Category Archives: Ohio

Workers of the World (and Ohio), Compete!

By Marc Kilmer

This Labor Day, many people used their extra day off from work to take a trip, cook out, and do other end-of-summer activities. However, Labor Day, according to the Department of Labor, is “dedicated to the social and economic achievements of American workers.” Only by recognizing these workers as individuals and enacting policies to let them compete freely can our state and federal governments truly allow them to obtain the social and economic achievements they deserve.

It goes without saying that every worker is different — each has different skills, education, work ethic, and other attributes that plays into how that worker does his or her job. And while some workers may have some common goals, allowing workers the freedom to compete with each other serves their interests best. Only through competition can a worker achieve the level of success that his or her attributes will bring.

When it comes to businesses, there is near-universal acknowledgment that competition is good for consumers. But competition is also good for businesses. When businesses must compete with each other for customers, they become more efficient, produce better products, and innovate in ways that improves themselves. The same principles of competition also apply to workers.

Unions are strong supporters of anti-trust laws aimed at preserving business competition. But when it comes to workers, unions aim at stifling such competition. As a result, many of the laws supported by labor unions — the very organizations that have appointed themselves to speak for American labor — hurt individual workers. Ohio’s prevailing wage mandate, the state’s coercive unionization law, federal barriers to imports, and other policies are designed to stifle competition and which keep workers from achieving higher wages and better positions in society.

At the federal level, union leaders long been a supporter of trade barriers, for instance. While some American workers may benefit by being shielded from competition from foreign workers, many more workers are hurt. Those who are employed by exporters or who rely on imported products or services are penalized by these union-supported policies. And, of course, every American who pays more for imported products has less money to spend because of high tariffs.

In Ohio, the law that allows unions to force workers to join them as a condition of employment has certainly kept businesses from locating in the state. It’s not a coincidence that workers in states that have enacted “right to work” laws have done far better economically than Ohio’s workers.

Similarly, the state’s prevailing wage law, which rigs the bidding process for government building projects, only benefits a small percentage of workers. Those who are employed by unionized firms that are long-established in the state win. Every other worker who works for a firm which is arbitrarily shut out of bidding on these projects loses.

The type of thinking which seems to be prevalent in unions is to try and protect what they have right now. That may work as a short-term strategy, but it’s an ineffective policy in the long-run. The world changes and only through competition can workers adapt to that change. While union leaders may not realize this, workers do. Private sector unionization has been falling for decades. Today, fewer than 8% of private sector workers belong to unions.

Instead of protecting workers from competition, the government should encourage competition. By erecting artificial barriers in the attempt to shield a select few workers from competition, both the state and federal governments have prevented many workers from being able to obtain the employment or wages for which they are capable. The best way to honor the workers of our country is to free the labor market from these government restrictions.

Source: Buckeye Institute’s, Weekly News Digest, September 8, 2009

Grassroots Economic Development

By Marc Kilmer

It’s probably not news to you that Ohio is not the easiest state in which to operate a business. This isn’t just a hunch business owners have, though. There is empirical evidence to support it. The Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan research organization, rates Ohio’s business tax climate worse than forty-six other states. In 2008, Ohio’s economic growth ranked behind forty-four other states. Unfortunately, there is little appetite in Columbus to address the fundamental problems facing Ohio businesses.

Ohio policymakers are enamored with top-down initiatives that seek to create economic growth. Tax credits and subsidies for certain kinds of businesses currently in favor with the political class seem to be the extent of policymakers’ ideas. As we saw with the demise of Skybus and DHL and ethanol plants throughout the state, though, this type of politically-driven economic development often ends up being a costly burden to taxpayers with few or no jobs created.

While it is difficult for politicians to contemplate, economic growth is not created through government agencies. Instead, it comes from the efforts of business owners, their employees, and their customers. It can’t be directed from above but it certainly can be stifled. When a state has a high tax burden or imposes onerous regulations, no bureaucrat from the Department of Development can fix things.

Instead of looking to direct economic development, Ohio policymakers need to create a climate where business owners can thrive. A reduced tax burden, a simplified tax code, fewer and more reasonable regulations — all these things will do much more for the state’s economy than another tax credit or low-interest loan program.

Unfortunately, creating an economic climate where economic growth is stimulated doesn’t provide as good a photo op as handing a Department of Development check to a business owner. Hopefully Ohio politicians will realize their top-down growth strategy hasn’t produced much growth and will instead decide that creating jobs is more important than taking credit for a special interest tax break.

Source: Buckeye Institute for Public Policy Solutions, August 24, 2009.

Kroger associates in Ohio ratify labor contract

Dayton area employees of the The Kroger Co. have ratified a new labor agreement.

The associates are members of United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local 75.

The agreement covers more than 4,000 associates who work in 30 stores in Dayton and surrounding areas.

“This agreement provides good, stable jobs for our associates, increases take-home pay, and provides high-quality, affordable health care,” said Geoff Covert, president of Kroger’s Cincinnati/Dayton division.

Source: Forbes/AP August 13, 2009

Activist and Candidate Training by American Majority

Candidate and Activist Training Seminars American Majority (AM), in conjunction with Citizens for Community Values (CCV), is bringing their Candidate and Activist Training Seminar to Otterbein College in Greater Columbus on August 22.

Do you want to make a difference in your community? Your positions and views are sound. You know it. But – how do you communicate those views outside your own small circle of personal friends? How can you make a difference in your community, your state, your nation?

Have you ever thought about running for office? You have the time, the desire, and the qualifications to run for that office – city council, school board, township trustee, county commissioner, whatever! But – you lack the technology, the know-how, the funding.

If either of these fit you, then this seminar is a must!

Considered by many to be one of the the nation’s premiere providers of conservative political training, AM’s professional staff is dedicated to providing people from all walks of life, and from all levels of experience and skill, the tools they need to make a positive difference in the culture.

To learn more, visit the American Majority website.

Crime Commission Wants Less Gambling

By Roger Greer

Illinois lawmakers have legalized 66,000 video-gambling machines, but none of them will be placed in DuPage County.

When the Legislature started looking at the expansion, the Chicago Crime Commission warned the DuPage County Board that the long-term, negative societal costs of video gambling would far outweigh any financial benefits.

Anita Bedell, executive director of Illinois Church Action on Alcohol and Addiction Problems, said the board took the commission at its word.

“Video gambling sends a wrong message,” she said. “We’re encouraged that DuPage County was the first, and we hope other counties and communities will follow suit.”

Other counties have taken notice. A similar proposal is expected next month by a coalition of Cook County board members. The Will County Board will soon consider similar action. And Kane County officials just decided to form a task force to investigate the impacts of video-gambling machines.

“People are considering the effects of gambling, the impact on their communities,” Bedell said. “And they can say ‘No’.”

Read >United Methodists Battle Gambling in Ohio to learn about some of the problems caused by gambling Ohio.

Ohio officials reject vote on slots for 2010

Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner’s office rejected a petition with more than 3,000 signatures that attempted to place Gov. Ted Strickland’s plan for video slot machines on the 2010 ballot. According to the finalized state budget agreement the governor is expected to issue an executive order to authorize the video slot machines at Ohio racetracks. The plan includes a total of 2,500 video slot machines at 7 race tracks. However, the plan which was added to the state budget is exempted from the referendum process. The final state budget was signed July 17, 2009.

On July 20, the group LetOhioVote.org filed a lawsuit in the Ohio Supreme Court in an effort to block the slots plan from going into effect. “There is an argument to be made, and the Supreme Court will evaluate whether or not this is subject to a referendum,” said Carlo LoParo, spokesperson for the group.

Ballot initiatives for gambling were turned down in 1990, 1996, 2006 and in 2008.

In all of our politicians efforts to use vice to pay for government, this blogger sees a potential pro-citizen plan that would save taxpayers billions of dollars. Let Gov. Strickland, the high court, and the legislators pay ALL state government expenditures gambling dollars. Seeing that Ohio officials defy the will of Ohio citizens concerning gambling, then all citizen taxpayers and voters should not have to pay any taxes. See that Ohio public officials produce services for themselves and their special interests and not the voting public, let them do it all without the tax dollars of Ohio citizens.

Of course those citizens who like the ideas of their corrupt politicians could always donate their money.

Source: Ballotpedia

Ohioans challenging Gov. Strickland’s Slot Machine Gambling to Ohio Supreme Court

On Friday July 23, LetOhioVote.Org filed a Writ of Mandamus with the Ohio Supreme Court directly challenging Governor Ted Strickland’s plan to place up to 17,500 video slot machines at Ohio horse race tracks without a vote of the people.

In the writ, LetOhioVote.Org committee members Tom Brinkman, Gene Pierce and David Hansen asked the Ohio Supreme Court to uphold the right of referendum on this issue. Further, the committee seeks the Court’s affirmation of the peoples’ constitutional right to vote on the video slot machine scheme. If the committee’s effort succeeds, the issue will be placed before voters in November 2010, and the slot machine rollout will be halted pending that vote.

“In 2006, nearly 57 percent of Ohioans opposed placing video slot machines at horse race tracks,” Pierce said. “If Governor Strickland and legislative leaders believe their plan is better than the one the voters already rejected, they ought to make their case directly to the people. Simply ignoring a public vote should not be an option.”

“The governor and legislative leaders should have the courage to place this issue before the voters,” former state representative Brinkman said. “They didn’t have the nerve to cut government, but they freely violate the expressed will of the people? Well, we say ‘not so fast.'” Brinkman is the co-founder of COAST, a Cincinnati-based taxpayer advocacy group.

“Placing video slot machines at struggling race tracks is nothing more than giving wealthy track owners a huge government bailout,” Hansen added. “It’s the same old story; they can’t make their business profitable so they turn to government. Any way you look at it, it’s bad economics and bad government.”

In 2007, Governor Strickland said, “The people of Ohio have spoken with a clear voice on this issue time and time again. They do not want an expansion of gambling in their state.” “The people deserve another opportunity to speak with a clear voice on this issue,” Pierce concluded.

Joining the fight against Strickland’s violation of Ohioans constitutional rights was Buckeye Institute’s 1851 Center for Constitutional Law. The 1851 Center filed an amicus brief on behalf of Ohio Citizen Action, Citizens in Charge and the Ohio Freedom Alliance. The brief urges the court to find language in the state budget excluding the authorization of video slot machines from referendum unconstitutional.

“The referendum process outlined in the Ohio Constitution is sacrosanct and must be tread upon lightly,” said Maurice Thompson, director of the 1851 Center for Constitutional Law. “Ironically, in seeking to arbitrarily and unconstitutionally deprive the people of Ohio of their right to Referendum, the General Assembly accentuates the very reason why Initiative and Referendum are so vital to Ohio’s governance.”

The brief points out that the right to referendum was added by amendment to the Ohio Constitution in 1912 to “serve as a check on the General Assembly by permitting laws, or parts of laws passed is that body to be submitted to voters for their approval or rejection.” In addition the brief cites that the Ohio Supreme Court has, on multiple occasions, upheld the right to a referendum as a staple of democracy in Ohio and should do so again on this issue.

Commentary: In 2006, slot machines gambling (Keno) was voted down by Ohio voters. It was called the Learn and Earn Initiative (Issue 3). Ohioans did learn how much rich track and bar owners would gain and how little school children would gain if passed. Moreover, Ohioans learned that shyster politicians, race track and bars owners were attempting make profits their Constitutionally guaranteed right. Those were reasons Ohio voters said NO to the Keno gambling initiative, a second step to justifying casino gambling. (The first step was allowing the lottery.)

The real issue then is not whether voters have a right of referendum, but a right to have their vote actually count. Ohio citizens made a valid constitutional decision about slot machine gambling at race tracks and other establishments. The decision was NO. No contingency exists–like the State budget deficit–that can negate the common consent of Ohio voters.

The issue created by Gov. Strickland and his legislative supporters amounts to the worse kind of political misbehavior. For they blatantly violate the rights Ohio citizens, oppose their Constitutional powers, and thumb their noses at the will of Ohioans. I do not see any other way to stop politicians of their ilk other than a swift and permanent removal from public office.

In the private sector, it is called being fired.

Alternative to Fair Tax

By Andy Myers

I’m not a proponent of the fair tax, and yes that makes me a target as was the case this past weekend at the gun and knife show. Our state sovereignty and audit the Federal Reserve booth was very well received by those who understand that our 2nd amendment rights come from a power higher than government, and we had well over 500 people sign our petitions. The NRA booth was next to ours and along with plugging the NRA to which I’d rather support GOA and the Buckeye Firearms Institute, he was plugging the Fair Tax. Most people familiar with the fair tax already know the details, so I would like to offer a “constitutional” alternative to the debate.

How about something that goes back beyond the fair tax all the way to June 2, 1944. The Liberty Amendment is an idea of Willis E. Stone, an industrial engineer. Born in Denver Colorado, who was a descendant of Ralph Waldo Emerson, the philosopher, and of Thomas Stone, a signer of the Declaration of Independence. As space in this letter is limited, I will paraphrase in the hopes that those who “understand the root of the problem is a federal government that has thrown aside the rules in which it was delegated.” will understand what the Liberty Amendment is about.

The Constitution is very specific in what powers the “sovereign states” granted it. And, there is a “proper and legal” way of changing it if need be. But our government disregards this process, for which they “swore an oath to” and continues to chain the people to a certain future of despotism. Stone’s Liberty Amendment on the other hand has been designed to fight all the multitude of apparently different battles at once, and win by “restoring the Constitution to full force and effect.” Once the Amendment is applied, a multitude of diversified battles will be won. The one thing about this proposal I disagree with is calling for a constitutional convention as this could likely lead to something far worse than what we could imagine. That is another subject that can not be adequately address in this letter.

The 4 sections of the Liberty Amendment are as follows:

Section 1. The Government of the United States shall not engage in any business, professional, commercial, financial or industrial enterprise except as specified in the Constitution.

Section 2. The constitution or laws of any State, or the laws of the United States shall not be subject to the terms of any foreign or domestic agreement which would abrogate this amendment.

Section 3. The activities of the United States Government which violate the intent and purpose of this amendment shall, within a period of three years from the date of the ratification of this amendment, be liquidated and the properties and facilities affected shall be sold.

Section 4. Three years after the ratification of this amendment the sixteenth article of amendments to the Constitution of the United States shall stand repealed and thereafter Congress shall not levy taxes on personal incomes, estates, and/or gifts. Henry David Thoreau once said, “There are thousands hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root.”

Please go to www.libertyamendment.com and let us strike at the root of the problems being created by an out-of-control federal government.

Ohio Supreme Court endangers children, violates parental rights, and supports the violation of law and decency

On July 1, the Ohio Supreme Court upheld an earlier decision that allows Planned Parenthood of Southwestern Ohio (PP) to keep secret their reports documenting whether or not PP is notifying authorities of instances of statutory rape of pregnant minors seeking abortion services at the Cincinnati clinic.

The Ohio Supreme Court heard arguments last October on this issue after granting a Motion for Rehearing which was brought by attorneys for Jane Roe.

In Roe v. Planned Parenthood, the parents of Roe allege PP employees breached their legal duties when they failed to notify the proper authorities of the young girl’s sexual victimization by the 22-year-old male who brought her to the clinic. They further allege that PP violated Ohio’s parental involvement laws by failing to notify or get consent from them before performing the abortion on their 14-year-old daughter.

Attorney for Jane Roe, Brian Hurley, states about the decision, “We respectfully disagree with and are disappointed in the decision. It allows Planned Parenthood, under the pretext of protecting privacy rights, to prevent anyone from reviewing its redacted records to determine the truth of what many people believe is Planned Parenthood’s policy and practice of violating its duty to report suspected or known sexual abuse of minors. We believe that the protection Ohio provides to its sexually abused children has been significantly weakened and parents’ rights to protect their children from abuse have been undermined. We agree with Judge Donovan’s assessment that the decision is neither just nor reasonable.1

I agree with Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, who said,

“It’s hypocritical for the Ohio Supreme Court to be concerned about the privacy of girls receiving abortions at Planned Parenthood when, by keeping the redacted, anonymous records secret, it is in fact protecting the privacy of older men who abuse underage teens. The Court, by its decision, is enabling and perpetuating injustice.”2

Lila Rose, 20-year-old UCLA student and president of the non-profit Live Action, caught on tape Planned Parenthood workers breaking state laws requiring prompt reporting of statutory rape and parental consent laws.

Lila Rose went undercover at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Birmingham and told a counselor that she was 14-years-old, pregnant by her 31-year-old “boyfriend.” Rose said she needed a secret abortion so her parents would not find out about her sexual relationship with the older man.

After telling the counselor that her “boyfriend” is 31, Rose asks, “Is it a problem about my boyfriend?” The counselor, identified as “Tanisha” in the video, responds, “As long as you consented to having sex with him, there’s nothing we can truly do about that.” Rose then says that her boyfriend “said he could get in big trouble,” and Tanisha acknowledges that “he could, especially if your parents find out that he’s 31.” She then tells Rose that the clinic manager, OB/GYN Dr. Desiree Bates, “sometimes does bend the rules a little bit” and states that “whatever you tell us stays within these walls” and “we can’t disclose any information to anybody.”

Alabama code 26-14-3 requires health professionals to disclose suspected cases of sexual abuse to state officials immediately.

“The law is explicit about a healthcare provider’s duty to report, yet Planned Parenthood pretends they cannot say anything,” Rose notes of the investigation. “Planned Parenthood increases its business and influence by circumventing state reporting laws, but inflicts terrible harm upon the vulnerable young girls sent back to statutory rapists.”

In the video, Tanisha also seems to tell Rose that a signature from an “older sister that’s over the age of 18” or someone “with the same last name” could function as a substitute for parental consent so Planned Parenthood could perform an abortion on a minor. Alabama Code 26-21-3 specifies that the written permission of either a parent or legal guardian is necessary before a minor may obtain an abortion.

The new video is sixth in Live Action’s Mona Lisa Project, a nationwide undercover investigation that documents Planned Parenthood’s repeated noncompliance with state mandatory reporting laws for sexual abuse of minors. Alabama is the fourth state to be implicated in the controversy, along with Arizona, Indiana, and Tennessee.3

While Alabama's Attorney General is taking legal action, YouTube is banning this public evidence of Planned Parenthood's crimes. Are YouTube executives politically correct leftists or are they being strong armed by the Left's politicians and corporate members who are leading the drive help PP regain taxpayer funding for its baby-killing services? Because they are owned by Google, the ban on Rose's video is without a doubt politically motivated. Another reason for YouTube censorship is their executives partnership with billionaire George Soros, the global fund raiser for all thing Left like anti-Catholicism and abortion-on-demand.

Breaking state or federal laws is not limited to organizations like Planned Parenthood. Members of the Left seem to always break the law in order to achieve their agendas. It is no surprise that leftist politicians-at-law draped with black robes sitting high at the bar of justice collude with their associates. The false high wall doctrine of church-state separation was the beginning upon which all of the Left's goals have been achieved. Roe v Wade and all similar court decision– Roe v. Planned Parenthood–is merely one lethal example. Parents killing their unborn children is not a privacy right found in the US Constitution, but protecting life is.

References:

1   Christian Newswire, July 2, 2009.
2   Christian Newswire, July 3, 2009.
3   Live Action, June 30, 2009.

Lila Rose’s video can be viewed online at liveaction.org/alabama

Voters’ Voices Are Silenced By The Ohio General Assembly

By The Ohio Council of Churches

For the past 20 years, Ohio voters have repeatedly said NO to expanding gambling. Two out of the past three years despite millions of dollars spent on advertising by gambling corporations, the voters have overwhelmingly voted No. Therefore, one has to ask the question why would a Governor, who has repeatedly spoken about the dangers of gambling, suddenly announce that he was supporting slot machines at Ohio’s seven horse racing tracks? Searching for new revenues to help fill a $3.2 billion hole in the 2010-11 biennial budget Strickland believes that this decision will create $933 million in the next two years.

If we step back from the rising pressure of falling Ohio tax revenues and rising unemployment, what are the probably impacts of such a decision? The seven racetracks are only required to pay $13 million of their $65 million license fee in the initial year. Therefore, they won’t have to begin any construction or expend any major funding until the November election when voters will decide the fate of Penn National’s casino proposal. The racetrack slots are not scheduled to begin until May 2010 with only two months remaining in the fiscal year. If the owners of the seven tracks decide that competition with the casinos will reduce the profitability outcome for them, they can withdraw from any further payments to the state and discontinue their plans to install slots at their tracks. Robert Griffin, owner of Scioto Downs racetrack, said they are willing to pay the initial $13 million, but questions if they will go ahead and put something in the ground if the casinos ballot issue passes in November.

Half of the total is based upon a $65 million license fee from each of the seven racetracks creating a total of $455 million. However, they are not required to pay the total up front. The racetracks originally asked for a claw-back provision that would allow them to get any license fees that they have paid back if the casino ballot issue passes in November. The legislature has since removed this option. This indicates that the horse tracks may not be in this agreement beyond November and all the $933 million may not materialize.

Warren county commissioners have remarked that they are opposed to gambling on the fairgrounds and it is very unlikely that the Lebanon racetrack there will participate in the slot machine opportunity. This reduces the $933 million estimate by at least $100 million.

The Governor’s decision seems to have been born out of the pressure to fill a $3.2 billion hole in Ohio’s biennial budget. But as is often the case in most decisions made in haste, this one is based on faulty suppositions. Another potential problem is that the compromise reached by the Governor must provide authorization for the slot machines at the racetracks by Executive Order with the House and Senate providing some enabling legislation. The American Policy Roundtable in Cleveland, an anti-gambling organization, has announced their intentions to challenge the action in the Ohio Supreme Court as violating Ohio’s Constitution by allowing casino –style gambling without a statewide vote of the people. They will seek an injunction to prevent the gambling of slots until a ruling by the court. At the very least, this could markedly reduce the revenue for this biennium. It took Pennsylvania three years to handle political hearings and court cases before they could get their first dime from the slots.

I haven’t even mentioned the fact that the economy has severely reduced the revenues in gambling establishments across the country and the Midwest is now exception. The Governor’s budget representatives provided information to legislative committees that each slot machine could deliver over $200 per machine each day. However, the representative from coin industry advocating for the bars and taverns said that the University of Cincinnati study indicated that each slot machine could anticipate $76 per machine. Obviously the large difference in potential funding could drastically reduce the total amount that the racetrack slots could provide the lottery and Ohio’s budget shortfall.

Finally, Ohio law requires that profits from the lottery must be utilized only by Ohio’s primary and secondary education directly and cannot be supplanted for other purposes. Therefore, court action could be initiated if the Lottery Commission tries to transfer profits to the general fund to cover some portion of the state’s financial budget hole.

The Ohio Council of Churches joins with the large majority of faith-based organizations including mainline, conservative and independent churches in strongly opposing the expansion of gambling because of the many negative impacts on communities, families and individuals. But even among those who favor gambling, many can’t support a monopoly for one business or gambling company. The majority of Ohioans oppose putting them into Ohio’s Constitution as the only ones allowed. This is all done without a competitive bid to give Ohio taxpayers a fair share of the profits. Voters remember that only last year, the Governor authorized a Keno game projected to raise $73 million a year. Eleven months later, Keno has produced just $30 million according to Ohio Lottery officials.

The Columbus Dispatch makes the most salient point in an editorial calling the slots a bad deal for Ohio. Because Ohio’s current budget contains $5 billion in stimulus one-time monies, they point out that even if the slots perform as suggested the next biennium will be $4 billion short in the 2012-13 budget. The editorial says, “In the name of balancing the budget, Strickland is asking Ohioans to subject themselves to a parasitic industry, knowing full-well that it will not begin to solve the state’s long-term fiscal problems. Most of the devastating cuts to Ohio’s safety net will still not be funded in this biennium budget and the next without the $5 billion stimulus funds the outlook is even bleaker.