A bipartisan pair of Ohio lawmakers defended their bill that would make hate crimes illegal, increasing penalties for assaulting or terrorizing someone based on their race, sex and even political affiliation."Look, as a Black ma n in America, I've been called the N-word a lot in my life more now that I'm a politician that's Black as a Republican than I've ever been in my life," state Rep. Josh Williams (R-Sylvania Township) said.The Toledo-area lawmaker said he is taking his personal experience to try to make Ohio safer.He and state Rep. Dontavius Jarrells are cosponsoring House Bill 306. It would prohibit hate crimes and allow victims to take civil action against the perpetrators, potentially resulting in up to $25,000 in fines. The legislation also includes that a threat of violence could include making a false report, which could be in reference to swatting.The lawmakers say the bill makes sure to protect free speech, since someone can only be charged if a perpetrator makes a direct threat, acts in reckless disregard and has the "apparent ability" to carry out violence. The victim must also be afraid that they are in danger."House Bill 306 fundamentally is about closing loopholes which hateful individuals use to terrorize our communities based off their perceived identities," Williams said. Ohio lawmakers move to classify threats on politicians as hate crimesRELATED: Ohio lawmakers move to classify threats on politicians as hate crimesCurrent Ohio law doesn't have a hate crime statute.The state does have ethnic intimidation, which elevates a crime like menacing from a misdemeanor to a felony if the suspect targets someone based on their "race, color, religion, or national origin."H.B. 306 creates a new provision, protecting race, color, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, age, familial status, military status, disability, the person's position in a labor dispute and political affiliation or position.This bill was a compromise, Jarrells said in an interview when the bill was introduced, but he believes that if someone commits a crime against a member of the LGBTQ+ community, it would fall under the "sex" protection. In his testimony, Williams acknowledged that the bill would apply to sexual orientation.Williams has another bill, H.B. 457, which would increase penalties for politically motivated crimes, including giving prosecutors the ability to seek the death penalty in homicide cases. Ohio Republicans move to allow death penalty for politically-motivated killingsRELATED: Ohio Republicans move to allow death penalty for politically-motivated killingsIn that legislation, the court must consider whether the suspect committed the crime based on the victim's race, religion, elected or appointed position, political affiliation, political association or biological sex." Under current law, the court must also consider if it was motivated based on race, ethnic background, gender, sexual orientation or religion.State Rep. Eric Synenberg (D-Beachwood) questioned both bills."Why are we clearly considering every other group or identity, including our political identities now, but not gender expression, gender identity?" Synenberg asked.Gender isn't applicable here, Williams responded."I don't believe someone that can change something about themselves on a whim, on a daily basis, is constitutionally protected," he said.He continued to say, without data, that there is a "large prevalence" of transgender people committing violence against people because of their beliefs. He referenced the Nashville 2023 school shooter, a transgender man. Williams said he hasn't seen violence based on "sexual identity."Synenberg mentioned that transgender people do face violence. Research from UCLA shows that transgender individuals face four times the amount of violence that cisgender people face. In a report done by the University of Pennsylvania, cisgender individuals make up 99.9% of all mass shooters.Despite Williams only wanting to protect identities that can't be "changed" each day, he supports political affiliations being a special class.Political violenceLast week, a man pleaded guilty to three misdemeanors arising from an alleged road rage incident involving U.S. Congressman Max Miller. Victim or liar? Congressman sued for defamation hours after suspect pleads guilty in road rage caseThe FBI charged a New Albany man in May for sending white powder and a bullet to Attorney General Dave Yost. Along with the threats to the state's top cop, the suspect sent powder and violent messages to dozens of other public officials, like Sec. of State Frank LaRose and Treasurer Robert Sprague.A Dayton man was arrested in July for leaving a threatening voicemail to Congressman Jim Jordan.Over the past two years, Congresswoman Shontel Brown, Yost and several state lawmakers have been "swatted," with individuals falsely reporting serious crimes occurring at their addresses. This hoax has the goal of sending a large police presence, or a SWAT team, to approach an unsuspecting victim.But when a man assassinated the Minnesota Speaker of the House and tried to kill other Democratic representatives in June, more troopers were deployed to monitor the Capitol Square area.House Minority Leader Dani Isaacsohn (D-Cincinnati) is pushing for additional protections, but is frustrated by the timing."Sometimes politicians are only empathetic or sympathetic when it affects them, right?" Isaacsohn said. "We've seen it on issue after issue."State Rep. Brian Stewart (R-Ashville) said he doesnt understand why motive is important in a violent crime. He gave the example of him and another colleague getting punched in the face, but the suspect only targeted him for being a Christian lawmaker and not the other representative thus, Stewart's assault would get more penalties."Why do we care? The offense is the same. Why should the penalty be any different?" Stewart asked Williams.Williams responded that its important for everyone to have equal protection, giving the example that attorneys have privileges that the regular Ohioan doesn't."I'm not gonna stand in front of my constituents as an attorney and say I'm more protected when I'm walking into court to defend murderers than you are walking into your church," Williams said.In the back-and-forth between the two men, Stewart said that they "have been down this experiment with hate crimes legislation," and that things haven't gotten better due to the laws."Doesn't that suggest that these laws do not have the deterrent effect that they are intended to have, and we have a pretty long track record to show that?" Stewart asked.Williams said that he would push back against that and pointed out that hate crimes have long been unaddressed."There hasn't been someone on our side of the caucus that has been in that community to have violence perpetrated against them because of the color of their skin, and luckily, I actually represent that community now," Williams said, noting that some people don't like that he is a part of the GOP. "I can tell you I've seen it."Follow WEWS statehouse reporter Morgan Trau on Twitter and Facebook. ...read more read less