Internet Explorer 11 is not supported

For optimal browsing, we recommend Chrome, Firefox or Safari browsers.

Why Did Ohio Democrats Join Republicans Against Gun Control?

Democrats have pushed relentlessly for policies that would reduce surging rates of gun violence in the state, but lawmakers joined conservatives to kill a last-minute gun control proposal.

(TNS) — It was almost 3 a.m. with hours remaining on the last working day of the year, and Ohio lawmakers were getting cranky.

The lame duck legislative session – the period after Election Day but before new lawmakers assume office in January – is traditionally among the most productive and chaotic stretches of the two-year cycle. Despite a rule in the state Constitution limiting bills to a single subject, ideas with next to nothing in common are routinely mashed into single bills and passed at light speed.

Democrats, who control just 35 of 99 seats, had just come off an unexpected win. They banded together with some of the chamber’s most ardent social conservatives to kill a package that combined stripping power from the state school board, a ban on transgender athletes playing women’s sports, and a ban on schools mandating COVID-19 vaccines.

Not much later, Rep. Kyle Koehler, a Springfield Republican, moved to amend another bill that reclassified penalties for animal abuse. His amendment had nothing to do with pets. Rather, it stiffened penalties for convicted felons who later were found guilty of unlawfully possessing a weapon more than once.

Democrats have pushed relentlessly and to no avail for policies that would reduce surging rates of gun violence in Ohio. But at the finale of a two-year legislative session where a Republican-dominated legislature dramatically rolled back gun restrictions in Ohio, Democrats went on to join with a swath of the more conservative wing of the Republican caucus to kill the amendment.

The episode captured the underbelly of lame duck politics: late nights, strange bedfellows, shortened tempers, and policymaking on a dwindling shot clock.

“This came up at 3 a.m.,” said Rep. Thomas West, a Democrat who lamented a lack of Republican outreach or time for meaningful analysis of the idea. “From a Republican party that’s loosening all the gun laws and constantly messaging [for more] guns.”

Where Did The Policy Come From?


Current state law prohibits people under a “disability” – fugitives, people convicted or accused of a violent felony and others – from possessing a weapon. Koehler’s amendment, in broad terms, would lengthen the penalties and broaden a presumption of prison time for previously-convicted violent offenders who are then convicted of possessing a weapon while under a disability for a second or third time. A third weapons under disability conviction would yield a three- to 10-year sentence.

“I think it’s time to realize that when a person will no longer follow the law, listen to anything we write on paper, there’s no new law we can write,” Koehler said in an interview. “We can only stiffen the penalties.”

The idea surfaced after a 2019 mass shooting in Dayton, when a 24-year-old man with no criminal history opened fire at a bar with a rifle he lawfully purchased online. He killed nine people and wounded 17 others. It was one of two mass shootings to rock the nation over a single weekend. Since then, mass shootings have grown increasingly common, and 2021 was the record year for gun deaths in Ohio since the 2000s, according to available state health department data.

Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican, proposed the idea within a limited gun control package that included the enhanced gun penalties but avoided mainstay gun control policies like universal background checks or “red flag” laws.

On the penalties provision, DeWine cites a report from an Ohio State criminal justice researcher who analyzed 36 years of state criminal convictions. The report finds that a small group of violent offenders commits a disproportionate amount of crimes. However, Deanna Wilkinson, who authored the report, said her research makes no policy recommendations and doesn’t evaluate the effects of enhanced gun penalties.

“It has nothing to do with the research,” Wilkinson said of the policy. “That’s not a recommendation the data would have suggested.”

DeWine’s administration stands by the idea. Andy Wilson, the soon-to-be director of the Ohio Department of Public Safety, said in an interview that the policy targets this small group of serial, violent offenders. He noted it leaves judges with discretion to ease sentences, and it doesn’t apply the enhanced penalties to people who are prohibited from carrying weapons due to drug violations or dependence.

“This is narrowly tailored to really incapacitate this small group of violent offenders so they are not in a position to commit violent acts,” he said.

The elements of DeWine’s proposal have gone nowhere. In the meantime, he signed GOP-passed legislation dramatically expanding gun rights in Ohio. He signed a stand your ground law, which removes the legal requirement to seek retreat before responding to a perceived attack with deadly force; he signed permitless carry legislation, which removes training and background check requirements for adults to carry a concealed weapon; and he signed legislation allowing teachers to carry firearms in classrooms after 24 hours of training.

How Did The Amendment Fail?


House Democrats have pushed anti-gun violence measures, but even more modest ideas like safe gun storage requirements go nowhere. The Democratic opposition to Koehler’s late-night amendment emerged when Rep. Juanita Brent, a Cleveland representative who chairs the all- Democratic Ohio Legislative Black Caucus, forced an unsuccessful vote to shelve the idea.

Soon, Cleveland area Democratic Rep. Monique Smith called the bill a “fake, veiled attempt to make it look like we’re doing something about gun violence.” She called the legislation “discriminatory” and lamented the chamber’s repeated failure to take up other gun safety laws.

Rep. Latyna Humphrey, a Columbus Democrat and OLBC member, said if the law isn’t working as is, just adding more penalties won’t help.

“We need to talk about why people are getting guns, how can we prevent people from having guns, and how we can keep our communities safer,” she said.

Rep. Bill Seitz, a longtime Cincinnati Republican, made a last-ditch effort to change minds. He pointed out that Nan Whaley, Dayton’s Democratic mayor at the time of the shooting, called the proposal a good start. (Whaley, through an intermediary, declined to weigh in.)

He called it a “modest step forward,” even if not a complete answer to record levels of gun violence.

The vote was perhaps the most discombobulated of the marathon, 16-hour session. Six Democrats, including ranking House Minority Leader Allison Russo voted yes, though the OLBC voted no. The roll call split the Republican caucus, however, and the amendment failed on a 37-48 vote.

Aftermath


Brent, who threw the Democrats’ first punch at the idea, didn’t respond to a text message. West, the OLBC president before her, voted against the amendment. In an interview Thursday, he expressed ambivalence over his vote.

On the one hand, West said he had some concerns with the policy itself. Black people are often over-enforced and disproportionately penalized within the criminal justice system, he said, and are more likely to live in dangerous areas warranting a need to carry weapons for protection. The amendment would worsen mass incarceration while ignoring a bevy of other gun control ideas.

But his other criticisms stem from politics and context: Why was this idea, if it’s important, only coming up at 3 a.m. on the last day of the year? Why are Republicans, who have drastically loosened Ohio’s gun laws, now championing a narrow idea with a punitive focus? Why didn’t Republicans try to get Democrats on board beforehand?

“Republicans have done nothing but promote guns in our community,” West said. “Instead of policies of behavioral changes, it’s like, let’s put them in jail and throw away the key.”

Democratic Rep. Casey Weinstein, who is white, voted against the amendment, saying in an interview he deferred to the OLBC, who felt Black Ohioans would be targeted by the narrow policy. Rep. Beth Liston, a Columbus Democrat, voted for the proposal but shared some concerns about its racial equity. She said open questions remain as to whether penalties actually deter gun violence, or whether this idea would fuel inequalities in the criminal justice system.

She didn’t think the idea was sufficiently vetted to get enough Democrats on board, but saw it as a good faith effort to reduce gun violence, however limited.

“If people are genuinely working to decrease gun violence, we shouldn’t let the perfect be the enemy of good,” she said. “I definitely think that the current political environment right not is not one that’s supportive of any gun safety legislation.”

Seitz, who voted for the amendment, said in an email that Republicans had no advance warning of Koehler’s move before it happened. But he called it “absolutely amazing” that Democrats voted down a gun control bill. He said the Senate was on board and would have passed the legislation had it made it out of the House. (A Senate spokesman said he couldn’t confirm this.)

“Makes one wonder if they are serious about policy, or only rhetoric,” Seitz said.


©2022 Advance Local Media LLC. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
Special Projects