Democrats have all but assured another statewide issue campaign next November by submitting extra signatures in a petition drive to force a referendum on an election reform law signed by Gov. John Kasich this summer.

Fresh from a major victory, the defeat of Senate Bill 5 (Issue 2 on the Nov. 8 ballot), Democrats and their allies needed about 10,000 more valid signatures to get House Bill 194 on the ballot next year. They filed more than 166,000 extra signatures in a petition drive backed by President Obama’s campaign organization.

The fight over the election reform bill continues an unfortunate pattern for how the Statehouse deals with complicated, partisan issues. As with Senate Bill 5, Republican majorities pushed the election reform bill through the legislature. As with the collective bargaining bill, they went too far, inviting Democrats to take to the streets to gather signatures. (Yet another petition drive is under way, to overturn a congressional redistricting bill also rammed through by Republicans.)

Of most concern to Ohio Democrats, their allies and the Obama campaign are changes, put on hold by the petitioning until voters decide, that would restrict access to the ballot, especially when it comes to casting absentee ballots. …

Ohio’s law on public sector bargaining needed to be revisited. So do the state’s election laws, with a presidential election looming. Instead, Ohioans are getting expensive, bitter issue campaigns.

Akron Beacon Journal

 

Judges should have to approve GPS tracking

Sometimes it takes time for our nation’s laws to catch up with technology.

That’s seems to be the case as the U.S. Supreme Court explores law enforcement’s use of GPS tracking. By placing the small devices on motor vehicles, police can now accurately map wherever a vehicle travels. …

The high court heard arguments recently, and is expected to rule by spring in a case involving nightclub owner Antoine Jones, who has been sentenced to life in prison on a drug conviction.

A federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., threw out the conviction, ruling FBI agents and local police did not have a valid search warrant when they installed a GPS device on Jones’ car and collected travel information over 28 days.

The device helped authorities link Jones to a suburban house used to stash money and drugs. …

The issue for the high court is whether police need a warrant before planting such devices on a car. …

Certainly, police should have use of the emerging technology, including GPS, to do their job as efficiently as possible.

But, if a situation is serious enough to need to watch someone electronically day and night, then a judge should have to approve it.

It stands to reason, if a warrant is too bothersome for police to pursue, then a case most likely isn’t that important in the first place.

The (Findlay) Courier