Category Archives: Ohio

Election Results: The Issues (updated)

The latest report from the Secretary of State shows the following:

Issue 1, the Constitutional Amendment increasing the age of at which a person may be elected or appoinnted judge, is losing. The percent of votes against the amendment are 62% and votes for it 38%.

Issue 2, the referendum to repeal the public employee collective bargaining reform law SB 5, is also losing. The percent of votes against SB 5 becoming law is 61% to 39% of the votes in favor of it.

Issue 3, the proposed Constitutional Amendment to preserve the freedom of Ohioans to choose their health care and health care coverage, is winning by 2 to 1 margin. The percent of yes votes are 66% and 34% of the votes are against it.

The latest Greene County Board of Elections report shows the following levy results:

County Issues
Issue 14: Greene County Career Ctr – 52% for and 48% against
Issue 15: Greene Memorial Hospital – 61% for and 39% against

Local Issues: Xenia
Issue 13: Xenia Schools – 34% for and 66% against

Local Issues: Others
Issue 5: Cedarville Twp & Village – 69% for and 31% against
Issue 6: Jefferson Twp Fire – 68% for and 32% against
Issue 7: New Jasper Twp Roads – 45% for and 55% against
Issue 8: Spring Valley Twp – 65% for and 35% against
Issue 9: Sugarcreek Twp – 46% for and 54% against
Issue 10: Xenia Twp – 53% for and 47% against
Issue 11: Beavercreek Schools – 44% for and 56% against
Issue 12: Greenview Schools – 36% for and 64% against
Issue 17: City of Bellbrook – 46% for and 54% against
Issue 18: City of Bellbrook – 56% for and 44% against
Issue 19: City of Fairborn – 53% for and 47% against
Issue 20: City of Fairborn – 58% for and 42% against
Issue 21: Bowersville Village – 67% for and 33% against
Issue 22: Bowersville Village – 63% for and 37% against
Issue 23: Spring Valley Village – 66% for and 34% against

Voters apparently intend for their cities and villages to maintain services. Thus far, voters seem to be telling school districts they have already voted for enough emergency, operating, permanent improvement, and renewal levies-enough is enough. As far as the Career Center is concerned, it is still too close to call for the GCCC, but county votes apparently want Greene Memorial Hospital to keep up its facilites.

Voters appear to have bought the union message as well as the call to maintian personal freedom over health care choices. Could there be a contradiction or confusion of views here?

Issue 3, Why Vote Yes?

Issue 3 seeks to preserve the freedom of Ohioans to choose their health care and types of coverage by an amendment to our state Constitution. Issue 3 aims at preventing the democratic party’s socialist version of health care reform from being forced on the citizens of Ohio. As proven in Europe and Canada, compulsory health care increases the overall cost of health care while reducing the quality of care. Those costs have contributed to the severity of the economic turmoil in the Europe.

The compelling case argued for the Obamacare is its claim that no one with an existing medical condition can be denied coverage and that the millions of poor Americans and their children will gain access to adequate health care. Those are two benefits touted by the media and all other proponents of Obamacare.

Obamacare law is supposed to prevention bankruptcy due to catastrophic illness and it will help small business provide health insurance to its employees.

It is also true that Obamacare will cost business more money to implement Obamacare. It will penalize individuals for not signing up for health care and small businesses for meeting the laws imposed of them. Physicians and other health care professionals support Issue 3 for similar reason–it will cost them too much financially and professionally. It will benefit insurance companies by increasing revenues to compensate for insuring people with preexisting illnesses. However, wealthier Americans will pay more for health care in order to compensate for the higher costs incurred by doctors, other health practitioners, and by government. Government-run health care will require more people and resources to run completely socialist health care system. Consequently, Obamacare will require more taxpayers funding. As Obama and his party associates in Congress have made clear, the wealthy are the taxpayers of choice.

Because of bureaucratic inefficiencies, corruption, high costs, fewer quality health professionals and the like, waiting long periods for treatment is common. That is why similar health care system in Canada and Europe are known for “rationing” services to the elderly and disabled. The same is expected under Obamacare, or rationed care.

On principles of inherent human rights alone, a Yes vote is necessary to preserve the enjoyment of what freedom we have left. With regard to efficiency and economy, a Yes vote will ensure government bureaucracy doesn’t destroy the quality of health care we already have.

Health care certainly needs improved, but Obama’s version will not provide it.

Why Vote Yes on Issue 2? Here Are Some Facts to Consider

Issue 2 is a referendum on the newly passed collective bargaining and other public employment contracts reform bill titled SB 5. The bill was passed in order to enable state government to reduce labor costs, balance the state budget, make public jobs more competitive and performance oriented, and attract as well maintain good workers.

One of the ways the governor, legislators, and many local officials agreed would enable them to accomplish these goals was reform the standards and practices of public workers.

Two organizations are leading grass root campaigns with regards to the passage of Issue 2. The union backed organization “We Are Ohio” lead the ballot referendum, wrote ballot argument opposing the SB 5, and produced most of the media ads seeking to persuade a no vote on November 8. “Building a Better Ohio” is the organization promoting the new law. “A Better Ohio” is behind the media ads, telephone calls, and literature campaign in favor of SB 5. It also has written the ballot argument for making it public law.

When in it comes to truth-in-advertising, “A Better Ohio” gets an “A” but “We Are Ohio” has earned an “F”. That is, statements and arguments made by “A Better Ohio” tend to be true while statement by “We Are Ohio” often have been shown to be false. The Plain Dealer’s PolitiFact Ohio is the source of these observations.

A number of other news, public policy think tanks, and other organizations have been focusing on this issue. They include Buckeye Institute (see links in right column above), Principled Policy Institute, Ohio Farm Bureau Federation, Dayton Chamber of Commerce, and others.

The ballot text voters will see presents two arguments. The “Vote No on Issue 2, Repeal SB 5” arguments make the following claims. SB 5 puts our families at risk by making it harder for fire and police to negotiate for needed safety equipment. Issue 2 also makes the nursing shortage worse by making it illegal for nurses, hospital and clinic workers to demand reasonable staffing levels. PolitiFact Ohio proves these arguments are clearly false. SB 5 specifically states safety employees DO have bargaining rights over equip and related issues (in section 4417.08 of the bill), and only about 10% of all nurse work for the state. What administrator is going to deny a real need for more nurses if a genuine health and safety issue can be proven? The state has monitoring mechanism to deal with such issues.

Another argument is that Columbus politicians exploited a loophole, giving a special exception to the same standards. As PolitiFact Ohio shows, politicians have always been exempt. The politicians already pay 15% into their healthcare and 10% to their pensions. And, they never can give themselves raises. Current politicians can only increase pay for future elected officials.

What is unfair about Issue 2 is the unions attempt to deceive voters into opposing the savings SB 5 will produce by making government more efficient.

A careful reading of the final argument against SB 5 is that Columbus politicians giving corporation tax-break incentives to moving businesses to Ohio, start new businesses, expand business operations, and keep them in Ohio is reason for Ohio economic problems. Union members should not be penalized for problems created by big business. Yet, politicians like Kasich are creating policies to curb corporate lobbyist influence peddling. Politicians like Kasich are not attempting to reduce pay but rather make public compensation, especially benefits, as fair as those creating profits that grow the economy. No public employee produces profits. As necessary as fire fighters, police, teachers, and support personnel are, public employee pay reduces available income or pay of all profit-makers, from the low-wage earner to the over-paid CEO.

Voting Yes on Issue 2 will NOT hurt us all. Ohio government made more efficient and public employee benefit package comparable the private-sector will not hurt us all either. It provides the necessary incentive for improving the quality of local education as well as all other sectors of government by making teaching and all other jobs based on results rather than mere tenure.

Yes on Issue 2 will provide more equality in union bargaining. Local communities and their representatives will be in a better position to handle economic down-turns when increasing taxes is reasonable. Taxpayers, in other words, will gain better legal standing regarding local government, schools, unions power, and taxation.

Cost of Living Adjustment for Seniors in 2012

By Senator Sherrod Brown

For too long, seniors have faced rising costs for prescription drugs, utilities, and food, but a monthly Social Security check that has not risen accordingly. That’s because the formula that determines whether Social Security recipients will get a COLA is not properly aligned with the costs facing most seniors. I’m fighting to reform this flawed formula so that seniors are not left in the cold.

I’m glad to announce that the Social Security Administration will provide a 3.6 percent cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) to seniors in 2012.

Seniors, who earned Social Security by paying into the program during their working years, not be forced to shoulder an outsize budget during their retirement. No elderly American should have to choose between paying for medicine and a meal. That’s why I’m fighting to preserve Social Security and Medicare by rejecting plans to privatize them, cut benefits, or raise the retirement age.

After the House of Representatives passed a plan that would dismantle Medicare as we know it, I encouraged 50 of my Senate colleagues to sign a letter pledging to reject this dangerous scheme. And raising the retirement age for Social Security might sound okay to Washington politicians who don’t have to work on their feet all day, but it’s a non-starter for hard-working Ohioans employed at our manufacturing facilities, farms, or restaurants. Ohioans who work hard and play by the rules believe that their elected officials should do the same. That’s why I’m also fighting to pass a bill I introduced that would tie the age at which members of Congress can collect their own retirement benefits to the eligibility age for Social Security. If a steelworker has to wait until she is 66 years old to receive retirement benefits, then so should members of Congress – especially those who want to increase the retirement eligibility age.

Across our state, I’ve met with senior citizens who have worked all of their lives to be able to retire with dignity. They never asked for a handout. They never expected a free pass. They worked diligently because, in Ohio, workers are the backbone of our economic strength.

Free Trade Benefits Ohio

By U.S. Representative Steve Austria

Recently, Congress came together in a bipartisan way to pass crucial free trade agreements between the United States and Panama, Colombia and South Korea. These trade agreements will help create good-paying jobs in the United States without another government spending plan. It will also boost economic growth by opening new markets for U.S. goods and services.

According to this administration, an estimated 250,000 jobs will be created, and every additional $1 billion in exports generates 25,000 new jobs in the United States. These will be long-term, sustainable jobs in the private sector – not temporary government jobs. Compared to the so-called “job-creating” stimulus spending plan that I voted against, this is a significant opportunity for agriculture, manufacturing and many other industries to competitively export their goods – creating private sector jobs in the process.

These trade agreements do not pick winners and losers, nor do they give any preferential treatment to companies in the United States – it simply levels the playing field with other countries. When given the chance to compete on the same level, American products and companies can succeed and remain leaders in the global marketplace.

Unfortunately, we are losing too many jobs and businesses to other countries. The burdensome, unnecessary government regulations that are being implemented by bureaucracies such as the EPA, combined with high tariffs on our exports, and one of the highest tax rates of any industrialized nation in the world, are driving companies out of the United States and overseas.

The free trade agreements will help shoulder that burden, by competitively pricing American exports. Furthermore, it will allow us to produce more goods in the United States without the barriers that drive up the cost of exports and make our country less competitive in the global marketplace.

In my district alone the benefits of international trade are enormous. There are approximately 89 businesses exporting more than $3 billion of products which support more than 9,700 jobs in our area.

I have always believed that when private businesses are given the opportunity to grow and succeed, they will. Take Bluegrass Farms of Ohio, a food grade soy business from my district. This small business currently employs 17 people in Jeffersonville and contracts with more than 40 local farmers to grow their products. Over 90 percent of the soy they produce is shipped to Asia, and a free trade agreement with South Korea could easily double their exports. The more we relieve the restrictions on allowing products to be exported throughout the world, the more small businesses like Bluegrass Farms can grow and hire locally right here in the district.

Similarly, these trade agreements will help American manufacturers like Ohio-based Procter & Gamble. Over 40 percent of their jobs in Ohio support their business outside of the United States in fields such as R&D, design, logistics, and marketing. They also export products like the Gillette Fusion from the United States to 92 countries. The Fusion is manufactured in two places; Boston, Massachusetts and Berlin, Germany. Both Korea and Colombia have tariffs on razors of 10 percent and 15 percent, respectively. The European Union’s FTA with Korea took effect in July, and its agreement with Colombia will follow shortly. According to Proctor and Gamble’s own analysis, had we not passed these trade agreements, the razors that are made in Germany would have been 10-15 percent cheaper to import just because their politicians were able to pass their agreement, and ours weren’t. Workers in the United States are the most productive in the world, but even the most productive who pay a 15 percent penalty, just for being from the United States, will have a hard competing in the international marketplace.

Many people have been asking for a solution to the economic downturn, and letting the markets work their will is one of the best ways to achieve it. The passage of these free trade agreements brings a host of opportunities for businesses in Ohio and around the country – and most importantly, the opportunity for more American jobs, here in America.

Ohio Reaches First Milestone in Personhood Amendment Drive

Personhood Ohio held a press conference on Friday morning at the Attorney General’s office in Columbus to announce the submission of the required number of initial petition signatures. The state of Ohio requires that at least 1,000 signatures be verified before the official citizen-led initiative drive can begin. Personhood Ohio is expected to turn in over 2,000 valid initial petition signatures.

The Ohio Personhood Amendment will define the words “person” and “men,” as used in the Ohio Constitution, to “apply to every human being at every stage of the biological development of that human being or human organism, including fertilization” irrespective of one’s age, race, gender, or disability.

“The scientific consensus is that every person’s life began at fertilization. It is not a subjective opinion, rather a verifiable fact,” said Personhood Ohio Director and Zanesville family physician Dr. Patrick Johnston. “The question for the citizens of Ohio is: Are we a people that will recognize and respect the inalienable and equal rights of every person?”

Kevin DeWine paves the way for the Fourth Reich, American style

By John Mitchel, LtCol, USAF(Ret)

RE: “Martin banned at GOP outpost,” Dayton Daily News, September 29, 2011. How dare Ohio Republican Party Chairman Kevin DeWine act as judge, jury and executioner in ordering Mike Bir to ban my State Rep from exercising his political freedom? Although DeWine and other party operatives certainly have the right to express their opinions, they have taken it over the top when they take an official position that denies Mr. Martin’s right to peaceably assemble. You may agree that there’s more going on here than meets the eye.

To explain, why didn’t DeWine or Speaker Batchelder send out the attack dogs after two prior incidents that did not result in convictions as this incident hasn’t? My guess is that now that Jarrod has established himself as an outsider more interested in his constituents than towing the party line, he has outlived his usefulness to the GOP, but there’s more.

This investigative reporter personally handed over irrefutable evidence

(See http://www.reformcongress.com/2010/press/press03_15_10.htm ) that Congressman Steve Austria violated federal election laws, not to mention U.S. House Ethics Committee rules by not reporting his spouse’s employment with Nextedge in Springfield or his association with the Dayton Development Coalition on his personal Financial Disclosure Statement (Form B) filed on May 15, 2008.

Worse yet, Kevin DeWine was not the only one to receive that information. Add to the list Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan, a member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, State Auditor (and now Lt. Governor) Mary Taylor, the Federal Election Commission, U.S. House Ethics Committee, and last but not least, Greene County Prosecutor Steve Haller. If you smell a cover-up, you’re probably on the right track.

If Republican leaders want to purge their party of misbehaving members, the least they can do is do it consistently, and not pick and choose their targets based on party insider status.

Rutherford Institute Appeals Ruling Against Teacher Fired for Urging Public School Students to Think Critically About Evolution

(Mount Vernon, OH)   The Rutherford Institute has announced its intention to appeal to the 5th District Court of Appeals in Ohio on behalf of John Freshwater, a Christian teacher who was allegedly fired for keeping religious articles in his classroom and for using teaching methods that encourage public school students to think critically about the school’s science curriculum, particularly as it relates to evolution theories. Freshwater, a 24-year veteran in the classroom, was suspended by the Mount Vernon City School District Board of Education in 2008 and officially terminated in January 2011. The School Board justified its actions by accusing Freshwater of improperly injecting religion into the classroom by giving students “reason to doubt the accuracy and/or veracity of scientists, science textbooks and/or science in general.” The Board also claimed that Freshwater failed to remove “all religious articles” from his classroom, including a Bible.

“The judge’s ruling is unfortunate because academic freedom is the bedrock of American education,” stated John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. “What we need today are more teachers and school administrators who understand that young people don’t need to be indoctrinated. Rather, they need to be taught how to think for themselves.”

In June 2008, the Mount Vernon City School District Board of Education voted to suspend John Freshwater, a Christian with a 21-year teaching career at Mount Vernon Middle School, citing concerns about his conduct and teaching materials, particularly as they related to the teaching of evolution. Earlier that year, school officials reportedly ordered Freshwater, who had served as the faculty appointed facilitator, monitor, and supervisor of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes student group for 16 of the 20 years that he taught at Mount Vernon, to remove “all religious items” from his classroom, including a Ten Commandments poster displayed on the door of his classroom, posters with Bible verses, and his personal Bible which he kept on his desk.

Freshwater agreed to remove all items except for his Bible. Showing their support for Freshwater, students even organized a rally in his honor. They also wore t-shirts with crosses painted on them to school and carried Bibles to class. School officials were seemingly unswayed by the outpouring of support for Freshwater. In fact, despite the fact that the Board’s own policy states that because religious traditions vary in their treatment of science, teachers should give unbiased instruction so that students may evaluate it “in accordance with their own religious tenets,” school officials suspended and eventually fired Freshwater, allegedly for criticizing evolution and failing to teach the required science curriculum. Freshwater appealed the termination in state court, asserting that the school’s actions violated his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and constituted religious discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Knox County Common Pleas Judge Otho Eyster upheld the School Board’s decision in a ruling issued on Oct. 5, 2011. Rutherford Institute attorneys have announced their intention to appeal the county court’s ruling.

Health Policy Institute of Ohio Launches Online Issue 3 Resource Page

The Health Policy Institute of Ohio launched today a page on its website dedicated to providing Ohioans with a non-partisan source for resources and information about state ballot Issue 3.

Issue 3 is a ballot initiative creating a state constitutional amendment aimed at preserving individual health care freedom.

If passed, Issue 3 will amend the Ohio Constitution to include the following language:

“In Ohio, no law or rule shall compel, directly or indirectly, any person, employer, or health care provider to participate in a health care system. In Ohio, no law or rule shall prohibit the purchase or sale of health care or health insurance. In Ohio, no law or rule shall impose a penalty or fine for the sale or purchase of health care or health insurance.”

To provide an understanding of the potential implications of Issue 3, HPIO has included analysis from:

Maurice Thompson, Exec. Director, 1851 Center for Constitutional Law
Janetta King, President of Innovation Ohio

“The purpose of the Health Policy Institute of Ohio is to provide state policymakers with the information and analysis they need to make informed health policy,” said HPIO President Amy Rohling McGee. “In the case of a ballot initiative, the voters are the policymakers and given that Issue 3 is a health policy issue, we wanted to make unbiased information and analysis accessible to Ohio voters.”

Click here to visit the Ohio Issue 3 resource page.

Obamacare’s Staggering Impact

By Mary Taylor
Ohio Lt. Gov. and Insurance Director

Since it was signed into law in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, has been the subject of intense debate. Both sides on this issue argue over its impact and what it truly means for consumers and health care in general. Now, thanks to an in-depth analysis of the law’s many provisions affecting Ohio, there is no doubt Obamacare will have a significant negative impact to our state and other states as well.

Earlier this year, as the Director of the Ohio Department of Insurance, I hired an independent consultant, Milliman, Inc., to review the requirements and mandates of Obamacare to determine its impact for Ohioans. They spent several months researching Ohio’s insurance market and laws to assess what our state will look like in 2014 and beyond.

The bottom line – health insurance premiums for individuals in Ohio will increase anywhere from 55 to 85 percent on average (not including current medical trends that are averaging 7 to 8 percent nationwide). Moreover, some Ohioans – depending on their current health status – may see their premiums increase by as much as 90 to 130 percent. These historic spikes in cost will hurt consumers at a time when health insurance is already going up.

In addition to significantly increasing premiums for individuals, the small group market will see extraordinary shifts and fluctuations. Even though overall increases in this market will be held to 5 to 15 percent (not including yearly medical trend), and some small groups will see decreases by as much as 40 percent, they will be subsidized by other small groups that could see premiums jump by as much as 150 percent depending on their current group health status.

As a CPA, I have no doubt these substantial changes will force many employers to drop coverage altogether because it is simply unaffordable and too unpredictable. This will result in more Ohioans moving into a government-subsidized program costing all taxpayers more money to pay for the health insurance subsidies for those that were previously covered by their employers.

The study also provides estimates for growth in Ohio’s Medicaid program because of changes mandated in Obamacare. These requirements are going to push more than 1 million people into Medicaid and potentially another 500,000 into the government-subsidized exchanges. When you add it all up, it’s possible that half of all Ohioans will receive some type of health coverage through a taxpayer-subsidized program once the law is fully implemented.

Advocates for the law would argue that even with the increase in premiums, insurance will still be more affordable because of the government subsidies provided in Obamacare. They would have you believe that while premiums will skyrocket, it doesn’t matter because the government will pay for substantial portions of the cost for many consumers. The truth is we do need to address the shortcomings in our current system, but our country cannot continue to spend at unprecedented and unsustainable levels.

There is a staggering price for every American attached to providing “free” or subsidized health care coverage. At a time when our country is $14 trillion in debt and when states are making hard choices to balance their budgets, this law is going to cause an explosion in health care spending never before seen. The federal government’s own actuary has predicted that government health care costs will represent 50 percent of all national health expenditures by 2020 and that health care spending in total will represent 20 percent of national GDP in that same year. This is unacceptable.

Handcuffing states with Obamacare’s one-size-fits-all approach is not the reform we need. Ohioans and Americans deserve a consumer-driven, market-based approach that is transparent and truly accountable for the cost and quality of healthcare – not a government-knows-best set of mandates.

Mary Taylor is Ohio’s 65th Lieutenant Governor. She was sworn into office on January 10, 2011, the same day Governor John R. Kasich named her to serve as the director of the Ohio Department of Insurance and to lead CSI Ohio: The Common Sense Initiative to reform Ohio’s regulatory policies. She is the only Certified Public Accountant elected to any state office in Ohio’s 208-year history.