Irresponsible reporting by Morning Journal in relation to Obama visit and Tea Party

Who does Lorain’s Morning Journal hire as reporters?  I couldn’t find a byline for this story to locate the name of the person who wrote it.

Here’s the objectionable excerpt:

Just a few minutes before the north gates of the LCCC are set to close, protesters and self-proclaimed teabaggers are starting to come into the free speech area. Located as far from the president as possible, their signs read “Abortion is murder” and “Jesus is pro life.”

“Teabaggers” is a profane derogatory slur that refers to a sexual act.  Those who attend Tea Parties do not proclaim themselves to be “teabaggers.”  It’s the bloggers and vile lefty pundits like Keith Olbermann who denigrate those who attend Tea Parties with that disparaging label.

Is that a representative sample of Tea Party signs that only address the pro-life cause?  The signs are silent about bailouts, Obamacare, and cap-and-trade?

What an amateur hatchet job masquerading as MSM journalism.  And to think this doesn’t even appear on the Op/Ed page, but is being reported as real news.

In DC on 9/14/09: The Beltway Cocoon

Even though Scott Brown won the U.S. Senate special election in Massachusetts, do you really think Capitol Hill is listening?  If my pilgrimage to Washington DC in September 2009 is any indication, I doubt it.

I’ve shown you the pictures I took at the 9/12 rally here and here.  But I haven’t told the bitter story of my visits to the DC offices of Senator George Voinovich (R-OH), Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), and Representative Adam Smith (D-WA) . . .

Until now.

Read the rest of this entry »

Invest Elyria

The ever-resourceful Brandon Rutherford, involved Elyria resident, endorsed by Buckeye RINO for Elyria City Council last fall, but not victorious on Election Day, is still reaching out to the Elyria community to devise ways to improve the city through ordinary grassroots efforts.  If you’re an Elyrian, you can be involved, too.  Check out the new “Invest Elyria” website, and you’ll learn about its purposes, proposals, and participation.  I have a feeling this is an effort that Buckeye RINO will revisit from time to time.  Best of wishes to all those involved with Invest Elyria from Buckeye RINO.

[UPDATE] Wanna Tea Party during Obama’s visit to Lorain County on Friday?

If you’ve missed some opportunities to attend Tea Parties on Capitol Hill in DC because it was so far away, then perhaps you’d like to be at a Tea Party closer to home.

If you’ve missed some opportunities to show your true genius in designing your own homemade protest signs and banners, January 22, 2010 (this Friday) might be a fortuitous occasion.  Who knows?  Perhaps someone in the Presidential motorcade might even spot your sign.

Lorain County Community College is on the outskirts of Elyria, and it’s a venue where President Obama will make an appearance on Friday, though I’m not sure of the exact time of the President’s appearance.

For the Tea Party, however, you’re welcome to stay the whole day.  You can pack food, if you like, but there are also plenty of fast food joints and other restaurants just down the road, to the north of the campus.  I have no idea what the weather forecast is, but be prepared for the outdoor conditions.

Mike Hellyar of the Lorain North Shore Patriots is designated as the organizer of the rally.  The plan for Tea Party attendees is to park at Elyria’s Hilltop Park Cobblestone.  It’s a little bit of a walk to the LCCC campus from there.  If by chance there’s no available parking at the park or at the campus, there is a shopping center called Cobblestone on the same road (State Route 301–also known as Abbe Road) as the campus.  State Route 301 is a heavily traveled thoroughfare, so as you walk along the way, plenty of motorists will have an opportunity to see your signs at virtually any time during daylight hours (just be careful not to get run over if you have to cross any intersections).

Driving-wise, LCCC is not that far from an interchange with I-90.  If traveling from Cleveland or other points east, you’d make a left off of the exit ramp onto State Route 254, and then make a right on State Route 301.  If traveling from Sandusky or other points west, you’d make a right off the exit ramp onto State Route 254 and then make a right on State Route 301.

You’ll see the Cobblestone shopping plaza on your right hand side fairly soon after turning on to SR 301 (Abbe Road).  The LCCC campus will be further south, along the left hand side of the road.  The sign at the entrance of campus is clearly visible.

I’ve always accessed Hilltop Park from Gulf Road (roughly parallel to Abbe, but further west), but it’s not the only access point, but the park stretches over to Abbe Road and up to Burns Road.  There is an intersection with Burns Road just south, beyond the LCCC campus, along Abbe Road.  Hilltop Park lies a little further south, just beyond that Abbe-Burns intersection, on the right hand side.

HilltopPark

If you feel your clever banner didn’t get enough exposure to viewers during the Tea Party, you might consider sending me a photograph of it, snapped on the LCCC grounds, and I’ll consider posting it here on Buckeye RINO.

Let the President know what you REALLY think about the bailouts, cap and trade, and Obamacare.

[UPDATE 1/20/2010] Two more links to help you get there and know what’s going on:

Cleveland Tea Party Patriots

Lorain NorthShore Patriots

[UPDATE] The hubris of Kasich

I’m not at all enamored with Steve Stivers as a candidate for Ohio’s 15th Congressional District.  But I sure wish he was in Congress right now instead of Mary Jo Kilroy, who has amassed a voting record I absolutely deplore.  Stivers was edged out by Kilroy by less than one percentage point of the total vote count in the 2008 elections for the 15th Congressional seat.

Less than one percentage point.

Guess what?  In that same Congressional race, there was a write-in candidate, Travis Casper, who captured all of 6 votes.  No big deal.

But guess what else?  In that same Congressional race, there was an independent, Don Eckhart, that snagged over 4 percent of the vote.  Who knows . . . maybe he garnered some votes from people who would have left their ballot blank rather than vote for Stivers or Kilroy.  Then again, maybe not.  Or, maybe those votes would have been split 50/50 between Stivers and Kilroy.  Who knows?

But, again, guess what else?  In that same Congressional race, Mark Noble, a Libertarian, captured close to 5% of the vote.  Since Kilroy, by her voting record, stands for big, expensive, intrusive government, and Libertarians are opposed to such, I’m thinking that the presence of a Libertarian in the race created an additional hurdle for Steve Stivers.

But the headline of this post is about Kasich, not Stivers.  Hmm . . . Are you way ahead of me at this point?  Can you tell where I’m going with this blog post already?  Perhaps so.

Remember, that ally of ACORN, Jennifer Brunner, is still Secretary of State through the culmination of this year’s elections, thus she still has her hand in the cookie jar.  In 2009, and now in 2010, Jennifer Brunner has permitted the Libertarian Party much more access to the ballot.

Don’t forget the Tea Party movement, either.  It could be a wellspring of 2010 candidates that are independent of any political party.

All across Ohio, GOP candidates up and down the ballot will have to face up to November’s additional hurdles presented by Libertarian and independent challengers who will demonstrate that the GOP has no monopoly over conservative-minded voters.  On the left?  There will be little competition to fracture the Democrat base.

There might not be an independent running in the Governor’s race, as it is a fairly daunting task to mount an independent run for Governor, but it’s too early to tell.

The Libertarian Party, though rising in prominence, is still small, with meager resources.  It’s unlikely that the Libertarians would subdivide their meager resources to support candidates in all five statewide executive branch races.  I think someone with a Libertarian philosophy might make a good fit for a State Auditor’s race, especially since Ohio Auditor Mary Taylor has now been corralled into running on the Kasich ticket as a candidate for Lieutenant Governor.  But does consolidating Libertarian resources in the Auditor’s race make any sense to the Libertarian Party?  No.

In the Libertarian Party’s own interests, I believe they will contest the governor’s race.  The governor’s race is unique among the statewide executive branch races in that it determines which political parties are major political parties and which are minor political parties, in accordance with Ohio’s election laws. If the Libertarians concentrate their efforts on backing a Libertarian candidate for governor, they’d be hoping to get enough votes to qualify as a major political party.  If they managed to do that, one of the first changes one would notice in 2011 would be that, in 88 counties, Libertarians would be added as officers of each Board of Elections.  Right now, only Democrats and Republicans constitute each county’s Board of Elections.  Other changes to Ohio’s political landscape would follow, and the GOP’s influence would surely be impacted.

Mary Taylor, campaign funds notwithstanding, would have been a shoo-in to retain her Apportionment Board seat as Ohio Auditor.  Among the 5 statewide executive branch races, 3 have a bearing on the composition of the Apportionment Board.  2010 is a U.S. Census year.  Before  the 2012 elections, legislative districts across Ohio must be redrawn to adjust for population shifts revealed by the 2010 U.S. Census.  The 3 races that matter to the apportionment board are: Ohio Secretary of State, Ohio Auditor, and Ohio Governor.  If a political party captures two out of these three crucial races, they capture the majority of the Apportionment Board that will redraw Ohio’s legislative map.  Mary Taylor was the GOP’s surest foothold in the climb to capturing the majority of the Apportionment Board.  Now, she’s been removed from the Auditor’s race, repositioned as a Lieutenant Governor candidate on the gubernatorial ticket headed by John Kasich.

The GOP may have forfeited the Auditor’s race and the Apportionment Board seat.  No one in the GOP was planning on challenging Taylor for the Republican nomination in the Auditor’s race.  The race, at this point, is totally vacant, and petitions to appear on the primary ballot are due to be filed by February 18th.  That’s not a lot of time to qualify for the statewide ballot, let alone clear the candidate’s calendar for campaigning, and especially for raising campaign funds.  Taylor was criticized for her fundraising by some pundits in various corners of the state, but she had more of a campaign treasury to fight for re-election to the Auditor’s seat than an absence of a candidate has.  No candidate=no campaign funds to win the election.  So, how did criticizing Taylor about fundraising help the GOP’s chances of capturing the seat?  Hello! You’ve got to at least have a name on the ballot to have any chance of winning!  Isn’t that obvious?

I’m sure somebody will surface as a GOP candidate for Auditor, but they’ll probably have to do so with less funds than Taylor had in trying to capture an open seat.  Taylor was only defending a seat she already held, and she’d won accolades for her performance as Auditor from many quarters, including even from some Democrats.  Doesn’t a positive perception of her job performance by voters add up to an advantage that can compensate for some campaign dollars?  I think so.  All-in-all, this opportunity to retain this Apportionment board seat appears to have been squandered.

In the Secretary of State race, the supposed frontrunners for nominations to their respective parties are Jon Husted for the GOP, and Jennifer Garrison for the Democrats.  Jon Husted, however, isn’t popular among all of Ohio’s Republicans, and perhaps Sandy O’Brien can steal away the GOP nomination like she did in the Treasurer’s race in 2006.  Jennifer Garrison isn’t popular among all the Democrats, either, so Husted and the Ohio GOP chair, Kevin DeWine besides banking on winning the May primary, are hoping and praying Garrison’s base won’t be energized this November.  I think the GOP’s chances of securing this Apportionment Board seat are iffy, but I think the chances are better for this race than for the Auditor’s race or the Governor’s race.

And now for the hubris of John Kasich, Republican candidate for Ohio Governor in 2010.  No doubt he’s giddy about capturing Mary Taylor to run on his ticket.  He may even be giddy about Strickland’s poll numbers as Strickland’s term in office resembles a train wreck.  But John Kasich, not Mary Taylor, will be at the top of the ticket, and Kasich is not universally revered and loved.  In fact, Kasich is not even universally known.  Furthermore, Kasich won’t have a monopoly on the “smaller government” message, as there’s likely to be a Libertarian candidate as well, a Libertarian with lots of incentive to peel away as many GOP voters as possible.  Keep in mind that Jennifer Brunner is still Secretary of State, and she’s not shy about leveraging whatever she can to improve Democrat outcomes.  Those Strickland versus Kasich poll numbers?  They don’t include any Libertarian in the polling.  Kasich may tout his balanced budget in Congress all he wants, but many voters, even among the Tea Party crowd, might only be dimly aware of that accomplishment.  More than likely, those who know just one or two things about Kasich are probably going to know that he used to be in Congress (a Beltway insider!  Oh no!  Yes, they will conveniently have already forgotten that Strickland was once a Beltway insider, too  . . . but the Libertarian definitely won’t be a Beltway insider) and, thanks to the Strickland campaign, voters will learn that he was somehow involved in the bankrupt Lehman Brothers firm (a Wall Street insider!  Double whammy!  Even Strickland can’t be portrayed that way!  The Libertarian will, no doubt, be free of that baggage, too!).  When the eventual Libertarian candidate is included in the poll numbers, the pollsters will be informing those polled that there IS a Libertarian alternative, and they might even mention the name of that candidate in the same breath as John Kasich and Ted Strickland, helping the Libertarian candidate overcome anonymity enough to erode Kasich’s voter base.  The left wing media might do their part to help re-elect Strickland by devoting coverage to the Libertarian (at least, I suppose Jennifer Brunner was envisioning all this as she facilitated Libertarian candidates’ access to the ballot during the past year or so).

Kasich should take nothing for granted.  Unfortunately, that’s not the way he has campaigned, to date.  Kasich seems to be taking much for granted.  He doesn’t seem to have realized it, but, despite the Strickland train wreck, he faced longer odds of capturing the governor’s seat at the outset of his campaign than either Husted or Taylor faced of winning their seats.  The GOP had a sure foothold in the Auditor’s race, an iffy chance in the SoS race, and a very challenging race in the Governor’s race.  The sure foothold has been forfeited, and, somehow, Kasich prides himself on that accomplishment, but he hasn’t shored up the possible sources of electoral base erosion in doing so.

Mary Taylor, from all appearances, wants to challenge Sherrod Brown for U.S. Senator in 2012.  Supposedly, a Lieutenant Governor seat would afford her the opportunity to campaign for Senate and hold government office at the same time.  She was likely to win re-election as Auditor.  But, as a voter, what would add to Taylor’s stature as a Senate candidate?  Taylor as state auditor, doing a better job than any of her auditor predecessors?  Or Taylor as Lieutenant Governor, where it’s really difficult to quantify her contribution to state government for the benefit of voters?  I think she’s more formidable as a Senate candidate as the sitting Auditor.  Now, let’s take that one step further.  As I’ve outlined, Kasich has more obstacles to winning than he’s, so far, acknowledged.  What are Mary Taylor’s chances of winning the 2012 U.S. Senate race as a failed lieutenant governor candidate if Kasich loses this November?  Greatly diminished, I think.

Kasich, in his hubris, has probably shortchanged both the Ohio GOP, notably the GOP leadership and the eventual GOP Auditor nominee, but potentially shortchanging all Republicans who will be seeking General Assembly seats for a decade beginning in 2012, and he may even be shortchanging Mary Taylor’s U.S. Senate aspirations, as well.

He’d better get off his duff (he probably thinks he’s already doing so, but I think he needs to redefine his notions) and campaign like his life depends on it if Kasich is going to win this November.  He’s holding way too many of the Republican Party’s marbles for him to come up short on Election Day without seriously damaging the party.

[UPDATE 1/21/2010] Lo and behold, as foretold, a Libertarian on the ballot for Ohio Governor.

[UPDATE X 2] Don’t blame me. I endorsed Annette Butler.

Of course, I’m referring to Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Bill Mason.  When he was up for re-election in 2008, I endorsed Annette Butler.   I harped on the corruption in county government.

But there is a political dimension to the corruption that grips Cuyahoga County.  It has everything to do with the Democrat Party.  In this election, I can’t think of a better place to get started with reform than the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s office with the election of Annette Butler.

Now, questions are being asked of Bill Mason in the wake of a traffic incident in which Mason was a passenger in a vehicle wherein the driver was apparently intoxicated.  But this story will turn out to be more than just your typical DUI, I’m fairly certain.  The Plain Dealer has this to say, but you might want to check back with the PD, because I think there might be more Bill Mason coverage on the way, and it might not have much to do with traffic.

[UPDATE 1/17/2010] As expected, there is more from the PD about Bill Mason, and it’s not about traffic, and it’s not good news, either.

[UPDATE 1.29.2010] More . . . again, not about traffic, but a detectable pattern of, shall we say . . . cronyism?

Take back our country in this year’s elections

One more reminder that Mark Stewart needs to be challenged for Lorain County Auditor

With the economic meltdown, more than a few local businesses can’t keep up with their bills.  If a business becomes defunct, it might garner some news coverage.  If it garners news coverage, there’s a good chance that the outstanding debts will be reported, particularly if taxes are overdue, especially when taxes are a matter of public record.

Elyria’s Chronicle-Telegram has a story about a shuttered strip club that, yet again, reveals the trend of inflating property tax assessment values beyond what the market would support.  This particular property was sold for $10 to get out from under the debt, but the prior sale price was $750,000.  One would think that the ever-worsening economy would support the notion that assessed values would be revised downward, but the Lorain County Auditor’s office assessed the value at $768,200.  Does anyone know anybody that will by this property for &768,200?  Didn’t think so.  When you add this bit of information to the info about tax assessments on the former Ford Lorain Assembly Plant property, and the complaints I’ve heard from some Lorain County homeowners, it’s clear to me that Stewart has been gouging the public.  In October, the Lorain County Auditor’s office announced that assessed property values were dropping, and a news story of potentially-inflated assessed property values in neighboring Huron County may have motivated the Lorain County Auditor’s office to make such an announcement.

But these are not the most egregious excesses perpetrated by Mark Stewart during his tenure as Lorain County Auditor.  For the most egregious excesses, I recommend poring over That Woman’s Weblog under the category heading of “CRA.”  Mark Stewart thinks that a Lorain County Auditor has the right to veto ordinances enacted by Lorain City Council.  In Stewart’s wranglings to retroactively (a violation of ex post facto provisions of the Constitution) rescind tax abatements, he’s cost the county and Lorain city lots of $$$ in legal fees.  The power Stewart has usurped is absolutely tyrannical.

In my opinion, Lorain County Auditor Mark Stewart is in need of some checks and balances.  The check and balance I’d prefer is that someone runs against him for election this year so that voters can show him the door.

Here’s a recent blog entry about launching a candidacy.

The deadline for submitting election candidacy petitions to seek party nominations in the primaries is February 18, 2010, before 4 p.m., at the Lorain County Board of Elections.

[UPDATE]Civil trial before federal judge to be “YouTubed”–on trial: California’s Prop 8

Ah, the wonders of the world wide web . . . in this case, YouTube.

In the November 2008 elections, not only were Presidential candidates on the ballot in California, so was Proposition 8.  Proposition 8 sought to affirm that lawful marriage in California would be reserved for matrimonially joining one woman with one man.  Voters approved the measure.  Those opposed to the measure are apparently still miffed at “democracy” spelled with a little “d,” and have made numerous attempts to do an end run around voters and the fundamentals of American governance.

Among the latest attempts to circumvent democracy, those opposed to California’s Proposition 8 are in the process of litigating the measure as a civil matter in a federal court where one judge (no jury) will decide the case.   In an unprecedented move, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker has ruled that courtroom proceedings will be recorded on video for display on YouTube.  (All the handier for harvesting sound bites out of context, don’t you think?  After all, who’d stare glassy-eyed at a computer monitor for hours upon hours watching courtroom YouTube clips to wrap their heads around the full scope and context of everything presented at trial?)

Michelle Malkin points out, in her blog post on the upcoming trial, that the move to YouTube the trial may be an attempt to intimidate witnesses that might be called to testify.

My advice to Prop 8 supporters who will be testifying:  Don’t let the opposing side sucker you into their straw man arguments wherein religion is the bogeyman.  Don’t let them turn this trial into a referendum on religion.  The opposing side has attempted to use that trick to sidetrack debating the real issue time after time.  As I’ve argued in a prior blog entry here at Buckeye RINO, one can be an atheist who subscribes to Darwinian evolution and still see the wisdom of withholding state recognition of same-sex “marriages.”

Of course, I’m not surprised that the opposing side is pushing for video coverage.  I’ve noted the opposing side’s double-speak before, when they’ve said that they want the government to stay out of bedrooms yet their actions demonstrate that they really want to parade their bedroom activity in full public view.

I suppose we could be thankful that the liberal left will only be presenting us with a courtroom video and not a bedroom video.

UPDATE 1/11/10: At least for the near future, the Supreme Court has blocked cameras from the courtroom for this trial.

The struggle to restructure Cleveland schools

I listened to the streaming internet feed of yesterday’s press conference wherein Cleveland Metropolitan School District CEO Eugene Sanders unveiled the plans for the “transformation” of Cleveland’s public schools.  The Plain Dealer provides more coverage that you may access through this link.

One thought that ran through my head:  Isn’t it amazing (and wrong) that the school district has to seek to spin off and/or partner with charter schools in order to gain sufficient flexibility to pursue academic excellence?  Isn’t it an indictment of federal and state mandates that cause public education to be so rigid?  In the short term, since addressing root causes for the inflexibility of public schools would take a great deal of time (especially since no politician has even begun to desire to address root causes–the politicians are still piling on with the mandates that increase the level of paralysis), I have to say, in broad terms (not necessarily all the details), that I support Sanders and the path of change that he is seeking to blaze.

Another thought that raced through my head as I listened to the press conference:  Too many people within Cleveland are going to nonsensical lengths to try to stop these changes that Sanders seeks.  There are too many people in denial about the devastatingly poor performance of Cleveland’s schools.  I can’t think of any reason why Clevelanders should cling to the status quo.  Does everyone realize the societal cost of maintaining dropout factories?  Dropout factories = more prisons.  I don’t like that equation, so let’s subtract dropout factories so that we can subtract prisons.

What will it take to allow public schools to be flexible enough to emulate the best practices implemented by private schools?  I think Ohio’s politicians ought to be scouring the revised code and administrative code to see what can be weeded out in response to that question.

Obama to visit Lorain County on January 22

Several media sources are reporting that President Obama will be visiting Lorain County on January 22.  Ostensibly, his message will focus on employment and economic recovery for Main Streets all over America.

Of course, politically speaking, Ohio is a bellweather state, so I understand why the President would, from time to time, schedule appearances here.  I suppose U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown is quite pleased with himself that the President has selected Lorain County for the upcoming occasion.  I’m sure local residents, whether they voted for the President or not, will be eager to make the President’s acquaintance.

Since 2002, I’ve been campaigning for improvements to Lorain County’s economy, and my proposals aren’t really on the same page as Senator Brown’s.  I’m curious what the President will say, but, if I were a betting man, which I’m not, I’d venture to say that the President’s message to Lorain County residents will not substantively differ from what Senator Brown’s message has been.  If the President did say anything that marked a departure from what Senator Brown says, that would raise lots of eyebrows in the blogosphere, and perhaps in the MSM, as well.

I’ve been less active in posting on my blog in recent weeks.  Perhaps I should give myself a swift kick-in-the-pants to increase my blog content before the President arrives.  My transportation series, in particular, keeps nagging at me.  I need to complete it.

I’m sure to weigh in on the President’s message in the aftermath of his visit . . . unless, of course, he hires me to be the czar in charge of scheduling sports events in order to save the BCS from itself, in which case, as a czar, I’d have to recuse myself from criticizing the President.

Will the President’s appearance be carefully stage-managed?  Or will there be unscripted and impromptu moments in which local residents can interact authentically with the President?  I’m curious to see how that turns out.

Reader’s opinions are welcome.  What are your thoughts and feelings about the President’s upcoming visit?

Ohio House GOP press release: Strickland, House Democrats Gamble With Education

Editor’s note: This press release was issued today, Jan. 4, 2010, on behalf of the Republican caucus in the Ohio House of Representatives. Rep. Martin represents the 70th Ohio House District, Rep. Morgan represents the 36th Ohio House District, and Rep. Stebelton represents the 5th Ohio House District.  Further information regarding this press release may be obtained via Megan Piwowar at (614) 466-0863.  As an aside, yours truly, DJW, the Buckeye RINO, thinks it is a huge mistake to depend upon the state’s gambling revenues, including the Lottery, to fund the essentials for K-12 education.  In my not-so-humble opinion, such gambling proceeds should be managed as a windfall, as the state ought not to be enticing more and more of Ohio’s residents to begin to gamble, or to gamble more often, or to gamble more $$$. Furthermore, it is the opinion of yours truly that education mandates ought to originate from the citizens within local school districts, not so much the state government, and definitely not the Federal government.

Strickland, House Democrats Gamble With Education: Schools Targeted As Political Pawns Throughout 2009

COLUMBUS— One year to the day House Democrats took the majority, State Representatives Jarrod Martin (R-Beavercreek), Seth Morgan, CPA, (R-Huber Heights), and Gerald Stebelton (R-Lancaster) summarized the 2009 legislative year as time of unfunded mandates on schools and damaging funding cuts to poorer districts, charter schools, e-schools and Catholic schools. Additionally, rather than streamlining state spending to ensure adequate funding for education, Governor Strickland chose to fund K-12 education with unstable revenue from video lottery terminals, an unconstitutional plan that eventually failed and put Ohio’s education system at risk.

“Throughout this economic turmoil, lawmakers Republican or Democrat need to remain committed to ensuring a bright future for Ohio’s students,” said Martin.  “The political pandering and aggressive tone that threatened devastating cuts to education was a clear demonstration of partisanship by Governor Strickland and House Democrats who carelessly placed the reductions on education before examining other bloated areas of the Executive branch or legislature.”

House Democrats managed to cut state education funding by nearly $400 million over the next two years, the first time since the DeRolph case of 1997 that the Legislature recommended education funding cuts. They also imposed costly mandates on schools by requiring the implementation of all-day kindergarten starting in the 2010-2011 school year, which many districts have said they could not afford in this economy.

“Recognizing that education is central to Ohio’s long-term success,” said Morgan.  “House Republicans proposed numerous ideas to increase Ohio’s chances of receiving federal funding through the Race to the Top program, preserve school choice, and alleviate oppressive mandates on districts. They also introduced a number of amendments to the budget to improve the governor’s evidence-based model.”

The Ohio Department of Development has estimated that establishing all-day kindergarten in Ohio’s 613 school districts will cost more than $200 million, including $127 million in operating costs and $78 million for classroom space. House Republicans avow that enforcing this mandate on already-struggling schools will force many to cut programs or extracurricular activities to be able to afford the mandate.

“I will continue to fight to save the taxpayers of Ohio money, and to cut wasteful government spending, while protecting our most valuable asset, the future of Ohio-our children’s education,” said Stebelton.  “I was disheartened by the inept leadership in Columbus to threaten our schools and even libraries while budget discussions were still going on.”

However, House Democrats have silenced many Republican initiatives since the beginning of the General Assembly. Although the Ohio House has been plagued by stalemates and inaction in 2009, House Republicans remain hopeful that 2010 will bring bipartisan discussions about Ohio’s future and how to responsibly bring our education system into the 21st century economy.

Federal judges interfering with petition laws set by the states?

Hat-tip to Ballotpedia.org for raising my awareness of what may be an emerging trend: Federal courts are being asked to invalidate laws passed by states that contain residency requirements for petition circulators.

In Ohio, voters, by way of petition and a subsequent vote, can enact and repeal laws through an initiative and referendum process spelled out by our state constitution, codified by state statute, and further clarified in the state administrative code, with any gray areas that can’t be decided by bipartisan county boards of election referred to Ohio’s Secretary of State.  Legal challenges within this scope ought to be handled by Ohio’s judicial branch.

At the level of the Federal government, there is no such petition process.  Any voter petitions presented to those who represent us in Washington DC are merely symbolic.  No petition has the power to compel the U.S. Congress or the U.S. President to act.  Petitions are clearly creations of the various states.  As one might expect, laws regarding petitions are not uniform throughout the nation, as each state sets forth its own laws governing petitions.

How is it that Federal courts are being asked to decide cases involving petition laws when there’s no such thing as a Federal petition?  Clearly, if the 10th Amendment to the Constitution means anything at all, then it’s a slam-dunk that state judiciaries, not the Federal judiciary, have jurisdiction over legal challenges to the laws that govern the petition process.

I found a Ballotpedia entry from Michigan and another Ballotpedia entry from Nebraska that made me scratch my head.

The Detroit Free Press reports that a Federal judge–got that?  Federal judge?–ruled that residency requirements for recall petitions (a Michigan state legislator, specifically, House Speaker Andy Dillon, was the target of the recall effort) were an unconstitutional restriction upon the freedom of speech.  Never mind that the judge, himself, trampled the 10th Amendment.  What did the statute say?  It said that for a recall of the state legislator, the petitions had to be circulated by those who resided within the state legislator’s district.  Who gets to vote for the state legislator in the first place?  Those who reside in the state legislator’s district.  Should I file suit because my freedom of speech is restricted because I don’t get to vote on that state legislator race because I’m not a resident of that Michigan legislative district?  To do so would be nonsense.

Yet, the Free Press article reports:

Judge Robert Holmes Bell found that requiring a petition circulator in a recall campaign to live in the district of the targeted officeholder violated the First Amendment because it substantially limited the pool of people who might participate.

I’m sure thousands of people reside in said district.  If not enough petition circulators can be rounded up from amongst that group, then perhaps there isn’t sufficient outcry for a recall.  One only needs to look at the chain of events to see this point borne out:  The motive behind the recall effort to oust Speaker Dillon was an anti-tax sentiment.  I certainly sympathize with anti-tax sentiments.  I have anti-tax sentiments, myself.  However, in 2008, a number of circulators for the anti-tax group’s recall petitions were circulated by those who were outsiders, not residing within Dillon’s district.  Understandably, the first response from elections officials were to invalidate the petitions circulated by the non-residents, in compliance with Michigan law.  Judge Bell, however, in a preliminary ruling, overrode the Michigan law, directed that the signatures from the invalidated petitions be counted anyway, so that the recall would appear on the ballot.  It did appear on the ballot.  Did the anti-tax group win their recall vote?  Nope.  Speaker Dillon easily prevailed.  There was no groundswell against Speaker Dillon after all.  Shouldn’t that have been all too predictable, considering an astro-turf effort was required to circulate the recall petitions in the first place?

But, if Michigan’s petition requirements really do squelch the voice of the people (which, apparently, they don’t), the matter should be challenged in Michigan’s courts, if the Michigan legislature and/or Michigan elections officials aren’t acting in the public’s interests.

Potentially, Judge Bell’s ruling, if it stands, could mean that out-of-state residents could invade Michigan to conduct whatever astro-turf petition drive strikes their fancy, burdening elections officials with paperwork that has little to do with the agendas of Michigan’s own registered voters.  And if out-of-staters are the ones circulating petitions, then Michigan wouldn’t even be in a position to determine whether the petition circulators are even citizens of the United States.  Foreign governments, multi-national corporations, and/or international NGO’s might conspire to conduct astro-turf campaigns on Michigan soil.  Whatever happened to self-determination?

The Omaha World Herald brings us the report of a suit filed in a U.S. District Court that challenges Nebraska’s petition laws.  In the case known as Citizens in Charge vs. Gale (John Gale is Nebraska Secretary of State), there are four legal provisions being challenged.  As in the Michigan case, the plaintiffs appear to be right-of-center on key platform planks.  Two of the legal provisions being challenged, I believe, are worthy of debate (but not in U.S. District Court, mind you, in a Nebraska state courtroom), as one provision stipulates that an independent candidate for statewide office must collect more valid signatures than partisan candidates are required to gather.

Another allegedly onerous provision is that an independent candidate’s petitions must include at least 50 valid signatures from at least 31 different counties.  That’s a lot of territory to cover, especially from the perspective of an Ohioan, since Ohio is a more compact state than Nebraska.  Such a stipulation would favor candidates from eastern Nebraska, where counties are smaller in size, than candidates from central or western Nebraska, where you have to put lots and lots of miles on your vehicle to string together 31 counties.

But the third provision being challenged in Federal court is the residency requirement for petition circulators.  To run for statewide office in Nebraska, your petitions need to be circulated by those who are eligible to vote in Nebraska.  Just like the Michigan case, I don’t see what’s wrong with that.  It’s a safeguard that prevents a guy like Iranian President Ahmadinejad from clandestinely putting a Quisling on the Nebraska ballot.

The fourth provision being challenged in Federal Court is particularly telling.  Nebraska law says the petition itself must disclose whether the circulator is a paid for his/her petition-circulating services or whether he/she is strictly a volunteer.  Why is it so telling?  Referring back to a sentence from the Detroit Free Press article about the case in Michigan:

Petition signature collecting has been a growth industry in the last decade, with professional collectors traveling from state to state to work for whoever would pay them.

I’m not exactly enamored with these enterprises who collect signatures for money.  Remember the dead people in Erie County, Ohio, who signed the casino petitions?  Paid circulators collected those signatures, and they were a nightmare for local officials to deal with when a majority of the signatures gathered were invalid.

In the Nebraska case, Citizens in Charge is an organization that would mobilize paid out-of-staters to invade Nebraska to circulate petitions.  It doesn’t matter to me that they are more conservative on issues than ACORN, and it doesn’t matter to me that they are a non-profit (like ACORN) rather than a for-profit (like the firm that circulated the casino petitions in Erie County), it reeks of astro-turf to have out-of-staters shape your state’s election ballot.

I see no harm in Nebraska’s requirement that circulators must be identified as either paid or volunteer, even though Ohio has no such statute.  But the challenge of that provision reveals what’s really at work in undermining these residency requirements, and by extension, eroding the 10th Amendment.

Frankly, I’ve had my fill of ACORN electioneering, but if these “conservative” plaintiffs prevail in these cases being heard in Federal courtrooms (where they don’t even belong), then we’ve got a lot more of ACORN headed our way.

No, I won’t be seeking the 56th District state rep seat in 2010

I was the Republican candidate who ran against Democrat Joe Koziura in 2002 and 2004 for the 56th District state rep seat.  In November 2006 and November 2008, Joe Koziura did not face a Republican opponent, which is regrettable.  I think voters should have choices.

The 56th District state rep seat will be an open seat in the 2010 election season because Mr. Koziura is term-limited.

The Morning Journal reports that one of those seeking the open seat will be Democrat Jose Candelario, who is stepping down from his position at the Lorain County Board of Elections.   I’m hoping that there will be others who will vie for this seat, so that voters will have choices.

I still get asked if I will be seeking the seat.  No, I will not be running for 56th District state rep in 2010.  I turn the question back to those who’ve posed the question to me, “Will you be running for the 56th District state rep seat in 2010?”  Hence, my prior blog post.

The 56th District includes the cities of Lorain, Sheffield Lake, and Oberlin, the 5th and 6th Wards of the city of Elyria, a very tiny, tiny, tiny sliver of the city of Amherst, the village of South Amherst, the whole of Sheffield Township, Amherst Township, and New Russia Township, most of Elyria Township, and a very tiny, eensy-weensy sliver of Carlisle Township.  If you are currently a resident and a legally-registered voter within said district, guess what?  You are qualified to be a candidate for state rep!

If you’re thinking about running and would like to ask me some questions, just send an email to my inbox.  I’ll try to be helpful.

Consider running for office in 2010

Up in arms over the direction your county is headed in?  Up in arms over the direction the state is headed in?  Up in arms over the direction our nation is headed in?  I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if that’s the case.

Wonder what you can do about it besides contacting your elected officials, attending civic meetings, signing petitions, voting, and rallying for causes?

You could run for office in 2010!  Despite all our gripes about elected officials, how many times do we see unopposed candidates on our ballots?  Far too often!  Voters need choices on ballots!

For many races, the eligibility rules for candidates aren’t all that complicated, especially legislative races, where citizenship, residency, and voter registration are often the only criteria for eligibility.  Don’t automatically suppose you wouldn’t be qualified to run.  There’s an excellent chance you’re eligible for a great many positions.  The Ohio Secretary of State webpage can be a starting point for checking on candidacy requirements and deadlines.  Some of the pointers I shared about launching a candidacy for municipal offices apply to running for county, state, and federal offices, too.

Don’t know much about running a campaign?  Phil Van Treuren, who ran a successful campaign this year, has a blog titled “Killer Campaigning,” which is very thought-provoking.  I bet you’ll find highly useful information there.  Start with this important advice about consulting family about a potential candidacy, then feel free to absorb the remainder of the blog’s articles thereafter.  Thanksgiving is a time for families to gather.  That’s a great opportunity to discuss launching a campaign with family members.  December’s holidays are also great opportunities to further communicate with family about launching an election bid.

On the ballot for next year:

  • Judicial branch: county court, state appellate court, and state Supreme Court judge positions
  • Legislative branch: county commissioner, some state school board seats, all state rep seats, odd-numbered state senate district seats, all seats for U.S. House of Representatives, and a U.S. Senate seat
  • Executive branch: county auditor, Ohio governor and lieutenant governor, Ohio Secretary of State, Ohio Treasurer, Ohio Auditor, and Ohio Attorney General

I’m hoping voters are swamped with choices next year.  Please consider putting your name on the ballot.

Happy Thanksgiving!