Brent Larkin is a Law School Graduate and a Political Idiot!

Brent Larkin had a column in Sunday's Plain Dealer berating Governor Ted Strickland for not proposing a tax increase to meet Ohio's budget woes. He also said that Strickland was the worse governor for Cleveland since he has been covering politics.

What's interesting about his rant againt Strickland is the fact that he totally ignores the fact that the Ohio General Assembly has to vote to raise taxes. Under Ohio's Constitution, the Governor doesn't have the power to impose taxes by executive fiat. They have to be passed by the Ohio General Assembly.

At the present time the Ohio General Assembly has one house controlled by the Democrats and the other by the Republicans. There is absolutely no indication that the Republicans who control the State Senate will vote for any sort of tax increase, including the proposals advanced by Larkin. Larkin thinks that Ohio should raise its sales tax by one cent and forego the last year of the five year reduction in the state's income tax passed by, yep, you guessed it, the Republicans in 2005.

Now, of course, Larkin doesn't even mention the fact that the Republicans in the State Senate would have to sign off on any tax increases. Nor does he mention the fact that it was the Republicans who got us in this mess in the first place. No, according to Larkin, all Strickland has to do is just ask the General Assembly to raise taxes and they will just jump to it.

Well, here's a news flash for Larkin, Bill Harris isn't going to support any increase in taxes. The Republicans in the State Senate aren't going to support any increase in taxes. How do I know this? Because if they won't support gambling to help raise revenue, they sure as hell won't support increasing taxes.

Strickland knows this, and he is unwilling to give the Republicans a campaign issue just to make people like Brent Larkin happy. You know, people who use to head editorial boards that endorsed Republicans like Bob Taft and Republicans running for the General Assembly.

More BS From John Kasich

There is a Cleveland Plain Dealer article on John Kasich appearing before the Cleveland City Club. According to the article, Kasich wants to eliminate the state's estate tax, phase out the state's income tax, and this will, of course, lead to a fiscal rebirth for Ohio. Oh yes, and the state's budget problems are all Ted Strickland's fault.

Nowhere of course, does he mention the ill advised income tax cut that the Republicans put through in 2005. You know, the one that cut the state income tax by 21%, causing at least a two billion a year drop in revenues. No, Blowhard John just ignores that fact and blames Strickland for the fiscal mess the state government is in.

Expect more of this type of bs from Blowhard John over the next 17 months until the election. Hopefully, after he is defeated, it will cease, but don't count on it.

Beacon Journal's Michael Douglas Shows Why Editorial Writers Aren't Politicians

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.

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.

Hausted Falls Back on Family to Explain Not Running for Governor

Former Speaker of the House Jon Husted told the Cleveland Plain Dealer editorial board that he wasn't running for governor because of family commitments. This is how the PD put it in its article on the editorial board interview:

Running for the state's top executive spot would require too big of a commitment at a time when Husted is focused on his wife, 13-year-old son and baby daughter. At least that's the situation now. Down the road? "I have plenty of time," he said."

When a politician tells you that he or she isn't running for a certain office because of his or her family. nine times out of ten you can bet that it's really because they don't think they can win the race. Interestingly, while Husted ruled out running for governor, he didn't rule out running for State Treasurer or Secretary of State. Apparently, his family comes first when it comes to running against a popular Democratic Governor, but not when it comes to running for other state-wide offices.

Our guess is that Husted knows he can't raise the money to run against Strickland, but figures that there will be Republican money to run against Brunner for Ohio S.O.S. The reason is that if Republican donors think they are going to lose to Strickland again, they will go all out to beat Brunner so they can draw the district lines for the General Assembly and for Congress.

In the State Treasurer's race, the Democrats will have an incumbent, but one that will have been appointed, not elected. Such a race will be easier than running for Governor or for Secretary of State, although Husted will still be up against an incumbent. Our predication is that "family obligations" will be the reason why Husted passes on a state-wide race next year.

Strickland to Veto Three GOP Passed Bills

In the waning days of the Republican controlled House, the GOP managed to pass four bills. Unfortunately for Republicans, they no longer have a rubber-stamp in the Ohio Governor's office. Three of those bills are going to be vetoed by Strickland, including SB 380 which was another attempt to "reform" Ohio's elections by suppressing votes.

This will be the first time since 2007, by the way, that Strickland has vetoed legislation. Since he has had to work with a General Assembly controlled by the Republicans since he took office, he obviously isn't veto-happy. These bills, however, were just bad legislation and needed to be struck down.

Two of them would hurt the state financially and the elections "reform" bill would have inconvenienced Ohio's voters by setting up three different dates under which Ohioans could vote early. If the Republicans needed a reminder that things have changed in Columbus, Strickland just provided it.

The irony of all this is that the Republicans drew the district lines of the General Assembly and, for that matter, of Ohio's Congressional Districts. If they are losing seats under lines that they drew, what will happen to them if Democrats retain control of the offices that make up Ohio's Reapportionment Board?

Medina Dems Visit the Gov

Strickland Not Making Taft's Mistakes

Governor Ted Strickland is not making the mistakes that Taft made which were to look as if he didn't care that Republicans were violating the public's trust. Strickland, by saying that there seems to be a double standard at work in the AG's office when four people lose their jobs but Dann doesn't, is trying to make sure that the damage is limited to Dann.

One of the problems that Dann has is that when you win election by talking about the faults of the other team, your margin of error is substantially reduced. You have to keep out of trouble yourself. You can't afford to be involved in a "romantic" relationship with a 28 year old employee.

The Ohio Constitution allows the Governor to appoint someone to the position of Ohio Attorney General if the position becomes vacant. If Dann resigned and such a vacancy occurred, then, depending on when the vacancy occurred, Strickland's appointee would either run this November in the 2008 election, or would run in the 2010 election.

In a state that usually tilts Republican, and with a Republican party that is usually well-funded by business interests, the Ohio Democratic Party can't afford to keep Dann around as Attorney General. Look for more pressure to be put on him to resign in the coming weeks.

Medina County State Representative Compares Strickland to Rhodes

Back in the Sixties and the Seventies there was a four term Ohio governor named Jim Rhodes who campaigned on the platform of "Jobs and Progress". Although he had been mayor of Columbus and State Auditor before becoming Governor, he grew up in Southeastern Ohio. One of the ideas that he promoted was that there should be a college or university within 30 miles of every person in Ohio.

Now, 26 years after Rhodes left office, Governor Ted Strickland is advocating similar ideas. During his State of the State address, Governor Strickland called for using a bond package to try and revitalize Ohio's economy. State Representative Bill Batchelder, (R-Medina County), told the Cleveland Plain Dealer that he heard more Jim Rhodes from Strickland during the State of the State address than he had since Rhodes died.

Batchelder told the PD reporter that he thought the similarities came from both men growing up poor and both men coming from Southeast Ohio. This is how Batchelder put it to the PD:

"I think he knows more down here," said the veteran lawmaker of Strickland, motioning to his gut. "I think he has a real sense of the public just like Jim did. What they feel and what their aspirations are. I think it comes from growing up without much and coming from down there."

Those of us who are Ohio Democrats and remember the fact that Rhodes beat us in four elections find the comparasion interesting. Ohio Dems could do far worse, and have, than nominating and electing a Democratic version of Jim Rhodes.

Governor Ted Strickland Pans Iowa Caucus

Governor Ted Strickland told the Columbus Dispatch that he thought the caucus procedure used by Iowa wasn't fair because people who were old, or ill, or who work at night wouldn't necessarily be able to take part. We are glad that Strickland spoke out against the Iowa caucus system. For some reason the media fawns over Iowa and New Hampshire and try mightly to convince the rest of us that a system that will produce less votes than Cuyahoga county has in a presidential primary is a good system. Frankly we just don't buy it.

Neither state has a large minority population, either of Afro-Americans or Hispanic voters. Frankly the absence of such voters means that candidates who manage to win those two contests aren't going to necessarily do well in the general election. Further, New Hampshire allows independents to vote in either the Democratic or Republican primaries, which means that the Democratic winner doesn't necessarily represent the majority of registered New Hampshire Democrats.

In the past, winners of the New Hampshire primary have included John Kerry, who lost the general election; Michael Dukasis, who lost the general election; and Paul Tsongas, who didn't even get to the general election. The last Democratic president came in second in New Hampshire, but went on to win two elections, becoming the first Democrat since FDR to win two consecutive elections for president, and only the third Democrat since the Civil War to do so.

Strickland is right: Get rid of the Iowa caucus and while we are at it, throw out the New Hampshire primary, or, at least, stop penalizing larger states that jump in front of these two states.

Feds Reject Ohio Plan to Epand Kids' Health Coverage

The Toledo Blade has a story dated Saturday, December 21, 2007, on how the Bush Administration has rejected Ohio's bi-partisan to expand health insurance for working families. This plan, which was in the Governor's budget which passed with only one negative vote, would have expanded health insurance coverage for families up to $62,000 in family income. The Bush Administration announced this rejection with a one-sentence explanation and refused any other requests for more information.

This means that the Bush administration is not only fighting the Democratic Congress in its efforts to expand S-CHIP but is also fighting the efforts of states like New York and Ohio to use state money and federal money to insure children. This is, of course, in keeping with Bush's philosophy of trying to get uninsured children into private health insurance plans as opposed to using government funded plans. Never mind, of course, that such insurance plans are prohibitively expensive and don't really exist for working families. It's more important to Bush and his radical right-wing allies to fight for a philosophy than actually see uninsured children insured for medical purposes.

Ohioans need to recognize that Ohio can't depend on Washington to solve this problem for us. It is possible that a Democratic President will get elected and that S-CHIP will be expanded in early 2009, but it is certainly not a certainty. That's why SPAN-Ohio, which stands for Single Payer Action Network is working for a universal health insurance plan in Ohio. If you are interested in their efforts, go to www.spanohio.org. You will find ways to get involved in this struggle.

GOP Controlled Ohio Senate Goes in the Bag for Ohio Utliities

The Cleveland Plain Dealer ran a story in its November 12, 2007 edition about the energy bill that just passed the Ohio Senate. Perhaps not surprisingly, the GOP controlled Ohio Senate worked over Governor Strickland's plan and,guess who got screwed? If you answered Ohio's consumers, you win the prize! And what is that prize you ask? Well, let's just see what the Ohio Senate has in store for you:

Electric rates for consumers than can never be lower than they will be in February of 2008

Deep discounts for large commercial users of electricity.

No requirement that electric companies use renewable sources until 2025 and then only if such sources do not raise the overall average price of electricity more than 3%.

In short, Ohio's consumers are going to get the shaft courtesy of Ohio's Grand Old Party which never met a large corporation it didn't love.

Strickland Endorses Clinton

The New York Times is reporting that Governor Ted Strickland endorsed Hillary Clinton for President. In making this endorsement, Strickland specifically rejected arguments that Clinton was going to hurt down ballot Democrats. Here is a quote from the Times article:

On a conference call with Senator Clinton and reporters, Mr. Strickland repeatedly vouched for Mrs. Clinton’s electability in next November’s general election, an issue that her rivals have tried to raise doubts about.

He also indicated her nomination would not be a drag on congressional and state office candidates; the campaign of one of her rivals, former Senator John Edwards, has argued that Mrs. Clinton’s unpopularity

Readers of this blog know that we posted an entry that raised the issue of whether Clinton would be a liability for down ballot Democrats. Apparently Ted Strickland doesn't think so and he is certainly much more knowledgable than we are about Ohio politics.

Surprise, Surprise, First Energy's CEO Doesn't Like Strickland's Energy Proposals

Well, this should come as no surprise. First Energy's CEO doesn't want anyone or anything to stop Ohio from adopting a system where the so-called "free market" will set electric rates. Of course, in other states that have adopted such systems there have been huge increases in electric bills.

Because of that concern Governor Ted Strickland wants to adopt a new energy policy for Ohio. Strickland's policy would, according to the Cleveland Plain Dealer story on First Energy's opposition to Strickland's proposal, undo deregulation, encourage conservation, and mandate renewable energy. First Energy wants to be able to sell electric at the highest price the market will bear.

Although First Energy's CEO is mouthing platitudes about competition lowering electric prices, the PD article notes that for the last two years FE has said that when deregulation arrives rates would go up. The simple fact is that we can't count on First Energy to protect Ohio consumers from sharp price hikes for electricity.

You can link to the PD article by clicking on this entry's title.

Another Reason to Like Ted Strickland: He Knows When Not to Talk

Buckeye State Blog put us on to this report about Governor Ted Strickland refusing to make public his preference for the Democratic nomination for President in 2008. The Gov told the Cincinnati Enquirer reporter that yes, he had a preference and no, he wasn't going to announce it to the media. That's smart.

First of all, why tick off Ohio Dems who aren't supporting the Governor's choice? Second, why tick off someone who may not be his choice, but who may end up being the nominee. Third, next year when he is campaigning with the Democratic presidential nominee he won't have to answer questions about why the nominee is better than his preference if his preference doesn't make it.

Strickland Backs Unification of Ohio's State-Run Colleges and Universities

Governor Ted Strickland and Chancellor Eric Fingerhut to push for unification of Ohio's state-run higher education institutions. Click here for an article about their plan.

Ted Strickland Takes on the Backdoor Draft

Breach of Faith
On April 9th President G.W. Bush announced the early deployment to Iraq of 13,000 soldiers comprising four U.S. national guard units to include the 39th Infantry Brigade Combat Team in Little Rock, Arkansas; the 45th Infantry Brigade Combat Team in Oklahoma City, OK; the 76th Infantry Combat Team, Indianapolis, and the 3,600 troop-strong 37th Infantry Brigade Combat Team in Columbus, OH.

Within 24 hours, Ohio Governor Ted Strickland posted a letter to the president.

“As you are aware, the 37th Infantry Combat Brigade Team was originally in line for possible mobilization in 2009. The timeframe has been moved up dramatically. This is a significant departure from the commitment made to Ohio soldiers and their families, and I believe it is a breach of faith,” he wrote. He noted that more than 9,000 Ohioans had been deployed since 9/11 and that the 37th, also called the Dragon Brigade, was initially informed that it would not be deployed for at least another two years. The brigade includes units from Columbus, Walbridge, Bowling Green, Tiffin, Sandusky, Marion, Piqua, Springfield, St. Marys, Cleveland, Austintown, Akron, Lima and Medina. The Medina unit is the 1-134th Field Artillery Service Battery.

At the end of May, the U.S. Department of Defense alerted 160 soldiers in the 838th Military Police Company in Youngstown that they were to report Fort Dix, N.J., in September. Having yet to hear from the president in regards to his first letter, the governor sent a second and similar letter, this one certified.

The breach noted by the Governor was one of a string of broken promises that would burden families in Ohio and across the nation.

The day after the Governor sent the letter, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates stepped before microphones to announce that effective immediately, all active duty soldiers deployed or going to combat area would have their one-year tours extended to 15 months.

“They have set in motion a process that could easily break the Army over the next couple of years. It is setting the Army on a descending spiral. You make the job harder, you make the tours longer, you put additional stress on families – all of which makes it harder to recruit new people,” Edwin Dorn, former Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, told the Washington Post after Gates’ announcement.

In his letter to the president, Governor Strickland wrote, “I am asking for your assurance that prior to deployment, every Ohio soldier has the most up-to-date equipment, including individual body armor systems, M-4 rifles and other weapons systems, night vision devices, and up-armored type wheeled vehicles. I am also asking for your assurance that every Ohio soldier has appropriate training.”

The governor is right to seek such assurances. After a May 4 tornado destroyed Greensburg, Kansas, the states’ governor, Kathleen Sebelius, said state’s response will likely be hampered because much of the states national guard such as tents and semi-trailers is in Iraq. She is not the only governor with such a problem. CBS reported that nationally, the average national guard unit has about 40% of required serviceable equipment. Ohio has 65% of the equipment it needs to train and fulfill its mission. It leads the nation. Lt. Gen. H. Steven Blum, Chief, National Guard Bureau, told a congressional subcommittee earlier this year that, “88 percent of the forces that are back here in the United States are very poorly equipped today in the Army National Guard.”

There are hints and suggestions that these changes in deployment, readiness are not temporary circumstances.

The May 9 issue of Washington Post quoted Lt. General Raymond T. Ordierno, commander of Multi-National Corps, Irag, as saying, “The surge needs to go through the beginning of next year for sure. What I am trying to do is get until April (2008) so we can decide if we can keep it going or not.”

Lengthening duty tours and accelerated deployments will no doubt have an affect on an already-strained military. This February the New York Times reported that the Army has lowered acceptance standards for new recruits. USA today published an article that same month stating that only one-fifth of the officers in the Individual Ready Reserve are willing to remain in the Army owing to their concerns about being deployed. As many as half of these essential officers may be planning to leave or take early retirement. Another article in the New York Times reported desertion rates rose 27% last year. Some 3,196 active-duty soldiers deserted.

The governor closed his initial letter saying, “I look forward to your response and assurances.”

The President has yet to show the governor of one of the nation’s most populous states the courtesy of a personal reply.
—Mac Overmyer

This article ran in the June issue of Common Sense, Medina County's only Democratic newspaper and is cross-posted at www.medinacountycommonsense.com.

Strickland's Uses Line-Item Veto Power

The difference in the Republicans only having 54 votes in the Ohio House of Representatives is shown in this quote from an article in the Newark Advocate regarding the 2007-2009 Ohio Budget: Attempts to override any Strickland veto are remote. A three-fifths majority in each chamber is required. That means 60 votes in the House, which has just 54 GOP members. House Republican spokeswoman Karen Tabor said her caucus had not yet decided whether to challenge the governor. Any override attempt would have to begin in the House, where the budget bill was introduced.

Strickland vetoed the establishment of a voucher program for special needs children; a provision to limit the powers of the Governor and require more reporting to the State Controlling Board; attempts to control lottery payouts and prohibit Sunday lottery drawings; an attempt to put limits on the Ohio Department of Job and Family services regarding the cost of prescription mental health medicine; and the establishment of a fund that could only be used to promote absintence only sex education for teens.

Clearly this whole budget process has been a victory for Strickland. He basically got what he wanted from the General Assembly and looked good while doing it. It was essential that this process go well so that he could keep his momentum going into the second half of 2007, and he certainly accomplished that goal. There was only one dissenting vote regarding the adoption of the budget.

One personality trait that Strickland brings to the Governor's office is that he is a polite person, but not a push-over. The Republicans saw that he wasn't a push-over when he exercised the veto of the bill that Taft tried to have become law without his signature, but he has followed that up with being polite to the Republican leaders during the budget process. Both of these traits have served Ohio well during his first six months in office.

Election of Strickland Changes Budget Priorities

Here are four examples from Ohio newspapers on how Strickland' election is changing Ohio:

Budget bill extends health insurance coverage to 4,000 children who have serious illnesses but can't get private health insurance.

Kent State University will not be raising tuition for undergrads and credits the just enacted budget bill.

Seniors applaud homestead break pushed by Strickland.

Funding for clinics treating women for breast and cervical cancer restored, saving 18 clinics.

Do you think that we would be reading these stories if Ken Blackwell had been elected?

NOTE: This entry is the 500th entry posted on the MCDAC Blog.

Rural Vote Starting to Turn Democratic, Ohio Led Way in 2006

According to this report from NPR the reliably Republican vote out of the rural areas of our country is staring to turn Democratic and the war in Iraq seems to be the reason. This is a very important development. The rural vote is credited with giving Bush both his 2000 and 2004 election victories.

What’s important to remember is that Chris Redfern, Ohio Democratic Chair, realized the importance of the rural vote in 2005 when he encouraged Ted Strickland to run for governor. Prior to 2006, and since 1962, Ohio Democrats had nominated eight candidates for governor. Seven of them had come from the top five counties in the state based on population. Those seven candidates won a total of three elections.

The reason why they lost was that they weren’t able to run up enough votes in the big counties to off set their losses in the areas outside of the large urban counties. The same thing happened in 2004 when Kerry won the larger counties, but lost counties that bordered the large urban counties such as Medina, Delaware, and Butler. They also lost more rural counties and didn’t carry the southeastern part of Ohio.

Contrast this with Ted Strickland who is from a rural part of Ohio. He carried not only the large urban counties, but ran up the vote in the rural parts of Ohio. He carried the southeastern part of the State.

Why did Strickland do so well all over Ohio? It is tempting to agree with the conventional wisdom and say it was largely because the Republicans nominated a nutcase for Governor. Like most conventional wisdom, however, the GOP nomination of Blackwell is only part of the story. Another part of the story is that Strickland was able to appeal to all sorts of Ohioans, not just those from large urban counties.

Take guns for example. Strickland’s position on guns is not favored by a lot of Ohio Democrats who come from large urban counties. Yet, in 2006, it was not possible for the GOP to demonize Strickland on this issue. Because the GOP couldn’t demonize Strickland on that issue, a lot of voters for whom guns are a deal breaker actually listened to Strickland on other issues such as education, jobs, and corruption.

Redfern deserves credit for realizing that the Ohio Democratic Party had to expand its reach in order to win state-wide victories in 2006. National Democrats who want to learn about winning the rural vote could do a lot worse than talking to both Strickland and Redfern.