David Arredondo guest blog: About Ohio’s New Congressional Districts

September 22, 2011 — buckeyerino

Editor’s note:  David Arredondo is a Lorain resident, very involved in the Lorain community and a highly visible member of the Coalition for Hispanic/Latino Issues & Progress (CHIP).  He is the vice chair for the Lorain County Republican Party.  He’s often a featured guest on WEOL radio to discuss his work with international students at Lorain County Community College (LCCC) as well as sharing a center-right perspective on political issues.  He’s also appeared as a Republican pundit on Feagler & Friends, which airs on the PBS affiliate in Cleveland, WVIZ.  Professionally, David Arredondo is the Director of International Student Services at Lorain County Community College.

ABOUT OHIO’S NEW CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS

Elections have consequences and it is clear that the GOP has had the upper hand on redistricting following the census in 1990, 2000, and 2010. Given this trend, it is entirely possible that we can expect more of the same in 2021. Our current law dictates that the state legislature is required to re-draw congressional district lines based on the census results and this census shows that Ohio has lost enough residents to warrant a loss of 2 seats. One of the requirements is that each district must be comprised of a similar number of residents. This time it is about 720,000 residents.

Another requirement is that the plan must provide for “majority-minority” districts which means that a significant number of black residents must be grouped together so as not to dilute their voting power. So the plan must adhere to this or risk being thrown out and re-drawn. Republicans have done as such the past three times and so first, Louis Stokes, then Stephanie Tubbs Jones, and now Marcia Fudge have the district seat in Cuyahoga County set aside for them.

This means that the plan is not democratic giving an equal opportunity for all candidates. Even if Republicans, or Democrats for that matter, wanted to create a fair, non-partisan plan giving all citizens equal opportunity to run for Congress or vote for a congressman in a 50-50 district, it is nearly impossible given the Voting Rights Act requirement providing for a Democratic Party set-aside seat.

The current Voting Rights Act is a relic of the last century and of a time that no longer exists. It is time for it to be abolished in so far as it perpetuates unnecessary practices such as congressional minority seat set-asides and provisions for bi-lingual ballots. It essentially sets-aside a Democratic seat based on race or ethnicity. The days of lasting institutional racism are long past.

If you want proof of how far we’ve come, just look at the faces of recently elected governors in New Mexico, Nevada, South Carolina, and Louisiana—all Asian-, or Hispanic-Americans and all Republicans. Marco Rubio, a Cuban-American Republican was elected senator from Florida. Here is substantial proof that so-called minorities can be elected state-wide without set aside districts. Six of the sixty-three new GOP congressmen elected in 2010 were Hispanic-Americans and two African-American. None was from a majority-minority district. One new Puerto Rican congressman was elected from Idaho. How many Puerto Rican voters might there be in Idaho?

And Republicans are supposed to be bigots?

For self-serving purposes, former Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner is spreading the word that Democrats dropped the ball last year by not offering a new law providing for a reform of the Ohio congressional redistricting process. She claims that Democrats’ hubris precluded them from working with Republicans, namely then-Senator Jon Husted. Nonsense, sheer nonsense. I have my doubts about the reality of such a scenario given that at least as early as summer 2010, polls showed that some state races would be toss-ups, the House could shift back to GOP majority and add seats in the Senate. I saw no speculation anywhere that Democrats would run the table and win the House, Senate and governorship. Even if Democrats wanted to pass a law for redistricting reform, GOP Senate leader Paul Harris would never have approved. He, not Jon Husted, would have been the decider on such a ploy.

Within the past few weeks more talk has surfaced, primarily from media pundits and aggrieved Democrats like Brunner, to change the current redistricting law, if need be, by a ballot referendum. It seems these days ballot initiatives are the only means that Democrats have to push their agenda. No doubt they believe that voters have forgotten that a few short years ago in 2005, Democrats and their Academic elite MSM allies proposed not one, but four initiatives to change the redistricting process, provide for Early Voting, and a reorganization of the Secretary of States office, among other things I recall. All four of these so-called “reform” initiatives” failed by no less than 2-1 margins, even in Cuyahoga County. I don’t agree that Ohio is a 50-50 state. Certainly over the past twenty years Republicans have largely had control of the state offices as well as the legislature. Democratic dominance is long in the past. The majority of “likely” Ohio voters are Republicans and Democrats, partisan voters. I can’t see how anything has changed to expect a different outcome for a redistrict initiative today or next year.

So in 2010, the GOP won 13 Ohio districts, Democrats 5. It would appear that the Republican redistrict map was an exercise in ensuring re-election for most incumbents, both Democrat and Republican save for three. Republicans were more than generous in giving up one seat and creating a possibly new minority seat in Columbus for a Democrat while the Democrats only lost one seat.

Those on the bubble are: Democrats Marcy Kaptur, Dennis Kucinich and Betty Sutton from Northern Ohio and Republicans Steve Austria and Mike Turner from the Dayton area. Two have no seat and one has a chance for a seat in an adjacent district in which she’s have to beat the Republican incumbent.

Right now a “death match” is shaping up between Kucinich and Kaptur in the 9th District. Since this includes much of Lorain County which is Sutton’s district, I wouldn’t discount the possibility that she takes on Kaptur and Kucinich rather than run against Renacci in the 16th.

Last but not least a change needs to be made whereby college students are allowed to register and vote in districts where they attend school: Columbus, Oberlin etc. as well as their home districts. Our system does not have portable registration such that you only have one residence to register and vote. College students do. Whether or not some or all vote multiple times at school and at home is unknown but the possibility exists that some do. That is fraudulent and needs to be fixed along with other measures. It is my understanding that currently the Cuyahoga voting rolls show more than one million registered voters with an eligible voting population of fewer than 800,000. The city of Oberlin has more registered voters than residents. The current electoral system leaves a lot to be desired.

Posted in National Politics, Politics in the MSM, State Politics. Tags: , , . 2 Comments »

Americans for Prosperity-Ohio press release: Former state rep Seth Morgan is the new Director of Policy for AFP-Ohio

March 17, 2011 — buckeyerino

Editor’s note: Perhaps you remember last year’s GOP primary in which Seth Morgan, a CPA, vied for nomination to the office of Ohio Auditor. This press release from Americans for Prosperity-Ohio was issued on 3/17/2011.

FORMER STATE REPRESENTATIVE SETH MORGAN JOINS AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY OF OHIO AS DIRECTOR OF POLICY

DAYTON – Grassroots free-market group Americans for Prosperity is pleased to welcome aboard former State Representative Seth Morgan as Ohio Director of Policy.

Morgan is recognized as a leader in advocating for free markets, fiscal responsibility in government, and limiting government’s intrusion into Ohioans’ liberties and pocketbooks. He entered politics as a young man, seeking to make a difference for the Community by putting to use his passion for public policy, philosophy of a responsible government, and love for the City of Huber Heights and the surrounding region.

In 2001, Morgan ran and was elected to the position of Huber Heights City Council, representing Ward 3. He won this first race by a mere three votes. He first took office in January 2002 and, at the age of 23, became the youngest Council member ever to represent the citizens of Huber Heights. In 2004 he was selected by his peers to serve as the city’s youngest ever Vice-Mayor. Morgan was reelected in 2005 to the Huber Heights City Council.

Morgan was elected in 2008 to serve as the Ohio State Representative for the 36th District, serving northern and western portions of Montgomery County. With his aggressive but resolute and consistent leadership style, Morgan “hit the ground running” and was most active leading in his role as the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Primary and Secondary Education. His effort for Ohio’s children lead him to take Governor Ted Strickland to the Ohio Supreme Court in his effort to force transparency and accountability for some of Ohio’s most important and far-reaching policies.

“The heart of American politics is not about Republican or Democrat or which ‘team’ one belongs to. Rather it is about helping individuals learn to love the liberty they’ve been given and the policies that best preserve that liberty. AFP is playing an important role in that effort in Ohio and for that I’m grateful to be assisting in their efforts,” said Seth Morgan.

Morgan accepts this position alongside his continued commitments as a Certified Public Accountant and President of MLA Management Systems, Inc. Morgan serves small to medium sized organizations with business consulting and part-time CFO services. He is also a Member of Morgan Troutwine & Associates, CPAs, LLC. Morgan and his wife Debra have three children.

Posted in Announcements, State Politics. Tags: , . Leave a Comment »

Press release: Boose town hall, Saturday 3/12/2011, Norwalk–topic is SB5

March 9, 2011 — buckeyerino

Editor’s note: This press release was issued on 3/9/2011. Can’t get all the way down to Columbus to make noise about SB5? There’s good news if you live in the 58th Ohio House District. It’s short notice, but State Rep. Terry Boose will be hosting a town hall in Norwalk on Saturday, 3/12/2011.  Please note that only the voters of the 58th district are invited to this town hall.  For those outside the 58th district, feel free to browse this directory to locate contact information for your own state representative.

BOOSE TO CONDUCT TOWN HALL MEETING ON COLLECTIVE BARGAINING LEGISLATION

LOCAL LEGISLATOR REQUESTS FEEDBACK FROM CONSTITUENTS ON SENATE BILL  5

State Representative Terry Boose (R-Norwalk) announced today that he will be holding a special town hall meeting in his district. The purpose of this meeting will be to give a brief overview of Senate Bill 5, which is the Collective Bargaining Reform bill which was recently passed in the Senate. After giving the brief overview of the bill, the representative will open up the floor to allow constituents to make suggestions and voice their concerns.

“The purpose of this meeting is for me to listen,” Rep. Boose said. “Senate Bill 5 is an important piece of legislation that is before us and I would like to take this opportunity to make sure that everyone has the facts about the bill, while giving the people I represent the opportunity to make their voice heard.”

The meeting will take place at the following time and location:

Sat. 3/12/2011 Norwalk 9:00am – 11:00am

Main St. Intermediate School
80 E. Main St. Norwalk, OH 44857

This meeting is open to constituents of the 58th House District only. No signs will be permitted in the building.

For more information, people are encouraged to call the representative’s office at 614-466-9628. The 58th House District includes Huron County, western and southern Lorain County, and eastern Seneca County.

Posted in State Politics. Tags: . Leave a Comment »

Ballot issues & school board roles: starting points for local control of schools

February 28, 2011 — buckeyerino

It’s been awhile (nearly 2 years) since I’ve composed any wonkish blog pieces on the topic of K-12 education.  I’ve blogged about a school enterprise zone proposal to facilitate opportunities for supplemental learning.  I’ve blogged about my opposition to charter schools.  But there is so much more ground to cover on the topic of education.

The public schools are the public’s schools–the people’s schools.  The people pay taxes for them.  We have a government of the people, by the people, and for the people (or, that’s the way it’s supposed to work).  So the people’s schools are the government’s schools, and vice-versa.

If the public schools are broken, it behooves us to fix them.  Us.  As in people.

Why are we letting our government leaders, including President Obama and Governor Kasich, do an end run around getting into the nuts and bolts of fixing inadequate public schools (think charter schools, think vouchers)?

Why are the federal and state governments even involved in mandating what our schools ought and ought not to do?  What do they know about the needs of your specific community and what do they know about the desires you have for your children, the students?  Does one size fit all?  I suppose they try to meddle in school affairs because the media press them to know, during the campaign season, what their education platform consists of.  Then, because they make some promises to the media about what they will do about education, they actually stick their noses into it.  But I don’t necessarily think their noses belong there.

I would like parents and members of the community to make the important decisions about their schools.  We are grown-ups, right?  Why do we need to shirk this civic responsibility?  Why do we either put it on the shoulders of the teachers to bring about positive academic outcomes or on the shoulders of Columbus and Washington DC?  Why are we absolving ourselves of our responsibilities to ensure that our, the people’s, schools achieve the standards that we, the people, set?

Maybe we, the people, have not felt empowered to fix our local schools.  If we go to a school board meeting to voice a concern, it often seems the concern doesn’t get adequately addressed.  Sometimes, even, the superintendent and/or school board members will say that their hands are tied by mandates from Columbus and Washington DC, and that’s why our concerns cannot be addressed.

It takes the wind right out of you to attempt to make a difference and then find out you are powerless to have any input about the school right down the street from your house.  If you feel powerless, then forget about it.  You don’t bother.  Apathy sets in.  The community drops out.  The parents drop out.  And then we wonder why the students drop out.

If we, the people, could feel like we could make a difference in we, the people’s, the public’s, the government’s, schools–wouldn’t it be more likely that our involvement would increase?  If our community invests themselves in education, if parents invest themselves in education, do you think the students would invest themselves in education?  I think so.

Empowerment.  Empowerment is the key.  One size DOES NOT fit all.  The power over the schools needs to be decentralized.  It needs to be wrested away from Washington DC, first, and Columbus, next.

Where do we start?  How about we transform the role of the school board?  As it stands, school administration, led by the superintendent, often sets the agenda for the school board meetings.  The school board then either decides to ratify the agenda items put forward by the superintendent, or not to ratify them.  If the school board is too often dissatisfied with the superintendent’s agenda, withholding ratification seems not to be making much difference.  The recourse, at that point, is for the school board to get a new superintendent.  They either decide not to renew the superintendent’s contract, buy out the superintendent’s contract, or sever the superintendent’s contract (which will likely result in a lawsuit initiated by the dismissed superintendent, which only goes to show that the superintendent was never really an ally to the schools, after all).

At the local level, it should be the school board who sets the agenda, not the superintendent.  At other levels of government, the legislative branch prescribes what is to be done and the executive branch carries it out.  Why should it be any different in a school district?  A role-reversal is needed.  This prescriptive legislative role is the empowering role for the school board.

And what empowering the rest of the members of the community?  How do we bring an end to the powerlessness that they feel?

Voting.  The ballot box.

As it stands, a school board can only put two kinds of issues on the ballot:  bonds and tax levies.  Whoop-de-doo.  We don’t get much say in how the schools are run, but we’re charged with the responsibility to figure out how we’ll pay for them.  That seems kind of unfair, doesn’t it?

We, the people, need to be allowed to vote on issues beyond just bonds and levies.  When a contentious issue arises in the school district and the school board is in a quandary . . . and then when very vocal proponents and very vocal proponents show up at the school board meeting and school board members don’t really know which camp is more representative of the wishes of the community . . . why can’t  either the proponents or opponents file to put the issue before the people?  I don’t think the school board, themselves, ought to have to pony up the money out of the school treasury to put the issue before the voters.  Are the proponents or opponents ready to put their money where there mouth is?  Are they ready to launch an election campaign concerning this issue?  If neither camp is, then the public should live with the school board’s decision, whatever it may be.  The public would have to absolve the school board of blame if its decision didn’t win everyone over.  But if a committee of citizens really truly felt strongly enough about an issue, why should that committee be handcuffed by state law?  Why should the issue be forbidden from appearing on the ballot?

Here’s a real-life example of an issue that citizens might have wanted on the ballot:  Oberlin High School sports teams, for decades, had been known as the Oberlin Indians.  There were two very vocal camps:  Those who had deep affection for the Oberlin Indian legacy (usually long-time residents who were alumni of the high school themselves) and wanted to retain the name; and those (usually those with ties to the college who are transplants in the Oberlin community) who took a stand against the name because of politically incorrect insensitivity toward the various Nations of the Native Americans–descendants of those who lived in the Americas before the arrival of Christopher Columbus.  Both groups were very vocal, and the school board was caught in the middle of this tug of war.  I spoke recently with a former member of the school board, a school board member who said such a vote by the school district’s electorate would have been very helpful in resolving the issue.  The school board voted in favor of the latter group, and the sports teams are now known as the Oberlin Phoenix.

Another example from Oberlin:  A group of parents thought it would be appropriate for the students to begin the day with a recitation of the pledge of allegiance.  Others thought it would be inappropriate to recite the Pledge of Allegiance in the public schools.  The school board sided with the latter group.  Would it have been so bad if those in favor of the Pledge of Allegiance had been allowed to collect signatures and to file petitions in order for the issue to appear on the ballot?

Other issues that citizens might want to put on the ballot:

  • Dress code:  The primary purpose of the schools is to educate.  If a student’s attire detracts from the learning that is to take place at school, it’s reasonable that it be addressed in the dress code.  What detracts from the learning environment and what doesn’t?  Well, community standards play a role in what’s acceptable and what’s not.  Some communities would demand more modesty than others.  One size does not fit all.  If the community were to actually vote on a dress code, then a judge wouldn’t have much difficulty in upholding the dress code if a student took the matter to court.
  • Contraceptive distribution:  There are some schools that supplied students with contraceptives with no questions asked.  It has even caught some communities by surprise, as the school administrators had quietly made their own unilateral decision on the matter without the input of the school board, let alone the community.  Would it be so wrong to have this issue on the ballot to see if the community supported the distribution of contraceptives in the school or not?
  • Sexuality:  How early in life should youngsters be introduced to concepts of sexuality by their teachers, such as the differentiation between homosexuality and heterosexuality?  Is education on sexuality even a role that the schools should undertake?  Would it be wrong to allow this issue to appear on the ballot?  Or do we let individual classroom teachers make this decision unilaterally?
  • School closures:  Dropping enrollment (an all-too-frequent phenomenon in Ohio) and saving money are the two primary causes for mothballing a school somewhere in a school district.  It’s just that no one wants the school in their neighborhood be the one that closes.  Instead of appealing a school’s closure to the courts (as sometimes happens), would it be so wrong to appeal to the electorate, instead?
  • Censorship:  When students contribute material that appears in school publications (yearbook, newspaper, etc.), should it be subject to censorship?  It’s kind of like the dress code . . . what standard should be applied?
  • Public access to the classroom:  Is it permissible for a parent or other local citizen to be a silent observer in a classroom while school is in session?
  • Cell phones:  Are students restricted during certain times and in certain places from using their cell phones?  What restrictions should apply?
  • Politicians taking the stage at student assemblies:  Should politicians be featured speakers at school assemblies?  Only if they visit in their official capacity as elected officeholders?  During election season?  Equal time for the political opponent?  Photo ops at the school to appear in the media or in campaign literature?  Or only visiting the school as a private citizen?
  • Raffles and other fundraisers:  Are raffles permitted to be used as a means of fundraising?  Or are raffles off-limits, recognized by the community as a form of gambling?  Who can raise funds on school property?  Any student group?  For any purpose?  By any means?  What about community groups?  Charities?  Political parties and candidates?  Commercial vendors?

The school board can make these decisions, but if the public wants to have a referendum, why not?  It sends a message that you can make a difference.  You can have input.  You are empowered.  You can be involved.  You care.

With the school board directing the superintendent (rather than voting to ratify the superintendents agenda), and with citizens able to put school district issues on the ballot (rather than voting to ratify bonds and levies only) we, the people, can begin to fix our, the people’s, the public’s, schools.

Posted in Local Politics, State Politics. Tags: , . Leave a Comment »

Partial listing of 2011 Lincoln Day Dinners in Ohio counties

February 11, 2011 — buckeyerino

I’ve noticed that recent traffic to my website came as a result of searches for the term “Lincoln Day Dinner.” The problem is that the search yields a list from last year. I consulted the website of the Ohio Republican Party to cull what information I could find about Lincoln Day Dinners being held this year. The ones I found listings for show only dates in February and March, thus, for April and beyond, I guess your best bet is to search this county-by-county directory of Republican Party chairs (sometimes showing links to the county’s GOP website) so that you can contact your county’s party chair directly. Even if your county’s Lincoln Day Dinner appears on the February-March calendar, you should contact county party leaders anyway because dates, places, and times for these events can (and sometimes do) change, even as the listed date fast approaches. In addition, many of the listings have incomplete information, so, by all means, contact the county chair or someone in the county party leadership that will keep you informed about these events.

Holmes County Lincoln Day Dinner

  • Monday 2/14/2011 6 pm
  • Carlisle Village Inn, 4949 Walnut St, Walnut Creek
  • Contact:  Rob Hovis

Knox County Lincoln Day Dinner

  • Saturday 2/19/2011 5:30 pm reception and 6:30 pm dinner
  • Dan Emmett Conference Center, 160 Howard St, Mt. Vernon
  • Contact:  Chip McConville
  • Guest Speaker:  Ohio Auditor Dave Yost

Hancock County Lincoln Day Dinner

  • Monday 2/21/2011 5:30 pm
  • Senior Center, 339 E. Melrose Ave, Findlay
  • Contact:  Mark Miller

Hamilton County Lincoln-Reagan Day Dinner

  • Wednesday 2/23/2011 5 pm
  • Duke Energy Center, 525 Elm St, Cincinnati
  • Contact:  Maggie Nuellmer
  • Guest Speaker:  Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels

Clinton County Lincoln Day Dinner

  • Monday 2/28/2011 6:30 pm
  • Expo Center at the Fairgrounds, Wilmington
  • Contact:  Geoff Phillips
  • Guest Speaker:  Ohio Senate President Tom Niehaus

Muskingum County Lincoln Day Dinner

  • Monday 2/28/2011 6 pm reception and 7 pm dinner
  • Prophets Park Amrou Grotto, 2560 Old River Rd, Zanesville
  • Contact:  Pat Hennessey

Ashtabula County Lincoln Day Dinner

  • Saturday 3/5/2011 5 pm reception and 6 pm dinner
  • Dorset Community Center, 2681 State Route 193, Dorset
  • Contact:  Charlie Frye
  • Guest Speaker: State Rep. Casey Kozlowski

Athens County Lincoln Day Dinner

  • Thursday 3/10/2011 5:30 pm reception and 6:30 pm dinner
  • American Legion, 520 W. Union St, Athens
  • Contact:  Pete Couladis
  • Guest Speaker:  Ohio Auditor Dave Yost

Morrow County Lincoln Day Dinner

  • Saturday 3/12/2011 6 pm reception and 6:30 pm dinner
  • Trinity United Methodist Church, Mt. Gilead
  • Cost:  $15 per person
  • Contact:  Tom Wiston (419) 560-1595
  • Guest Speaker:  Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted

Washington County Lincoln Day Dinner

  • Friday 3/18/2011 5:30 pm reception and 6:30 pm dinner
  • Shrine Building, 249 Pennsylvania Ave, Marietta
  • Contact:  Marilyn Ashcraft
  • Guest Speaker:  U.S. Rep. Bill Johnson

Monroe County Lincoln Day Dinner

  • Saturday 3/19/2011 6:30 pm
  • Midway Community & Senior Citizens Center, 37358 State Route 800, Sardis
  • Contact:  Roger Claus

Lorain County Lincoln Day Dinner

  • Saturday 3/26/2011
  • DeLuca’s Place In the Park, 6075 Middle Ridge Rd, Lorain
  • Contact:  Helen Hurst
  • Guest Speaker:  Ohio House Speaker Bill Batchelder

Scioto County Lincoln Day Dinner

  • Tuesday 3/29/2011 6 pm
  • Friends Center, 1202 18th St, Portsmouth
  • Contact:: Kay Reynolds
Posted in Local Politics, State Politics, Uncategorized. Tags: , . 1 Comment »

From the desk of Sean Kalin Stipe: Pending Ohio ballot issues

January 29, 2011 — buckeyerino

Editor’s note:  Sean Kalin Stipe is a Lorain resident.  In 2009, Stipe ran for Lorain City Council.  More recently, he’s written a guest blog article about the rise of the Libertarian Party in Lorain County.  He is currently Deputy Communications Director for the Libertarian Party of Ohio.  Here, he has summarized the issues that are projected to be on ballots statewide, provided petitions are filed containing the required number of valid signatures.

2011 BALLOT ISSUES

Work has begun on potential ballot issues for the November 2011 election. Ballotpedia.com has identified five proposed measures, one of which is legislatively referred. The issues include judicial reform, gambling, health care, immigration and state sovereignty.

Ohio Judicial Appointment Amendment

The legislatively-referred constitutional amendment “Ohio Judicial Appointment Amendment” would create a bipartisan selection panel that recommends candidates to the governor. Justices would serve 2 years, after which a retention election will be held. During retention elections, justices will not face an opponent. Ohio is one of 21 states that currently elects their justices. In 1987, Ohio voters defeated the “Ohio Abolish Supreme Court Elections,” which proposed abolishing the election of Supreme Court and Appeals Court judges.

Supporters argue that a “merit system” will help reduce the influence of money in judicial election races.

Opponents argue that the amendment would reflect the views of the elite and not of the general public.

In order to place the measure on the ballot, the proposed measure must garner support by 3/5 of lawmakers in the House and the Senate. Should that fail, there is the option of an initiated constitutional amendment. That petition method requires 400,000 valid signatures.

Ohio Slot Machines at Horse Tracks Referendum

The veto referendum “Slots at Horse Tracks” looks to delay implementation of, and possibly repeal, the legislature’s “casino implementation” HB 519. That bill contains implementing provisions for the “Ohio Casino Initiative.” Issue 3 was passed by voters in November 2009 with 52.9% of the vote. It authorizes the building of one casino each in Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, and Toledo. Horse track owners object because Issue 3 did not allow slots at horse tracks.

Ohio Health Care Amendment

The “Health Care Amendment” is a citizen initiated constitutional amendment (CICA) which exempts residents of Ohio from national health care mandates; also know as “Obama Care.” The Ohio Liberty Council fell short of the signatures needed to make the 2010 ballot.

The Opposition argues the proposed amendment would block the federal health care reform bill without offering alternative options.

Supporters argue that The federal government has a limited set of enumerated powers. None of these powers includes the ability to force people to purchase health insurance, or anything else for that matter.

Ohio Immigration Reform Initiative

Another CICA titled “Immigration reform Initiative” would authorize police to question a person’s immigration status if there are any suspicions. The initiative mirrors the immigration bill in Arizona passed in 2010.

Ohio Senator Tim Grendell (R) is supportive of the proposed measure:

“If they are getting services in Ohio they are not legally entitled to and taxpayers are paying for this, we need to stop it.”

Opponents argue that anti-immigration legislation negatively affects local housing markets, lowering the values of other homes in neighborhoods and collecting less property, sales and income tax.

Ohio Sovereignty Amendment

The most significant CICA, “Sovereignty Amendment” deals with the administration of government. Aside from “reining in government,” the measure would allow juries to nullify laws; expand the right to bear arms and maintain militias; permit the recall of elected officials by petition signatures alone; ban federal enforcement of laws except through a county sheriff; and require that all public school operations through the 12th grade be regulated at the district level only.

The issues are very complex and the challenge is to explain all the elements and the complexity of the proposal. Proposed by The People’s Constitution Coalition of Ohio, they state that the . . .

“American people are quickly reaching the limits of their endurance for governmental encroachment upon their rights and liberties. They are seeking an end to the barrage of federal legislation and mandates currently being forced upon them that will effectively place them and their posterity into perpetual financial servitude and surrender the sovereignty of our country to foreign powers.”

Posted in State Politics. Tags: . 2 Comments »

Guest blog: State rep Terry Boose on Ohio’s biennial budget

January 28, 2011 — buckeyerino

Editor’s note: State Representative Terry Boose (R-58) released this editorial to media outlets on 1/27/2011. As a reminder, town hall meetings are scheduled on Monday 1/31/2011 (in Norwalk) and Thursday 2/10/2011 (at Lorain County JVS).

THE OHIO BUDGET FROM A LEGISLATOR’S POINT OF VIEW

Huron, Lorain and Seneca counties have suffered through the current economic crisis and we face a budget that requires spending reductions, but I am ready for the challenge of hard work and creative solutions to help create a balanced budget.

Our state constitution requires a balanced budget, but if we were to continue funding all programs in the next budget at the current level, we would have an $8 billion deficit.  So I must work with other legislators to pass a balanced budget and, at the same time, promote policies that encourage employers to hire as many unemployed Ohioans as possible.

Job losses, declining company sales and a lack in funding will all be issues debated in great detail over the next five months. As your legislator, I will fight for the issues that matter most to the residents of the 58th House District.

Passing a budget is a long process that begins in the governor’s office.  Governor Kasich will present his draft of the budget by March 15 to the Ohio House of Representatives and is subsequently introduced before the House Finance and Appropriations Committee.  The House Finance Committee will hold hearings and listen to agencies, staff, interested parties and the general public about the merits of the governor’s proposed budget. Committee members will then vote on the bill and pass it on to the House floor for a vote by all Representatives.

Once the House passes a budget bill, it moves on to the Senate and undergoes a similar legislative process.  If the House and Senate have different versions of the budget bill, a joint conference committee is created to resolve them.  That committee prepares a report for both chambers’ final approval and, after passage in both chambers, the budget goes back to the Governor’s office for his final signature.

The state’s fiscal year begins July 1 so the budget must be passed by June 30, as required by the Ohio Constitution.

I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle as we tackle the issues most important to Ohio.  Our priority this year is to create a climate within Ohio that promotes job growth and business investment while transforming and revitalizing our economy.  I am committed to continuing our efforts on tax reform to make Ohio an even better place to live and raise a family.

If you have any questions regarding this issue or any other policy matter, I can be reached at (614) 466-9628, by email at district58@ohr.state.oh.us or by mail at Representative Terry Boose, 77 S. High St., 12th floor, Columbus, OH  43215.

Posted in State Politics. Tags: . Leave a Comment »

Should a state be able to declare bankruptcy in Federal court? NO!

January 23, 2011 — buckeyerino

Oh, those rascal politicians on Capitol Hill in Washington DC.  Oh, those rascal politicians in state offices scattered around the country.  What do we do about such rascals that have bloated government spending for decades and decades now?

So many states are facing red ink, and so many of those states won’t solve the problems on their own.  Instead?  Look to the federal government for bailouts of states.

But wait!  The federal government spending even more?  For more bailouts?  How?  How can the federal government keep coming up with more dollars out of thin air?  It’s unfathomable.

So now there are some tongues wagging on Capitol Hill to provide relief to fiscally undisciplined states without committing even more federal dollars to bailouts.  It’s called bankruptcy.  Legislation may soon materialize that would allow states to declare bankruptcy.

If you are one of the lucky Americans that hasn’t been wiped out in this disastrous economy and it just so happens that you’ve invested in municipal and state government bonds thinking that they were safe bets, well, all that could change.

If it changed, then where would you invest your money that would allow it to hold its value?  Every investment that’s only on paper or that’s only a few bytes on a computer chip has its risks, and the risks are getting bigger by the day.

Workers are already being punished by this economy by losing jobs and not finding new jobs.  Perhaps it’s time to punish the investors, too.  Well, at least punish the investors who don’t own stock in financial corporations that are “too big to fail.”

If a state were to declare bankruptcy under the proposal that’s wagging tongues on Capitol Hill, bondholders would be unsecured creditors.  So, how do you get your money from cashing in bonds from a bankrupt state?  I don’t know.  With no collateral, there’s nothing a bondholder could repossess that would coax the state to pay up.  Perhaps you could take the matter to court and seek a judgment against the state, but what good would that do?  There’s no mechanism at your disposal that would allow you to collect the money the state owes you.  Futility.  Utter futility.

Oh, and state pension funds?  Gone.  Sorry about your retirement.

What if bankruptcies spread through the states like wildfire?  Is it conceivable that the federal government might do likewise?  And then what?

I think this bankruptcy idea is dead in the water, as I don’t see how it could gain any traction with voters.

Sorry, all you political rascals.  You’ll just have to learn fiscal discipline.  Unless, of course, your objective is to cause the collapse of America as we know it.

Posted in National Politics, State Politics. Tags: , . Leave a Comment »

Ohio House Republican press release: Proposal to restructure public mental health

January 22, 2011 — buckeyerino

Editor’s note: This appears to be just a proposal, at present, as I do not yet see a bill listed on the General Assembly website. State rep David Burke represents the 83rd Ohio House district, which includes Logan County, Union County, and most of Marion County.  This press release was issued 1/21/2011. After reading through the press release, you are welcome to read my further editorial comments (below the fold).

REP. BURKE: OHIO’S MENTAL HEALTH SYSTEM FACES A CRISIS

Will introduce bill to identify cost-savings, structural improvements

COLUMBUS—In order to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of Ohio’s mental health services, State Representative Dave Burke (R-Marysville) intends to propose legislation that calls for a review of Ohio’s behavioral health system. The goal of this legislation will be to identify potential reforms and cost-containment opportunities within the system, which will not only improve state health services but also rein in costs.

“The current system is crumbling and fragmented,” said Burke, who serves as chairman of the Health and Human Services Subcommittee of the Finance and Appropriations Committee. “There is no transparency with regard to costs, and oftentimes there is no coordination of services. With numerous tragic events that have happened over the last few years that have involved behavioral health system issues, it is important that Ohio make a comprehensive review of the system.”

More than 340,000 Ohioans received community mental health treatment during fiscal year 2009. Starting in 2014, the Ohio Medicaid program expects that more than 550,000 new enrollees will be added to the system, about one-third of whom will require mental health treatment. However, the current system leaves significant gaps in coverage for individuals who need behavioral services, which in fiscal year 2009 left more than 22,000 mental health patients without Medicaid coverage.

According to Burke, a lack of coordination between departments often leads to inflated costs or flawed patient care, which not only strains the state budget but also puts vulnerable Ohioans at risk. Many mentally ill Ohioans end up institutionalized in prisons and nursing homes, when in reality, a number of these individuals require more intensive behavioral treatment.

“It is extremely important that we don’t let Ohioans who depend on state services fall through the cracks or be subjected to inadequate treatment,” said Burke. “We will soon have an opportunity to improve Ohio’s mental health system while at the same time reduce inefficiency. This is a standard of excellence that we owe to those who elected us to lead this state.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Health Care, State Politics. Tags: , . Leave a Comment »

Press release: Rep. Boose town halls in Norwalk and Pittsfield Township

January 20, 2011 — buckeyerino

Editor’s note:  Save the town hall dates on your calendar: 1/31/2011 (Norwalk) and 2/10/2011 (Pittsfield Township).  This press release was issued on 1/19/2011.

BOOSE TO CONDUCT TOWN HALL MEETINGS ON STATE BUDGET ISSUES

LOCAL LEGISLATOR TO PRESENT BUDGET OUTLOOK AND IS REQUESTING FEEDBACK FROM CONSTITUENTS

State Representative Terry Boose (R- Norwalk) announced today that he will be holding two special town hall meetings in his district.  The purpose of the meetings will be to give a presentation about the budget climate that the legislature faces while planning for the next state budget.  After giving the presentation, the representative will open up the floor to allow constituents to make suggestions and voice their concerns.

“There is no doubt that it is going to be a tough budget year, and I wish to take this opportunity to make sure that people are fully informed,” Rep. Boose said. “Everyone is affected by this budget so it is important that people show up at one of these meetings to give me their ideas.”

The meetings will take place at the following times and locations:

  • Monday, 1/31/2011 from 7 pm to 9 pm in Norwalk at the Norwalk High School’s Fisher-Titus Learning Center
  • Thursday, 2/10/2011 from 7 pm to 9 pm in Pittsfield Township at the Lorain County JVS in Lecture Room B

For more information, people are encouraged to call the representative’s office at 614-466-9628.  The 58th House District includes Huron County, western and southern Lorain County, and eastern Seneca County.

Posted in Announcements, State Politics. Tags: , . 1 Comment »

Press release: State rep Terry Boose introduces bill to cut salaries of state elected officials

January 20, 2011 — buckeyerino

Editor’s note:  Republican state rep Terry Boose represents the Ohio House 58th district, comprised of Huron County and large swaths of eastern Seneca County and southern Lorain County.  This press release was issued on 1/20/2011.

BOOSE PROPOSES MEASURE TO REDUCE SALARIES OF ELECTED OFFICIALS

COLUMBUS—State Representative Terry Boose (R-Norwalk) recently introduced legislation that, when enacted, will reduce the salaries of members of the Ohio General Assemblies and statewide elected executive officeholders by 5 percent.

“During these tough economic times, elected officials must lead by example,” said Boose. “Many of our constituents have lost their jobs or had their salaries reduced. Further, the state and many local governments are having difficulties balancing budgets. We should do our part by taking a 5 percent pay cut until the state’s economy turns around.”

In accordance with the Ohio Constitution, the salary decrease would take effect upon the election or re-election of the affected officeholders. House Bill 41 includes a “sunset” provision that would rescind the provisions when Ohio’s real Gross Domestic Product increases in at least two of three years by 2.5 percent or more. It will not impact county elected officials.

“By linking the salary of elected officials to our state’s prosperity, Ohio’s leaders’ economic success will be tied to the success of the state they have been elected to serve,” Boose said. “This is a level of accountability that is especially necessary during these difficult times.”

In the previous General Assembly, Boose jointly introduced this legislation as House Bill 210 with Rep. Seth Morgan in June 2009, but the measure stalled in committee. House Bill 41 will now be sent to the Rules and Reference Committee which will refer it to a standing committee of the House, where it will undergo further consideration.

Posted in State Politics. Tags: . Leave a Comment »

Committee assignments for Ohio House of Representatives

January 20, 2011 — buckeyerino

Editor’s note:  The two-year 129th Session of the Ohio General Assembly convened this month.  Within the Ohio House of Representatives, the Republicans form the majority caucus and the Democrats form the minority caucus.  William Batchelder is Speaker of the House and Armond Budish is Minority Leader.  Each committee of state reps is led by a Republican chair on behalf of the majority caucus and a ranking Democrat on behalf of the minority caucus.  For a directory of all 99 state reps showing their full names, the Ohio House districts they represent, and links to webpages for each of them, you may click this link.

Agriculture & Natural Resources (13 Republicans; 8 Democrats)

  • Majority: Hall (Chair), Derickson (Vice Chair), Balderson, Boose, Buchy, Carey, Damschroder, Goodwin, Kozlowski, Landis, Peterson, Ruhl, Thompson
  • Minority: Okey (Ranking), Clyde, Gentile, Heard, Mallory, Murray, O’Brien, Phillips

Commerce & Labor (9 Republicans; 6 Democrats)

  • Majority: Uecker (Chair), Young (Vice Chair), R. Adams, J. Adams, Blair, McGregor, McKenney, Roegner, Wachtmann
  • Minority: Yuko (Ranking), Antonio, Hagan, Murray, Ramos, Szollosi

Criminal Justice (8 Republicans; 5 Democrats)

  • Majority: Slaby (Chair), Hayes (Vice Chair), Blessing, Bubp, Coley, Hite, Uecker, Young
  • Minority: Winburn (Ranking), Garland, Pillich, Weddington, Williams

Economic & Small Business Development (14 Republicans; 9 Democrats)

  • Majority: Baker (Chair), Buchy (Vice Chair), Anielski, Beck, Dovilla, Gonzales, Grossman, Henne, Kozlowski, Landis, Newbold, Rosenberger, Schuring, Thompson
  • Minority: Williams (Ranking), Barnes, Celeste, Driehaus, Goyal, Luckie, Reece, Slesnick, Winburn

Education (14 Republicans; 9 Democrats)

  • Majority: Stebelton (Chair), Newbold (Vice Chair), Anielski, Baker, Brenner, Butler, Derickson, Hayes, Henne, Hite, Huffman, Kozlowski, Roegner, Thompson
  • Minority: Luckie (Ranking), Antonio, Celeste, Driehaus, Fedor, Gerberry, Patmon, Phillips, Ramos

Financial Institutions, Housing, and Urban Development (9 Republicans; 6 Democrats)

  • Majority: Coley (Chair), R. Adams (Vice Chair), Blair, Brenner, Duffey, Hackett, Hollington, Henne, Stautberg
  • Minority: Goyal (Ranking), Ashford, Foley, Gentile, Milkovich, Pillich

Finance (20 Republicans; 12 Democrats)

  • Majority: Amstutz (Chair), Carey (Vice Chair), D. Adams, Anielski, Balderson, Beck, Burke, Duffey, Gardner, Grossman, Hall, Hollington, Maag, McClain, McGregor, Mecklenborg, Peterson, Sears, Slaby, Stebelton
  • Minority: Sykes (Ranking), Boyd, Garland, Lundy, Reece, Slesnick, Carney, Clyde, Driehaus, Goyal, Phillips, Ashford

Finance Subcommittee on Agriculture and Natural Resources (3 Republicans; 2 Democrats)

  • Majority: Balderson (Chair), Hall, Peterson
  • Minority: Slesnick (Ranking), Driehaus

Finance Subcommittee on Health and Human Services (3 Republicans; 2 Democrats)

  • Majority: Burke (Chair), R. Adams, Sears
  • Minority: Boyd (Ranking), Goyal

Finance Subcommittee on Higher Education (3 Republicans; 2 Democrats)

  • Majority: Gardner (Chair), Mecklenborg, Slaby
  • Minority: Garland (Ranking), Clyde

Finance Subcommittee on Primary and Secondary Education (3 Republicans; 2 Democrats)

  • Majority: Carey (Chair), Maag, Stebelton
  • Minority: Lundy (Ranking), Phillips

Finance Subcommittee on Transportation (3 Republicans; 2 Democrats)

  • Majority: McGregor (Chair), Beck, Grossman
  • Minority: Reece (Ranking), Carney

Health & Aging (14 Republicans; 9 Democrats)

  • Majority: Wachtmann (Chair), Goodwin (Vice Chair), Balderson, Burke, Duffey, Gardner, Gonzales, Hackett, Hollington, Hottinger, Johnson, McKenney, Schuring, Sears
  • Minority: Fende (Ranking), Antonio, Barnes, Boyd, Carney, Garland, Hagan, Ramos, Yuko

Health Subcommittee on Pension Reform (5 Republicans; 2 Democrats)

  • Majority: Schuring (Chair), Gardner, Hackett, McKenney, Wachtmann
  • Minority: Hagan (Ranking), Ramos

Insurance (13 Republicans; 8 Democrats)

  • Majority: Hottinger (Chair), Hackett (Vice Chair), J. Adams, Burke, Combs, Derickson, Henne, McGregor, Peterson, Schuring, Sears, Snitchler, Wachtmann
  • Minority: Carney (Ranking), Ashford, Fende, Foley, Heard, Letson, Luckie, Stinziano

Insurance Subcommittee on Workers’ Compensation (3 Republicans; 2 Democrats)

  • Majority: Hackett (Chair), J. Adams, Wachtmann
  • Minority: Foley (Ranking), Letson

Judiciary (8 Republicans; 5 Democrats)

  • Majority: Bubp (Chair), McKenney (Vice Chair), Butler, Coley, Huffman, Mecklenborg, Slaby, Stebelton
  • Minority: Murray (Ranking), Letson, Okey, Stinziano, Szollosi

Local Government (14 Republicans; 9 Democrats)

  • Majority: Blair (Chair), Boose (Vice Chair), Baker, Brenner, Butler, Derickson, Duffey, Hackett, Hall, Martin, McKenney, Newbold, Ruhl, Snitchler
  • Minority: Weddington (Ranking), DeGeeter, Gerberry, Heard, Lundy, Mallory, Okey, Reece, Sykes

Public Utilities (14 Republicans; 9 Democrats)

  • Majority: Snitcher (Chair), Beck (Vice Chair), Amstutz, Anielski, Balderson, Coley, Gonzales, Goodwin, Landis, Martin, Peterson, Roegner, Rosenberger, Stautberg
  • Minority: DeGeeter (Ranking), Ashford, Foley, Gentile, O’Brien, Stinziano, Szollosi, Weddington, Williams

Rules & Reference (6 Republicans; 4 Democrats)

  • Majority: Blessing (Chair), Batchelder (Vice Chair), J. Adams, Burke, Gonzales, Grossman
  • Minority: Budish (Ranking), Heard, Phillips, Szollosi

State Government & Elections (14 Republicans; 9 Democrats)

  • Majority: Mecklenborg (Chair), Hite (Vice Chair), J. Adams, Blessing, Buchy, Combs, Damschroder, Dovilla, Gardner, Grossman, Hollington, Huffman, Maag, Young
  • Minority: Gerberry (Ranking), Celeste, Clyde, Fedor, Letson, Lundy, Patmon, Stinziano, Sykes

State Government Subcommittee on Redistricting (3 Republicans; 2 Democrats)

  • Majority: Huffman (Chair), Combs, Dovilla
  • Minority: Letson (Ranking), Clyde

Transportation, Public Safety, & Homeland Security (8 Republicans; 5 Democrats)

  • Majority: Combs (Chair), Damschroder (Vice Chair), Johnson, McClain, McGregor, Rosenberger, Ruhl, Uecker
  • Minority: Mallory (Ranking), DeGeeter, Hagan, O’Brien, Patmon

Veterans Affairs (8 Republicans; 5 Democrats)

  • Majority: Martin (Chair), Johnson (Vice Chair), Bubp, Butler, Hite, Landis, Rosenberger, Young
  • Minority: Pillich (Ranking), Boyd, Fedor, Milkovich, Yuko

Ways & Means (10 Republicans; 7 Democrats)

  • Majority: Stautberg (Chair), McClain (Vice Chair), Amstutz, Baker, Beck, Blair, Boose, Dovilla, Hayes, Maag
  • Minority: Letson (Ranking), Barnes, Fende, Foley, Milkovich, Slesnick, Winburn
Posted in Announcements, State Politics. Tags: , . Leave a Comment »

Press release: New rules in Ohio House foster transparency & bipartisanship

January 20, 2011 — buckeyerino

Editors note: This press release was issued on 1/11/2011.  The state representatives elected to the Ohio House of Representatives last November are now in office and a new session of the Ohio General Assembly has convened.

REPUBLICANS PROMOTE OPEN LEGISLATIVE PROCESS AND CUT COSTS THROUGH NEW OHIO HOUSE RULES

COLUMBUS — The new Ohio House Republican majority today proposed new governing rules that will promote a more open and fair legislative process for legislators on both sides of the aisle.

“Sixteen years ago, after more than two decades in the minority, Republicans dramatically changed the way the House of Representatives was governed,” said Representative Randy Gardner (R-Bowling Green).  “Today, the new Republican majority says change is needed again.”

Gardner was asked by Speaker William G. Batchelder (R-Medina) to oversee a rewriting of House rules to restore some of the principles that have been lost since Gardner and Batchelder served in House leadership more than a decade ago.

“It is time for us to throw open the doors and the windows of the Statehouse and let the sun shine through again,” Speaker Batchelder said.  “This is the People’s House, and we have put together rules that further our commitment to all Ohioans that the House of Representatives will operate effectively, efficiently and with greater transparency.”

Specifically, the new rules would change the House in three significant ways:

  • The number of full standing committees is reduced by 37 percent, from 27 committees to 17.  Gardner and Batchelder maintain that fewer committees promotes a greater focus on issues and will save the taxpayers additional money with fewer committees. This change alone to legislators’ base salary for committee service will save taxpayers more than a quarter-of-a-million dollars over the biennium.

  • A two-day waiting period or reading period has been re-established for any final votes (conference reports) on legislation with appropriations, primarily aimed at a more open state budget process.  The rule requires two days following a conference committee vote before the House may consider the budget.  Last session, House members were given three hours to read 500 changes in the 3,000-page budget, which spent $50.5 billion.
  • A rule requiring advanced notice of floor amendments has been repealed, meaning any House member may propose a floor amendment at any time.  Under the old rules, members had to have their amendments submitted to the House clerk by 10 a.m.

“When you shut out a legislator from debate and from offering amendments, that legislator’s constituents are shut out of the process as well—and that, we believe, is wrong,” Gardner said.  “We strive to provide a more fair and open process for all legislators regardless of party, so that all Ohioans can be represented.”

Batchelder noted that only four bills sponsored by GOP members in the past two years passed the House and none in the first six months of the session.  He said that was a stark contrast to the 26 Democrat bills that were passed in the 1995-96 session when he was Speaker Pro Tempore, with 14 minority bills passing in the first six months of session.

“We intend to pass legislation that will benefit all Ohioans, regardless of the party affiliation of the member who sponsors the bill,” Speaker Batchelder said.  “We believe that these rules are the most favorable to the minority caucus than any other session in recent memory.”

Posted in State Politics. Tags: . Leave a Comment »

Press release: Incoming Republican majority in the Ohio House of Reps to seek greater transparency

November 5, 2010 — buckeyerino

Editor’s note:  The Republican Caucus of the Ohio House of Representatives issued this press release on 11/4/2010.  Republicans have been in the minority of the Ohio House for the past two years, but, as the election results show, they will form the majority in the upcoming session commencing in January.

REP GARDNER TO PRODUCE OHIO HOUSE RULES

COLUMBUS—House Republican Leader William G. Batchelder (R-Medina) today issued the following statement:

“I am pleased to announce that our caucus has asked Representative Randy Gardner (R-Bowling Green) to begin crafting the House Rules for the 129th General Assembly. Previously, Representative Gardner served in this capacity in 1994, when he successfully brought an unprecedented level of transparency to the House of Representatives.

With Ohio facing such large challenges, it is more important now than ever before that the House operate in a way that will encourage the public to be fully engaged with the work that is done here.  It is with this in mind that we are honored to have Representative Gardner provide his experience and knowledge as we move forward in designing our operational framework.”

Rep. Gardner issued the following statement:

“I am honored to have been asked by my colleagues to produce this necessary function for a successful 129th General Assembly of the Ohio House of Representatives.  Our new Rules will ensure an effective, efficient House for both sides of the aisle and will promote a thorough, diligent work ethic by lawmakers to benefit Ohioans. There is no question that we must restore a minimum two-day waiting or reading period before final votes are taken on our state budget bills. The people of Ohio and all House members must be provided time to know what’s in the bills before we vote.”

In the 128th General Assembly, House members were forced to vote on the final version of the state budget bill with approximately 2 ½ hours to read the Conference report before voting on the measure. The bill included more than 500 changes in the 3,000 page document.

Posted in State Politics. Tags: . Leave a Comment »

Election results match up well with Buckeye RINO endorsements

November 3, 2010 — buckeyerino

Though I said in my prior post that I still wouldn’t be happy though Republicans were projected to do well in Congressional races, I have to say, looking through election results, I’m not sad either.  Their are many reasons to smile.

The candidates I endorsed did reasonably well.

In Cuyahoga County, with the new form of government, the Republican didn’t win the county executive race.  Plus, of the 11 county council winners, only three are Republicans.  I’m not sure if that will put enough distance between the county government and the scandalous rascals who will make every attempt to infiltrate it.  On the bright side, having 3 Republicans in county office is a huge improvement over zero (and it’s been zero for a long time).

The last time I checked, the Erie County Auditor race was too close to call.  There’s still a chance it could turn out the right way, in favor of Rick Jeffrey.

Unfortunately, Jeff Krabill didn’t win the 80th District seat in the Ohio House of Representatives.  He certainly came awfully close, though, as incumbent Dennis Murray didn’t even garner 50% in his successful re-election bid.  A Libertarian candidate, though not a winner, clearly influenced the outcome of that race.  If the Libertarians didn’t have a candidate on the ballot and it were a two person race, I don’t see how Dennis Murray would have been appealing to a Libertarian.  In a two-person race, I think Krabill would definitely have been the one who captured more than 50% of the vote.  Krabill can take solace in 3 facts: 1) He retains his seat on the Sandusky school board; 2) It took BOTH a Democrat AND a Libertarian to defeat him, as the Democrat couldn’t have done it alone; and 3) as a result of the 2010 Census and other Republican election victories, there may be a redesigned district, perhaps a more favorable one, for Krabill to run in if he chooses to take another shot at state rep in 2012.

In another race contested by more than two candidates where the winner captured less than 50% of the vote, the outcome was much more to my liking.  There was a four-way race for Lorain County Commissioner, and Joe Koziura came out on the short end of the stick. :-D   Republican Tom Williams is the new county commissioner.  Starting in January, Lorain County taxpayers will finally have an advocate working on their behalf in county offices.

Skip Lewandowski didn’t win his state rep race in the 56th District, and he would have been an excellent state rep.  Rae Lynn Brady didn’t win in the 57th, either.  On the upside, Terry Boose easily won re-election in the 58th District, Rex Damschroder prevailed in the 81st District, and the GOP recaptured the Ohio House of Representatives.

In the 13th state senate district, Gayle Manning won.

Kathleen McGervey won her election to the state school board.

The Kasich/Taylor ticket uprooted Ted Strickland from the governor’s office.

David Yost won for Ohio Auditor and Josh Mandel for Ohio Treasurer.

The GOP will lead the reapportionment process for designing new legislative district boundaries based on the new 2010 Census figures.

Maureen O’Connor and Judith Lanzinger won races for the Ohio Supreme Court.

Bob Latta won re-election.  Peter Corrigan, Rich Iott, and Tom Ganley did not win, but 5 Ohio Democrat U.S. Representative incumbents (Mary Jo Kilroy, Steve Driehaus,  John Boccieri, Zack Space, and Charlie Wilson) were defeated by Republican challengers, so, in January, the Ohio delegation to the U.S. House of Representatives will include 13 Republicans and 5 Democrats.  As expected, the GOP, nationwide, picked up more than 60 House seats.

Rob Portman won the race for U.S. Senate, and the GOP made nationwide gains there, with at least a net gain of six Senate seats since the special election in Massachusetts that sent Scott Brown to Washington DC.

There you have it.  Lots to smile about this time around.

Posted in Local Politics, National Politics, Politics in the MSM, State Politics. Tags: , , , . 1 Comment »
« Older posts
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.