My GUESS is that there were two reasons:
Agri-business (big farms/lobbyists/contributors) were for it.
2) Ohio has LOTS of farmers, and the small farmers want EPA, PETA, SPCA, etc. off their backs on farming.
A Constitutional Amendment, such as Issue 2, removes the ability of Legislators and special interests thereof, of constantly tinkering with the law, certain interests tinkering with the makeup of the Oversight Committees, changing rules, etc.
When it takes a Constitutional Amendment to change the law, we THE PEOPLE get to decide. Same as the State Casino referendum, which WE get to vote on, and not have bureaucrats deciding which Brother-in-law or Donor gets the benefit.
I have a brother who is a small farmer in rural area of the State, and all the farmers around him and himself wanted Issue 2 to pass. They have too many nit-picky rules now, such as having TWO exits in the henhouse in order to call your chickens "free range", etc.
You would be surprised by the number of current senseless rules on farming that the PETA, Humane Society, etc. have put in place to "protect" farm animals.
Strickland was just pandering to votes and special interests, but the bottom-line in my book was to protect small farmers (although large Agri-farmers also will benefit as a result).
Your take on the issue was the same as our friends. To get environmental wacko animal rights nutcases to back down...... or at least to have some control over them from within the state.
It's just the Strickland thing that had me puzzled, and truthfully almost made me vote against it. I'm glad I got clarification before I went to the polls and voted.
The idea of “agri-business” is a joke. Over 95% of Ohio’s farms are family farms. The reason most of these guys are even corporations is just for tax purposes. The farms they call “factory farms” are just the guys who have been more successful.
These anti-farming people are idiots.