To enact section 122.1712 of the Revised Code to create the Ohio Israel Trade and Innovation Partnership.
HB188 would create the Ohio Israel Trade and Innovation Partnership within state law and direct it to study ways to expand trade, investment, business and academic exchanges, policy coordination, and mutual economic support between Ohio and Israel. The partnership would also examine opportunities in specific industries, emerging technologies, innovation clusters, and possible multilateral partnerships involving Israel and other nations. In addition to the policy framework, the bill includes a $5 million annual appropriation for fiscal years 2026 and 2027 from the General Revenue Fund to support the partnership’s activities.
The partnership would be composed of legislative appointees, gubernatorial appointees, and ex officio state officials, including representatives from higher education, business groups, Ohio Jewish communities, and economic development organizations. Members would serve without salary but could be reimbursed for expenses, and the partnership would be required to hold hearings around the state and issue annual reports to the governor and legislative leaders. The bill would add a new section to the Revised Code, section 122.1712, and create a dedicated state-funded program under the Department of Development.
HB188 would amend Ohio law by creating a new statutory partnership focused on Ohio-Israel economic and innovation ties and by establishing a new GRF appropriation item to fund it. It would give the Department of Development a state-supported vehicle for convening stakeholders, studying trade and technology opportunities, and producing recommendations, while also requiring ongoing reporting and administrative support through the state budget process. The bill’s practical impact would be to formalize and financially support a state-level international economic development initiative involving trade, higher education, and business sectors.
The bill appears to have received generally favorable treatment in the House, advancing out of committee 9-2 and then passing the House 73-10. That voting pattern suggests broad support, though not unanimity, for creating the partnership and funding it. No committee transcript was provided, so the available record shows support through votes rather than detailed debate.
The main points of contention likely concern the use of $5 million per year in General Revenue Fund dollars for a partnership centered on Israel, as well as whether the state should create a dedicated international trade body with a membership structure that includes politically and economically connected appointees. Opposition may also reflect broader concerns about prioritizing foreign economic partnerships over other state needs, or about the scope of the partnership’s mandate to study policy, trade, technology, and multilateral relationships. The recorded nays in committee and on the House floor indicate some disagreement, but the bill still drew substantial majority support.