Over the
next couple of emails, we’re going to do something a little
different.

We’re
going to game out two possible outcomes of Ohio’s November 3
gubernatorial election, looking at what each could mean for gun owners
in the next four years — and potentially much further down the
road.

This is a
descriptive exercise, not a prescriptive one. I’m not telling you how
to vote. After nearly twenty years in politics, I’ve learned that what
politicians have an incentive to do often matters as much as what they
promise to do.

I’m sure
you’ve seen the same.

I’ll add
one note here, his survey arrived late — after early voting in the
primary had begun — and we had to use some political pressure to make
it happen, but his commitments are in writing and can be measured
against what happens in office.

In recent
days, Vivek has also spoken publicly about allowing 18-to-20-year-old
adults to purchase handguns, and at an October 14 Columbus
Metropolitan Club event, he questioned restrictions that treat an
18-year-old differently from a 21-year-old.

For the
sake of this scenario, let’s assume he wins and decides to make those
commitments a governing priority.

In this
situation, the governor can advocate for legislation, work with
lawmakers, and sign bills that reach his desk, but he cannot
personally move a bill out of an Ohio House committee.

This runs into roadblocks very quickly if the current Ohio
House Republican leadership team remains the same.

Republicans have controlled the governor’s office and both
chambers for years. That period produced some significant changes,
including the repeal of the duty to retreat and permitless carry.

It also
produced repeated fights over proposals from Republican governors and
several Republican legislators, including Mike DeWine’s STRONG Ohio
measures and John Kasich’s 2018 gun-control package that were
introduced by their legislative allies.

Additionally, several bills that OGO has prioritized have not
reached the governor’s desk.

It is
also fair to note that the Senate has advanced other firearm-related
measures during McColley’s tenure, including bills involving
suppressors and local gun regulations.

None of
that tells us what a new administration would do, it just describes
where the legislative bottlenecks have been and which relationships a
new governor would have to navigate.

As we’ve
all experienced extensively for the last several years, under
one-party control legislative leaders frequently have little incentive
to force a vote that they think might “rock the boat.” That’s one
major reason why “leadership” turns their backs on the grassroots and
sends critical pro-gun legislation to a “kill committee,” enabling
them to avoid inter-caucus fights and keeping a governor from having
to sign or veto a bill.

That is
one possible explanation for inaction, though there are many more.

If
Ramaswamy decides that these bills are central to his agenda, he could
spend political capital pushing legislative leadership to act. The
combination of written commitments, an active governor, and persistent
grassroots pressure could change the outcome.

To give you a teaser for the next email, there is
another model worth examining: divided government.

In Kansas
in 2021, a Republican legislature overrode Democratic Governor Laura
Kelly’s veto of legislation creating a provisional concealed-carry
license for 18-to-20-year-olds. In North Carolina in 2023, lawmakers
overrode Democratic Governor Roy Cooper’s veto of a bill repealing the
state’s pistol purchase permit requirement.

Those
examples show how a veto can become a legislative rallying point, but
they don’t prove that divided government is better. Arizona is a clear
counterexample: without enough votes to override Governor Katie Hobbs,
Republican lawmakers could not turn certain gun bills into law.

Ramaswamy
has talked a lot, from the earliest parts of his campaign, about
turning the Ohio River Valley into a major engine of economic growth
and increasing Ohio’s population by an estimated 25% in only four
years.

Those are
ambitious goals, and, taken on the presumption that those goals are
the most important, their political consequences, if achieved, are
much harder to forecast.

A growing
Ohio could attract families looking for lower taxes, more opportunity,
and greater personal freedom, which would presumably expand the number
of voters who strongly support the Second Amendment.

But it
could also attract workers and families with very different political
priorities, gradually changing suburban districts and the balance of
power in Columbus.

I’ve
watched this happen in my lifetime, particularly in places like
California, Texas and Georgia.

California used to vote reliably Republican as recently as the
late 1980s, but progressive policies and the importation of millions
of foreigners converted the Golden State into a Democrat castle.

Texas,
with the explosion of tech-sector jobs and companies relocating to
areas like Austin, saw a massive influx of Californians and H-1Bs that
has turned Texas from Red to Purple and possibly blue in this
cycle.

The same
with Georgia and the suburbs around Atlanta.

As you
know, a person’s previous ZIP code doesn’t tell us how that person
votes, but new factories and massive tech/data center campuses don’t
have “we only hire patriots who love our country” check boxes.

What we can say is that major demographic change often
reshapes political landscapes in ways that were catastrophic to the
Americans who live there, and economic growth at the expense of moving
a reliably red state to permanently blue is how a state loses
everything.

With a
candidate who has made extensive written commitments to OGO members on
gun rights; legislative leaders whose past choices are part of the
public record; and several possible paths from campaign promises to
actual laws.

One path
is a governor who uses his office to move bills that have been
stalled. Another is an administration occupied by competing priorities
while those same bills remain in committee. The longer-term effects of
his growth agenda are a separate question, with more than one
plausible answer.

I’m not
picking which path will happen. I’m laying out the political mechanics
so we can watch them clearly.

In the
next email, we’ll examine Scenario Two: Amy Acton wins. We’ll use the
same questions and standards and then examine the difference in terms
of incentives.

Before
November 3, you can review the candidates’ recorded positions in our
2026 ballot guide.

VOTE PRO-GUN on or before November
3rd.

Talk soon,

Chris
Dorr
Executive Director
Ohio Gun Owners