Bill 458 (“HB 458”) is signed into law by Governor Mike DeWine. One may assume that, given the previously discussed issues, this bill might be an effort to make the electoral process more accessible. This assumption, however, would be incorrect. The legislature instead decided to place yet more hurdles in the paths of hopeful Ohio voters. The new bill requires one of four accepted photo IDs to be presented at the voting station, ending the long-standing acceptance of alternative ID options such as current utility bills or government checks. Additionally, it shortens the time frame to “cure” faulty provisional ballots, shortens the absentee ballot request window, and eliminates the last day of early voting, among various other restrictions. Activists point out that vulnerable populations like racial minorities, individuals with disabilities, and overseas service members will be disproportionately impacted by the changes.
Ohioans did not accept HB 458’s changes without a fight. The Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless, in conjunction with other civil rights organizations, challenged HB 458’s voting changes in federal district court on the basis that they place “unjustified and discriminatory burdens on the fundamental right to vote,” therefore “violat[ing] the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.” The effort was quickly swatted down, however, as the court determined that the burdens placed upon Ohio voters did not rise to the level of a constitutional violation and granted summary judgment in favor of defendant Secretary of State Frank LaRose.
Although the constitutional challenge to HB 458’s voting restrictions was doomed to fail, the case brought to light the contradicting mentalities of many of the bill’s supporters. The bill was intended to strengthen Ohio’s elections following widespread suspicion of election tampering in 2020. However, proponents of the bill such as Frank LaRose and Mike DeWine previously ensured the public of the security and efficacy of Ohio’s elections before the implementation of HB 458. So, one may ask, why were the changes even needed? Unsubstantiated suspicions of election tampering, which have been repeatedly debunked by state officials, do not warrant the effective disenfranchisement of scores of voters. HB 458 represents a hardline pivot in election policy, and Ohio voters will bear the cost.