On Father's Day, June 21, the Akron Beacon Journal ran a column by Michael Douglas, who is in charge of the editorial board, blasting Governor Ted Strickland for advocating slot machines at racetracks to raise much needed revenue. Apparently Douglas believes that Strickland should advocate tax increases. Perhaps Douglas is in need of a history lesson, one that Ohio Democrats haven't forgotten.
In 1982, Dick Celeste became Ohio's Governor. Following his election, the Democrats had control of the General Assembly and all the executive offices in the state. They also had the obligation to govern the state during a severe recession.
The Democrats bit the bullet and raised the state income tax. Celeste managed to get re-elected in 1986, and the Democrats held on to the House of Representatives, but in 1984, they lost control of the Ohio Senate. The Republicans used the campaign theme of the supposed 90% tax increase that Celeste had gotten through the General Assembly. It worked, and the Republicans haven't lost control of the State Senate since that election.
Douglas apparently believes that all Strickland has to do is come out for higher taxes and the Republicans in the Senate will just roll over and help raise taxes. There is absolutely no evidence that Bill Harris, and the rest of the Republican leadership in the Senate, will go along with that idea.
What is more likely to happen is that Strickland would come out for a tax increase, the Republicans would block it in the Senate, and the Democrats would lose both the Governor's race and control of the House in 2010. Such a result is way too high a price to pay to make editorial writers happy.
Showing posts with label Akron Beacon Journal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Akron Beacon Journal. Show all posts
Monday, June 22, 2009
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Who Has the Burden of Proof? Governor or his Critics
Governor Ted Strickland is about to veto a bill that would have established tax credits for movie production companies to set up shop in Ohio. The companies getting these tax credits could then sell them to other companies to use. Strickland and his Lt. Governor, Lee Fisher, object to this idea and maintain that the state cannot afford it when it is facing a deficit in its revenues, a deficit that has been estimated at between 500 million and one billion dollars.
Today, December 20, 2009, both the Akron Beacon Journal and the Cleveland Plain Dealer carried opinion columns or editorials blasting the Governor for his planned veto. The Beacon's Dennis Willard, who reports from Columbus for the Beacon, called the Strickland administration "whiners" and the Cleveland Plain Dealer, in its editorial, called Strickland anti-Cleveland. Interestingly in both papers the justification for supporting the tax credit provision was that while Ohio would lose tax revenues, it would gain jobs.
Interestingly enough, however, neither article set forth any analysis of how many jobs would be created versus how much would be lost in tax revenue. This brings up the question, who has the burden of proof? Is the burden of proof on the sponsors of the legislation to show that the loss of tax revenue is worth it in terms of jobs created, or is the burden of proof on the Governor to show that the loss of tax revenue is too much when compared to the potential number of jobs created?
We think it is on those who would cut tax revenue at at time when the State of Ohio is facing massive budget deficits. It is impossible to have a informed debate on the Governor's proposed veto when neither the bill's Republican sponsors nor their media allies can tell people how many jobs would be created versus the tax revenue that would be lost.
This problem, of course, is nothing new. Ever since the 1980s when Ronald Reagan promised that tax cuts would actually lead to more tax revenue, a proposition that was shown to be totally bogus when the Federal deficit exploded under St. Ronnie, the media has never challenged Republicans on their claims about the supposed benefits of tax cuts.
Why? Because the corporations that own media companies and the executives who run them like tax cuts, especially tax cuts tilted toward the wealthy. Because they like these tax cuts, they never demand that Republicans produce the proof that their tax cuts result in benefits to the economy as a whole.
The column by Dennis Willard and the editorial by the Cleveland Plain Dealer are just one more example of this behavior. In their minds, the burden of proof is not on the Republicans who would deprive Ohio of tax revenue when it is facing a deficit but on the Democratic Governor who thinks that we can't afford such a tax credit. That position is simply ridiculous.
Today, December 20, 2009, both the Akron Beacon Journal and the Cleveland Plain Dealer carried opinion columns or editorials blasting the Governor for his planned veto. The Beacon's Dennis Willard, who reports from Columbus for the Beacon, called the Strickland administration "whiners" and the Cleveland Plain Dealer, in its editorial, called Strickland anti-Cleveland. Interestingly in both papers the justification for supporting the tax credit provision was that while Ohio would lose tax revenues, it would gain jobs.
Interestingly enough, however, neither article set forth any analysis of how many jobs would be created versus how much would be lost in tax revenue. This brings up the question, who has the burden of proof? Is the burden of proof on the sponsors of the legislation to show that the loss of tax revenue is worth it in terms of jobs created, or is the burden of proof on the Governor to show that the loss of tax revenue is too much when compared to the potential number of jobs created?
We think it is on those who would cut tax revenue at at time when the State of Ohio is facing massive budget deficits. It is impossible to have a informed debate on the Governor's proposed veto when neither the bill's Republican sponsors nor their media allies can tell people how many jobs would be created versus the tax revenue that would be lost.
This problem, of course, is nothing new. Ever since the 1980s when Ronald Reagan promised that tax cuts would actually lead to more tax revenue, a proposition that was shown to be totally bogus when the Federal deficit exploded under St. Ronnie, the media has never challenged Republicans on their claims about the supposed benefits of tax cuts.
Why? Because the corporations that own media companies and the executives who run them like tax cuts, especially tax cuts tilted toward the wealthy. Because they like these tax cuts, they never demand that Republicans produce the proof that their tax cuts result in benefits to the economy as a whole.
The column by Dennis Willard and the editorial by the Cleveland Plain Dealer are just one more example of this behavior. In their minds, the burden of proof is not on the Republicans who would deprive Ohio of tax revenue when it is facing a deficit but on the Democratic Governor who thinks that we can't afford such a tax credit. That position is simply ridiculous.
Saturday, October 27, 2007
United States Water Concerns Affect Northeast Ohio
One factor that shaped the history of the United States, particularly the part of the U.S. that is east of the Mississippi River, is our country's supply of fresh water. The rivers and lakes of our country allowed settlers to penetrate the inland, transport goods, and provided water for businesses, farms, and households. Like a lot of other things, though, our country's supply of fresh water is threaten by growth in our population and environmental factors like drought and global warming.
The Akron Beacon Journal had a story on its website dated October 27, 2007, which explores what is happening to our water supply. This is a quote from the story:
An epic drought in Georgia threatens the water supply for millions. Florida doesn't have nearly enough water for its expected population boom. The Great Lakes are shrinking. Upstate New York's reservoirs have dropped to record lows. And in the West, the Sierra Nevada snowpack is melting faster each year.
Across America, the picture is critically clear the nation's freshwater supplies can no longer quench its thirst.
The government projects that at least 36 states will face water shortages within five years because of a combination of rising temperatures, drought, population growth, urban sprawl, waste and excess.
This is not just a concern of western and southeastern states, it is also a concern for Ohio. One thing that a lot of Ohioans aren't aware of is that Ohio's use of Lake Erie is controlled by a treaty between the United States and Canada that created the St. Lawrence waterway project. That project opened up the Great Lakes to international shipping, and greatly benefited both the U.S. and Canada, but the treaty creating the Waterway also mandates that water cannot be taken from Lake Erie and pumped over a Continental Divide.
In Ohio there is such a divide that runs through Medina County around the River Styx area. North of that divide water from Lake Erie can be used for municipal water systems. South of that divide, however, the water cannot be used for municipal water systems. This means that water from Lake Erie cannot be used for water systems for cities and villages like Wadsworth, Lodi, and Seville.
Both the U.S. and Ohio need to start looking at this problem and coming up with solutions. If we don't, then our children and grandchildren may end up living in a nation where fresh water is much harder to find.
The Akron Beacon Journal had a story on its website dated October 27, 2007, which explores what is happening to our water supply. This is a quote from the story:
An epic drought in Georgia threatens the water supply for millions. Florida doesn't have nearly enough water for its expected population boom. The Great Lakes are shrinking. Upstate New York's reservoirs have dropped to record lows. And in the West, the Sierra Nevada snowpack is melting faster each year.
Across America, the picture is critically clear the nation's freshwater supplies can no longer quench its thirst.
The government projects that at least 36 states will face water shortages within five years because of a combination of rising temperatures, drought, population growth, urban sprawl, waste and excess.
This is not just a concern of western and southeastern states, it is also a concern for Ohio. One thing that a lot of Ohioans aren't aware of is that Ohio's use of Lake Erie is controlled by a treaty between the United States and Canada that created the St. Lawrence waterway project. That project opened up the Great Lakes to international shipping, and greatly benefited both the U.S. and Canada, but the treaty creating the Waterway also mandates that water cannot be taken from Lake Erie and pumped over a Continental Divide.
In Ohio there is such a divide that runs through Medina County around the River Styx area. North of that divide water from Lake Erie can be used for municipal water systems. South of that divide, however, the water cannot be used for municipal water systems. This means that water from Lake Erie cannot be used for water systems for cities and villages like Wadsworth, Lodi, and Seville.
Both the U.S. and Ohio need to start looking at this problem and coming up with solutions. If we don't, then our children and grandchildren may end up living in a nation where fresh water is much harder to find.
Friday, October 05, 2007
Brunner Kicks So-Called "Independent" Candidates Off Ballot
Recent actions by Jennifer Brunner show what a difference having a Democratic Secretary of State makes as opposed to having Ken Blackwell. The Akron Beacon Journal's website, www.ohio.com, reported in an entry dated October 5, 2007, that Brunner broke a 2-2 tie on the Summit County Elections Board by ruling that independent candidates, who had ties to the Summit County Republican Party, couldn't appear on the November ballot.
Alex Arshinkoff, the Summit County GOP Chair, was suspected of getting people to run as independents to help GOP candidates defeat Democrats in races for Clerk of Court for the Cuyahoga Falls Municipal Court and Barberton Law Director. With regard to the Clerk's race, Brunner ruled that the candidates had handed in their petitions late. With regard to the Barberton Law Director's race, Brunner ruled that Edna Boyle, a Republican who was defeated in the 2006 primary for Ninth District Court of Appeals Judge, wasn't really an independent. All in all a very neat illustration of what a difference a Democratic SOS can make in Ohio politics.
Alex Arshinkoff, the Summit County GOP Chair, was suspected of getting people to run as independents to help GOP candidates defeat Democrats in races for Clerk of Court for the Cuyahoga Falls Municipal Court and Barberton Law Director. With regard to the Clerk's race, Brunner ruled that the candidates had handed in their petitions late. With regard to the Barberton Law Director's race, Brunner ruled that Edna Boyle, a Republican who was defeated in the 2006 primary for Ninth District Court of Appeals Judge, wasn't really an independent. All in all a very neat illustration of what a difference a Democratic SOS can make in Ohio politics.
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Trouble in the Elephant Herd: State Senator Tries to Oust Summit County GOP Chair
The Akron Beacon Journal is reporting that State Senator Kevin Coughlin is challenging Summit County GOP Chair Alex Arshinkoff. You can read the whole article by clicking on the link in this entry's title.
Like all family feuds, this one promises to be bitter. One of Arshinkoff's allies, Cuyahoga Falls Mayor Don Robart, refers to Coughlin as being "nuttier than a fruitcake." Coughlin says that Arshinkoff is "too paranoid, too vindictive" and is vengeful and, apparently for those reasons, should be replaced as county chair.
Of course Coughlin didn't mind Arshinkoff's personality traits when he was helping Kevin become a State Senator. It is hard to imagine any Republican office-holder objecting to a person being vindictive and paranoid since Bubble-Boy Bush and his brain, King Karl Rove, built their entire political operations out of fear, mistrust, and vindictiveness.
The only difference is that Coughlin is term-limited in 2010 and doesn't know what he is going to do next. He apparently wanted to run for State Auditor in 2006 but Arshinkoff backed Taylor instead of him. So now he plans to get even by replacing Arshinkoff on the grounds that Alex is too vindictive? Only to a self-righteous Republican like Coughlin would that make any sense. Republicans just don't have a sense of irony.
Like all family feuds, this one promises to be bitter. One of Arshinkoff's allies, Cuyahoga Falls Mayor Don Robart, refers to Coughlin as being "nuttier than a fruitcake." Coughlin says that Arshinkoff is "too paranoid, too vindictive" and is vengeful and, apparently for those reasons, should be replaced as county chair.
Of course Coughlin didn't mind Arshinkoff's personality traits when he was helping Kevin become a State Senator. It is hard to imagine any Republican office-holder objecting to a person being vindictive and paranoid since Bubble-Boy Bush and his brain, King Karl Rove, built their entire political operations out of fear, mistrust, and vindictiveness.
The only difference is that Coughlin is term-limited in 2010 and doesn't know what he is going to do next. He apparently wanted to run for State Auditor in 2006 but Arshinkoff backed Taylor instead of him. So now he plans to get even by replacing Arshinkoff on the grounds that Alex is too vindictive? Only to a self-righteous Republican like Coughlin would that make any sense. Republicans just don't have a sense of irony.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Does Ohio Need State Law on Strippers?
If you click on the link in this entry's title, you can read an Akron Beacon Journal editorial chiding the Republican General Assembly for adopting a state law prohibiting contact between strippers and patrons. The thrust of the editorial is not that such a prohibition is a bad idea, but that it should be adopted by local governments and not the state. If Cincinnati wants to adopt a no-contact rule and Columbus doesn't, then why is that Cleveland's problem? Why can't local officials decide this issue for themselves? Why does it take a state law to regulate strip clubs?
One of the arguments that conservatives used to make against Federal legislation was that local governments and state governments were better equipped to handle problems. Conservatives used to argue that this was especially true where the government's police power was concerned.
Now, however, Republicans in the General Assembly are more than willing to override the principle of self-government when it helps them score brownie points with a special interest group such as Citizens for Community Values.
Again, the issue here isn't the merits of a no-contact rule. Frankly, we can sympathize with the goals of this legislation. The issue here is which level of government should address this issue.
Cross-posted at www.medinacountycommonsense.com.
One of the arguments that conservatives used to make against Federal legislation was that local governments and state governments were better equipped to handle problems. Conservatives used to argue that this was especially true where the government's police power was concerned.
Now, however, Republicans in the General Assembly are more than willing to override the principle of self-government when it helps them score brownie points with a special interest group such as Citizens for Community Values.
Again, the issue here isn't the merits of a no-contact rule. Frankly, we can sympathize with the goals of this legislation. The issue here is which level of government should address this issue.
Cross-posted at www.medinacountycommonsense.com.
Monday, March 05, 2007
How Ted Strickland is Different
An Akron Beacon Journal reporter, Dennis Willard, posted a story in that paper's Sunday edition about how Ted Strickland is different than Bob Taft or George Voinovich. It is an interesting article and one that every Democrat should read. Ted Strickland is different because he is not allowing the General Assembly to set the agenda which both Voinovich and Taft did and because he governs with a whole different philosophy. Check it out, it is worth the time. You can read Willard's article by clicking on the link in this entry's title.
Sunday, February 25, 2007
Akron Beacon Journal Article on Retail Employees' Pay
The front page of the Akron Beacon Journal's Business section had a story today, (2.25.2007), about retail jobs in Ohio. It points out that retail jobs are paying less and that pay for retail employees is not keeping up with other sectors of the economy. In Medina County, for example, retail jobs have increased but retail pay has declined by 10% according to the article. Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown is quoted as attributing at least some of the decline in pay for retail employees to that sector's lack of organized workers. Other factors cited in the article include technology, which is allowing retail establishments to eliminate jobs by use of such mechanisms as self-checkout stations.
What is interesting about this article is that one of the arguments made by supporters of free trade treaties such as NAFTA is that while manufacturing jobs may be lost, service sector jobs will step in and fill the void. Well, as this article shows, the pay for such jobs is much less than the pay for the lost jobs. This affects all of us, not just the workers involved. If lower paying jobs replace higher paying jobs, then workers won't have as much money to spend on things like entertainment, cars, groceries, dining out, and recreation. It means that professionals such as doctors, lawyers, and dentists may find that their clients don't have as much to spend of their services. It will affect construction jobs because people who don't have as much money can't spend as much on housing. It will affect governments, especially governmental bodies like school boards, who have to go back to voters on a regular basis for approval of tax levies. In short, when one section of the economy suffers, all of the economy may suffer.
What is interesting about this article is that one of the arguments made by supporters of free trade treaties such as NAFTA is that while manufacturing jobs may be lost, service sector jobs will step in and fill the void. Well, as this article shows, the pay for such jobs is much less than the pay for the lost jobs. This affects all of us, not just the workers involved. If lower paying jobs replace higher paying jobs, then workers won't have as much money to spend on things like entertainment, cars, groceries, dining out, and recreation. It means that professionals such as doctors, lawyers, and dentists may find that their clients don't have as much to spend of their services. It will affect construction jobs because people who don't have as much money can't spend as much on housing. It will affect governments, especially governmental bodies like school boards, who have to go back to voters on a regular basis for approval of tax levies. In short, when one section of the economy suffers, all of the economy may suffer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)