Tell Us Who You Are Backing for United States Senate

We are taking a completely unscientific poll as to who our readers are supporting for the Democratic nomination for the United States Senate seat being vacated by George Voinovich. Tell us if you are supporting Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher or Sec. of State Jennifer Brunner. You can take the poll by clicking on the answer in the box on the right hand side of this page. You can also leave us a comment on why you are supporting one or the other.

Voinovich Stiffs Working Women

The Senate voted on Thursday on a cloture motion to get off debate on the H.R. 2831 otherwise known as the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2007. Lilly Ledbetter is a woman who worked for Goodyear in Alabama for over 20 years. When she received an unsigned note, she found out that she was being paid substantially less for the same work as three men. She filed a Federal lawsuit based on the 1964 Civil Rights Act for wage discrimination. She won a verdict of over three million dollars.

Her verdict, however, was taken away from her by the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court found that Federal required Ms. Ledbetter to bring her action within 180 days of the first time she was discriminated against, which was when she was first paid less money than the male employees. The fact that she didn't know of such discrimination didn't matter to the majority of the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would have changed the language in the Federal law that the majority of the U.S. Supreme Court relied on in reaching its decision. The bill had passed the House and was being debated in the Senate. The vote on the cloture motion was extremely important since it would have been harder to have opposed the bill itself than the cloture motion.

The cloture motion needed 60 votes to pass. It received 56. Forty-two Senators opposed the cloture motion. One of those was Ohio's own George Voinovich. George Voinovich stiffed working women with his vote.

Voinovich Votes Against Cloture on GOP Filibuster of Dem Plans to Increase Stimulus Package

George W. Voinovich, who is a real budget hawk when Democrats occupy the White House or money is being spent to help real people, voted with the Republicans today on a cloture motion to end debate on Democratic amendment to the stimulus bill. The cloture motion failed by two votes, 58 to 41. Ohio's other United States Senator, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D, voted to cut off debate on the amendment. Both Clinton and Obama returned to the Capitol to vote for the cloture motion.

Here's what gets us about Voinovich. It's not that he voted against more money for the stimulus bill. We can see why he might oppose it, if he was truly sincere about increasing the Federal debt. We just don't think that he is sincere. Where he sees fiscal responsibility, we see insincerity since he voted for Bush's tax cuts of 2001 and 2003. Those tax cuts are a major reason why we have record setting deficits today.

If he had truly been a deficit hawk, as some of his media admirers in the Cleveland Plain Dealer like to call him, then he wouldn't have signed off on the huge tax cuts that Bush gave the wealthy unless the Republican controlled Congress had been willing to cut Federal spending to pay for the tax cuts. Of course, they weren't ready to do that and neither was the Bush Administration. Instead they ran up huge deficits and sold T-Bills to the Chinese that our children and grandchildren will end up paying.

So What is the Iraq War End Game?

On December 18, 2007, the United States Senate voted on an amendment offered by Senator Russ Feingold, (D-WI), to re-deploy United States troops out of Iraq. The amendment failed by a vote of 71 to 24, with 71 Senators voting against it and 24 Senators voting for it. Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio backed the Feingold amendment, but Senator George Voinovich voted against it. So here's our question for George Voinovich and the other 70 Senators who voted against the Feingold amendment: How much longer do you see us in Iraq? Here's another question: How much more are you willing to spend to keep American troops in Iraq?

Those two questions are very seldom asked by reporters covering this war. Bush is allowed to get away with trite sayings like, "We will stand down as the Iraqis stand up", whatever the hell that means. No one wants to talk about how longer American troops will have to stay in Iraq or how much more money Bush's war will cost this country.

If Bush would have told the American people that his Iraq War would cost over 3,000 American lives, over half a trillion dollars in taxpayer money, and would last over five years, the support for his war would have measured in single digits. It was only because he and his administration basically promised a cakewalk that he got Americans to support his war. It was only because of the stupidity of the Kerry campaign ("I voted for the resolution before I voted against it) that he got re-elected. This war was sold to the American public by lies and is being maintained not because it has the support of the American people, but because the Republican members of the Congress put loyalty to Bush ahead of the desires of the American public.

So, this is no longer just George Bush's war, it is now George Voinovich's war. Ohioans need to ask Senator Voinovich just how much longer he is prepared to support keeping American troops in Iraq and just how much money he is willing to spend to keep American troops in Iraq. All that is needed now is a way to ask those questions, since it is pretty obvious that the media won't ask tough questions of this war's supporters.

Voinovich Votes Against Ending Debate on Energy Bill

So once again, good old moderate Republican George Voinovich, decides to support big business and the Bush Administration over the interests of the American people. Today the House passed energy bill, which would raise fuel efficiency standards, require electric utilities to increase the use of renewable fuels like wind, and tax big oil companies to help pay for costs associated with the bill, came to a vote in the Senate.

Under the new rules laid out by the Republicans, almost every bill has to get 60 votes or face a filibuster. The energy bill's cloture vote failed in the Senate. Fifty three Senators voted to shut down the debate, 42 voted against shutting down debate, and five Senators didn't vote. Guess how Ol' Moderate George voted? Yep, you got it, he voted with the utilities, the oil companies, and George W. Bush. That's a so called moderate Republican for you: You can always count of them to support Bush in the end.

More Voinovich BS from the PD

Is there a law somewhere that says that the Plain Dealer has to describe Voinovich as some sort of Republican "moderate" on Iraq, even though it is obvious he is not such thing? Time and time again the PD tells us that Voinovich is searching for a different policy in Iraq than Bush's even though it is simply not true.

The latest example is a Plain Dealer editorial that appeared on Sunday, November 25, 2007. The editorial included this gem:

You might think that Democratic leaders, having already fallen hard on this path this year, would look to form an alliance with Republicans - including Ohioans Steve LaTourette in the House and George Voinovich in the Senate - who want a new course in Iraq.

Here's a question for the stupid editorial writer who wrote the above: When has George Voinovich proposed a new course for Iraq that is substantially different than George Bush's? Voinovich has supported the President on every vote that has been held this year. He refuses to come out in support of any kind of deadline for the withdrawal of American troops. He supported the so-called "surge." So just what is this new course that Voinovich and LaTourette supposedly want?

Look, we have long known that the Plain Dealer carries good old George's water. They did it when he was Cuyahoga County Auditor, when he was Cleveland's Mayor, when he was Governor, and now they are still carrying it when he is a Senator. Instead of insulting the intelligence of their readers by making up stuff, why doesn't PD's editorial staff just come out and admit the obvious: No matter what the facts are, they support whatever Voinovich does.

Does George Voinovich Believe in the Rule of Law?

Okay, so this is not exactly a surprise, but Senators Brown and Voinovich split on the nomination of Michael B. Mukasey to be Attorney General. One of the more depressing things about Voinovich's support of Bush's agenda over the last several years is the fact that Voinovich is a lawyer and yet seems unconcerned about the assault on the rule of law by the Bush Administration.

Since 9-11 the Bush Administration has claimed the right to conduct survelliance without a warrant; hold an American citizen indefinitely without bringing a charge against him in court; send people to foreign countries to be tortured; and conduct interrogations using methods that are considered torture were they to be done by American military personnel. Through all of this George Voinovich has said little if anything.

All of these practices are assaults on the rule of law. The rule of law includes "the principle that governmental authority is legitimately exercised only in accordance with written, publicly disclosed laws adopted and enforced in accordance with established procedural steps that are referred to as due process." All of the practices described above are assaults on the rule of law in the United States.

One of the exciting things for those of us who are attorneys has been the role of lawyers in confronting the acts of General Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan. At no small risk to themselves, Pakistani lawyers and judges have resisted the attempt of General Musharraf to set aside the law in his quest to stay in power. These lawyers and judges are willing to put their "money where their mouths are" when it comes to defending the rule of law in Pakistan.

Contrast that with the actions of lawyers like Voinovich who are willing to help Bush set aside the rule of law in the United States. When George Voinovich was sworn in as an attorney, he took an oath to uphold and support the Constitution of the United States. How does he square that oath with his support of this administration?

Voinovich's BS Idea: Have Iraq Timetable for Withdrawal After Bubble-Boy Leaves Office

Voinovich and some other so-called Republican moderates, otherwise known as "Bush enablers", have come up with a real bright idea: establish guidelines for withdrawal from Iraq which start after BB leaves office. Who else is supposedly backing this lame-brain effort? Well, there is Elizabeth Dole, Norm Coleman, and Lamar Alexander. What do all of them have in common? They are running for re-election in 2008 and they are worried about losing because of BB's War.

Now, this proposal makes a lot of sense for Republicans. Vote to set up guidelines for getting out after Bush leaves so that his wing-nut base won't vote against you in a primary. Stick any negative consequences of withdrawal on the incoming president who will most likely be a Democrat. Avoid having your party held accountability for the diaster that its President and Vice-President have gotten the U.S. into in invading Iraq.

For the rest of us, however, this idea really, really sucks. In a democracy elections are how we hold political parties and politicians accountable for their exercise of power. The Republican Party shouldn't be let off the hook for how Bush and his enablers in the Congress have managed this country since 2000.

George Voinovich Chooses Bush Over Ohio's Kids

The Senate voted today on the Reauthorization of the State Children's Health Insurance Program. Sherrod Brown voted to invoke cloture while George Voinovich voted not to invoke cloture. The motion to invoke cloture passed 69-30, more than the required 60 votes. Our guess is that Voinovich will now to try and have it both ways by voting for the bill on final passage. This way he can spin it to the press and other media that he supports expansion of the program while, in reality, he voted against Ohio's kids and for George W. Bush on the cloture motion.

Voinovich's Iraq Position: Troop Withdrawal Good, Deadlines Bad

Ohio's other United States Senator, George Voinovich, gave an interview to WOSU radio in which he came out for the Bush Administration developing a plan to withdraw from Iraq, but, according to WOSU, he will not vote for a deadline. He says that he believes that a deadline of one year would be disastrous.

This is classic Voinovich: Do just enough to look like you are listening to Ohio's voters, but, when the chips are down, support Bubble-Boy's Iraq policy. This way he gets the praise of moderately conservative Ohio newspapers like the Plain Dealer and the Columbus Dispatch for being realistic about Iraq, but doesn't earn the animosity of the wing-nuts who vote in Ohio's Republican primaries.

This is always the problem that Cuyahoga County Republicans have in Ohio politics. Since they are from Cuyahoga County, they tend to be much more reasonable than some of the downstate Republicans. They have to be because Cuyahoga County, even in its Republican areas, will only tolerate a certain amount of right-wing craziness. This tendency toward reasonableness makes them hard for Democrats to beat in general elections, but makes them vulnerable in Republican primaries.

Look what happened, for example, to Jim Petro. Here he was a successful state-wide vote getter, a winner of races for Ohio Attorney General and Ohio State Auditor, a proven vote getter in the biggest Democratic county in the State, and he gets whacked in the primary by a right-wing nut job named Ken Blackwell. You can be sure that Voinovich took note of that election, especially if he is thinking about running for re-election in 2010.

Iraq, though, is different than other problems Voinovich has faced in his political career. The cost in human suffering and financial treasure to the United States is high compared to the importance that most of us who aren't oil company executives attach to the country. Voinovich's political balancing act may come to a crashing end over this issue if he decides to run in 2010.

Bush Veto of Health Insurance Bill Will Hurt Ohio Kids

Elizabeth Auster of the Cleveland Plain Dealer had a column in the July 29, 2007 issue about how Governor Strickland's plan to insure more Ohio children may be screwed because of a possible Bush veto of a bill to increase health insurance for children. If you click on this entry's title, you can read an article that includes the following quote from Governor Strickland:

"The coverage the president enjoys, that enables him to have a colonoscopy that is not available to a lot of other people, is in part financed through the government," Strickland said. "This is really frustrating, that in a country that's spending billions of dollars a month on a war that he chose to initiate, that we cannot spend the money that's needed to make sure that our children have access to health care. I find that reprehensible."

This quote from the Auster column shows how the program would work:

In the past, Ohio has limited coverage under the children's health insurance program to families with incomes up to twice the poverty level - $41,300 this year for a family of three and $48,260 for a family of four. Beginning next year, families whose incomes fall between twice and triple the federal poverty level - between about $41,300 and $61,900 for a family of three - will be able to buy coverage for a $40 monthly premium per child.

Ohio's Democratic Senator, Sherrod Brown, supports the expansion of health insurance but Senator Voinovich has not yet announced a position. If you are so inclined, you can call his Cleveland office at 216-522-7095 or his Washington office at 202-224-3353 and let his staff know your thoughts on this issue. The name of the program is the State Children's Health Insurance Program and your question would be whether Senator Voinovich backs an expansion of this program. Be polite. If you call and receive an answer, please let us know the response by emailing webmaster@medinacountydemocraticactioncommittee.org.

Anti-Voinovich Video Clip on You Tube

MCDAC received this email message on Monday, July 23, 2007:

I'm Matt Hurm, the Ohio Field Director with Americans Against the Escalation in Iraq. We're a group founded by 12 national groups including Vote Vets, Moveon.org, and SEIU. We're working out of the Progress Ohio office in Columbus as well as Cleveland and Cincinnati and we're putting together a very active organization. We put together some political theatre at poor Senator Voinovich's expense. I've attached the link and embed below. Enjoy and follow up with questions to me.

It's All Harry Reid's Fault

That's the new story line from Republicans trying to distance themselves from Bush and his increasingly hugely unpopular war. The story line is that somehow there would be over 60 votes for a change in policy but Reid, by insisting on deadlines, is forcing, yes, forcing, Republican "moderates", aka wimps, like Voinovich, Lugar, Warner, and Alexander to support Bush's policies in the Senate.

You can listen to this argument being advanced by David Brooks on the Jim Lehrer News Hour during the Shields-Brooks segment that aired on July 20, 2007. You can read it in the Washington Post editorial that ran on July 21, 2007. You can see it in the comments that George Voinovich made in the New York Times about how the Democrats are politicizing the war. You can read it here in the L.A. Times.

Why is this message being repeated? Because Republicans realize that they are being killed politically by Bush and his war. They want to distance themselves from it in the public mind, but, on the other hand, they don't want to tick off Bush's supporters in the Republican Party. So here's what they and their supporters in the media want: They want to pass a resolution that can't be enforced but that sounds good on paper so they can say they did something and they want it to be bi-partisan so that Democrats can't use Bush's war against them.

Well, here's a news flash for so-called Republican moderates like Voinovich: Harry Reid wasn't chosen Senate Majority Leader to make your life easier. Here's another news flash: Those of us who are Democrats don't really care if you take a political hit.

Here's what Democrats ought to say to Republicans like Voinovich: If the Congress passes a bill that calls for a withdrawal from Iraq, without "timelines" over Bush's veto and he doesn't comply, will you vote for impeachment? If the answer is no, then what good is the approach that they are supposedly in favor of?

See, the problem with media outlets like the Washington Post and the News Hour is that they act like we are supposed to take what Bush says seriously, as if he is a person interested in compromise. What Democrats like Reid understand is that Bush doesn't believe in either compromise or telling the truth. The only way you can deal with someone like that is give him or her absolutely no room to maneuver. Then, and only then, can you get him to possibly compromise. This guy is a bully and the only things that bullies understand is power. To guys like Bush and Rove compromise is another word for weakness.

This is why national political reporters who are creatures of the culture of the Washington Beltway just don't understand either Bush or Democrats who stand up to him. These reporters believe that compromise is how you get things done. Political actors who reject compromise and insist on getting their own way baffle these reporters. "That's just not how you play the game" is their attitude. Well, the game has changed. Harry Reid gets it, the Washington Post editorial board doesn't.

Voinovich Votes Against Increasing College Aid

This is a description of H.R. 2669-College Cost Reduction Act of 2007:

College Cost Reduction Act of 2007 - Amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA) to alter the Pell Grant program by: (1) increasing the maximum Pell grant; (2) removing the tuition sensitivity provision reducing the Pell Grant available to students attending low cost schools; (3) allowing year-round Pell grants; (4) increasing students' Pell grant eligibility by increasing their income protection allowance; (5) altering the formula for determining whether a student qualifies for a simplified means test and zero-expected family contributions; and (6) excluding certain income and assets from student need determinations.

Sounds like a good idea, right? After all, Americans are being constantly urged to get more education so they can compete in the global economy. Who could vote against something like that? George Voinovich, that's who.

George Voinovich: Supporting Bush on Iraq and opposing helping Americans go to college. He's a real sweetheart, ain't he?

Voinovich Does It Again

Once again we have a high-profile story on how Voinovich is breaking with Bush over Iraq. This time the media is using a supposed comment Voinovich made about how Bush has "f---d up" in Iraq. Of course, once again Voinovich gets to have his cake and eat it too. He gets to look like he is actually breaking with Bush on Iraq, but when the chips are down, he won't vote against Bush.

This week, there will be a vote on whether to allow an "up or down" vote on the Reed-Levin plan to end American military involvement in the Iraq War. Republicans are threatening a filibuster and the Democrats need 60 votes to cut-off debate. All Voinovich has to do is vote to cut-off debate to send Bush a real message about how he feels about the war. He doesn't even have to vote in favor of the amendment, just allowing a vote would be a way to show Bush what he thinks. Our bet is that he won't do it, that when the chips are down, he will once again support Bush. Any takers?

UPDATE: Click here for an excellent column by Harold Myerson of the Washington Post on the same topic.

UPDATE TWO: Yep, he did it. He voted against the cloture motion which means that the Reed-Levin amendment won't come up for a vote. So just exactly does George V. plan to force Bubble-boy to change course in Iraq? Maybe by wishing really really hard while clapping his hands?

Brown, Voinovich Vote Against Cloture for Immigration Bill Debate

During the last week, we have highlighted how Ohio's two United States Senators split over raising the average fleet mileage standards for vehicles sold in America and over the 2007 Employee Free Choice Bill. Yesterday, (6/28/2007), Ohio's two Senators voted in unison to defeat a cloture motion on the immigration bill. (You can see the vote here.)

We actually think this bill is a bad idea and would cost the Democratic Party in states like Ohio, Pennslyvania, and Michigan. We also think that it would allow employers to create a permanent group of workers who would act as a way to make sure that employees don't organize or seek better wages.

In an earlier post we suggested linking free trade treaties to support for the Employee Free Choice bill which would make it easier to form unions. Absent such a linkage we thought, for what it was worth, that the trade treaties with South Korea, Peru, Panama, and Columbia are bad deals for the American middle class.

Those bills, however, would not be near as damaging as the immigration bill that would basically allow guest workers to come in, stay for a period of time, and then return to their native counties. That idea is just crazy.

Those who read this blog know that we have advocated for a policy of "Bring the Troops Home from Iraq and Put Them on the Border." Once Americans saw that the government was serious about protecting border security, and serious about cracking down on employers who hire illegal immigrants, they would be much more willing to accept some changes in the status of the 12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States.

So congratulations to both of Ohio's United States Senators for standing up for Ohio's workers on this flawed piece of legislation.

Brown and Voinovich Split on Employee Free Choice Act

As you can see from this vote in the United States Senate today, Ohio's two Senators split on the vote to shut off debate over the 2007 Employee Free Choice Act. This bill would allow employees to form labor unions and negotiate with employers by signing cards authorizing representation. Such a system would work against companies that block union representation by intimidating employees. Such intimidation usually takes place in activity leading up to representation elections. Senator Sherrod Brown voted to stop the debate while George Voinovich voted against stopping debate. The cloture vote needed 60 votes to pass and it got 51.

Ohio's Senators Split Vote on Energy Bill

Ohio's two United States Senators split on the energy bill passed on Thursday, June 21, 2007, by the United States Senate. Senator Sherrod Brown voted "Yea" while Senator George Voinovich voted "Nay." The bill raises corporate average fleet mileage requirements on vehicles sold in the United States.

As this Washington Post article makes clear, the United States is behind Europe, Japan and even China in setting mileage requirements for vehicles. This is a quote from the Post article:

The United States, with current efficiency standards of 27.5 miles per gallon for cars and 22.2 per gallon for SUVs and small trucks, has lagged behind the rest of the developed world. In the European Union, automakers have agreed to voluntary increases in fuel-economy standards that next year will lift the average to 44.2 miles per gallon, according to the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. In Japan, average vehicle fuel economy tops 45 miles per gallon. China's level is in the mid-30s and projected to rise, propelled by government policy.

This is not a politically easy vote for Ohio's two United States Senators. Ohio has lost a lot of auto industry jobs over the last two decades. The United Auto Workers are an important ally of the Ohio Democratic Party and have supported Senator Brown in past elections, including the 2006 election. If political courage is defined as acting and voting for measures that either opposed by or not supported by political allies, then Senator Brown displayed political courage by his vote yesterday. Senator Voinovich? Not so much.

Send a Letter to Voinovich & Media About Global Warming

We were asked to forward this information on to others and decided to post it on our blog.

Friends,

Would you be able to help send a Letter to the Editor of your local paper urging Voinovich to cosponsor the Biden-Lugar resolution on global warming?

Below are three ready-to-go letters, but if you or other prefer to rephrase them, you can learn more about the issue from the attached "Dear Colleague" letter.

At bottom, I've included the contact information for the relevant papers--let me know if you would further info.

Thank you,

Tom Bullock
Ohio Representative, National Environmental Trust
1256 Cook Avenue, Lakewood, Ohio 44107
440-554-7203


Voinovich should support U.S. leadership to curb global warming

It's time for Senator Voinovich to get on the record in support of U.S. international leadership to curb global warming pollution. Voinovich should join Senator Sherrod Brown as a cosponsor of the Biden-Lugar Resolution, which calls for the U.S. to resume its leadership role in developing an international treaty that requires reductions in global warming pollution from all major emitting nations.

Why is it important that the U.S. lead? Two reasons:

First, science shows global warming is real, man-made, and already here, as shown by three recent reports by more than 2,500 scientists in more than 130 countries. Ohio is expected to get warmer and drier, with a climate perhaps resembling Arkansas' later in the century.

Second, China won't get real about curbing its global warming pollution until we do. Right now, the U.S. is the world's largest emitter of global warming pollution, but soon China will overtake us for this dubious distinction. We want to engage China now, and stop providing excuses for its global warming emissions.

Name
Home Address
Daytime Phone


Does Voinovich think Global Warming is a myth?

The evidence is in, but the White House has its head in the sand on global warming. So, apparently, does Senator Voinovich, who has yet to cosponsor the Biden-Lugar Resolution, which calls for the U.S. to resume its leadership role in developing an international treaty that requires reductions in global warming pollution from all major emitting nations.

Voinovich opposed similar legislation in 2005, but he change his position this year, given three reports jointly authored by 2,500 scientists worldwide that show global warming is already affecting us ( e.g. through increased floods and storm damage). Ohio's climate is projected to grow warmer and drier during this century, with Ohio summers resembling Arkansas's by 2095.

The public wants strong curbs to global warming pollution, and the Biden-Lugar Resolution would be an important first step towards getting the U.S.--and the rest of the world--on the right track.

Name
Home Address
Daytime Phone




Biden-Lugar Resolution on global warming deserves' Voinovich's support

An important effort to re-engage the U.S. in international leadership on global warming deserves Senator Voinovich's cosponsorship. The Biden-Lugar Resolution, soon to be voted on by the U.S. Senate, calls for the U.S. to resume its leadership role in developing an international treaty that requires reductions in global warming pollution.

Despite past opposition to similar measures, Voinovich can feel good about cosponsoring the Biden-Lugar Resolution, because it:
• would commit all major emitting nations, both developed and developing, to significant reductions in global warming pollution;
• features oversight from bipartisan Senate observers to monitor talks and ensure U.S. negotiators bring back agreements Americans can support.

This is a balanced and sound approach worth supporting, especially given the urgency of acting now to curb global warming pollution.

Name
Home Address
Daytime Phone




(99-word letter for Cincinnati Enquirer)
Voinovich should support U.S. leadership to curb global warming

It's time for Senator Voinovich to get on record in support of U.S. international leadership to curb global warming pollution. Voinovich should cosponsor of the Biden-Lugar Resolution, which calls for America to resume leadership in developing a treaty requiring reductions in global warming pollution from all major emitting nations.

China won't get real about curbing its global warming pollution until we do. The U.S. is currently the world's largest emitter, but soon China will overtake us. We should engage China now and stop providing excuses for its global warming emissions.

Name
Home Address
Daytime Phone


--------------------------------

To submit a letter to the editor, keep letters under 200 words, send an email with no attachments, and sign your name, home address, daytime phone, and a valid return email address. Then send to:
• Elyria Chronicle-Telegram; letters@chroniclet.com;
• Lorain Morning Journal; letters@morningjournal.com; jcole@morningjournal.com;
• Lake County News-Herald; editorial@news-herald.com; glenn_gilbert@news-herald.com;
• Canton Repository; submit at the following link: http://www.cantonrep.com/index.php?external=forms/letter_editor.php
• Sun Newspapers (suburban Cleveland); sun@sunnews.com;
• Medina Gazette: opinion@ohio.net;
• Youngstown Vindicator; letters@vindy.com;
• Warren Tribune-Chronicle; letters@tribune-chronicle.com;
• The Dayton Daily News; edletter@daytondailynews.com;
• Times Community Newspapers (Suburban Dayton); see this link for local editor's email: http://www.tcnewsnet.com/main.asp?SectionID=12&SubSectionID=14&ArticleID=6;
• The Springfield News-Sun; newssuneditor@coxohio.com; or submit at the following link: http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/search/content/brandx-cgi/letter_editor.cgi;COXnetJSessionID=B1NPuS7l5wFPbsfVp42E5GRH6Q4PaJf8PPhM2dXwUQk1aEiiAuqL!862028175?urac=n&urvf=10947004314500.9402820639255247
• Greene County Dailies; jrichardson@xeniagazette.com;

Once Again George Voinovich Puts Drug Company Profits Ahead of Ohioans' Pocketbook

Yesterday, the Senate voted 49-40 to adopt an amendment to legislation that prevented consumers from importing cheaper prescription drugs from Canada. You can see how the Senators voted here.

Senator Sherrod Brown voted with consumers and Voinovich didn't. It's really that simple. Oh, sure, George V. is going to say that it was to make sure that consumers are safe because the FDA doesn't regulate or police prescription drugs in foreign countries. Of course, earlier this year he voted against giving the Federal Government the power to negotiate prescription drug prices for Medicare. You can see that vote here.

If Choice "A" is making drug companies happy, and Choice "B" is making consumers happy, line up George V. on the side of the drug companies.