The Ohio race has tightened, but President Obama still leads Mitt Romney by 5:

Mr. Obama holds a 50 to 45 percent lead over Romney among likely voters in the Buckeye State, down from a 53 to 43 percent advantage on Sept. 26. Three percent of likely voters there are undecided. ...

The president is viewed as better on foreign policy, 50 to 43 percent, which will be the focus of tonight's debate, but his lead has shrunk from 13 to seven points on this measure. The candidates are now even on handling the economy; last month, the president led by six points on this issue. Romney has also widened his lead over the president on handling the budget deficit.

The president continues to be seen by Ohio voters as caring about their needs and problems - 60 percent say he does while just 37 percent say he does not - similar to last month. While Mitt Romney has improved on this measure, more voters continue to think he does not care about their needs and problems than think he does.

Cincinnati Enquirer endorses Connie Pillich!

Pillich works both sides of the House

In a rematch of their 2010 contest, Connie Pillich and Mike Wilson are vying again to represent the 28th District in the Ohio House of Representatives. The district includes the communities of Forest Park, Springdale, Sharonville, Blue Ash, and Montgomery. In 2010, the race was very close, with Democrat Pillich winning by about 600 votes.

Since then, the Republican-dominated Ohio Apportionment Board redrew the legislative districts and made it harder for Pillich to win again by taking out the Democrat-friendly neighborhoods of Lincoln Heights and Woodlawn and replacing them with Republican-friendly areas of Kenwood and Madeira.

In 2010, Pillich held on to her seat even as Republicans gained a strong majority in the Ohio House. We think she deserves another term.

Read the whole editorial.

As President Barack Obama has gained in Ohio polls, so has incumbent Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown, who has now jumped out to a 10-point leadover GOP Senate candidate Josh Mandel, according to a poll released Monday.

A survey from the Columbus Dispatch found Brown ahead of Mandel by a margin of 10 points, 49 percent to 39 percent. The last Dispatch poll, out Aug. 26, had the two candidates tied at 44 percent.

Question for the court

Questions have been raised all along about JobsOhio, the private agency created last year to take over from the state Department of Development. Yet John Kasich has persisted, the governor pushing his idea that a private operation making substantial loans will move faster to create jobs and prove more responsive to business.

Lawsuits concerning the constitutionality of the new entity have hampered its ability to get going, blocking its revenue source -- profits from state liquor operations -- to tap the bond market. Those lawsuits have come from left and right, one filed by Democratic lawmakers and ProgressOhio, a liberal group, and another by the 1851 Center for Constitutional Law, a conservative organization.

So far, no court has taken up the underlying issue of whether JobsOhio runs afoul of constitutional language intended to prevent public money from flowing without conditions into corporations and to prevent the use of the state's credit (in this case, liquor profits) to back private bonds. Instead, lower courts have ruled that the challengers lack the standing to proceed, which ProgressOhio has appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court.

Last week, things got more tangled. The Kasich team landed in the unusual position of challenging itself in court. David Goodman, the state commerce director, refused to sign an agreement that would transfer liquor profits to JobsOhio. He points to the constitutional questions. JobsOhio officials responded by asking the Ohio Supreme Court to settle the matter.

JobsOhio would tap a revenue stream of more than $150 million a year for 25 years, a substantial investment in job creation. The governor rightly argues that he won a mandate to proceed along this track. Yet the constitutional questions must be resolved, the provisions of the state constitution about public investment in the private sector crafted after the bitter experience of canal and railroad investment debacles in the 1840s.

That experience underscored the sound concept that with public money must come accountability and disclosure to protect the public interest. With the lawsuits against JobsOhio stuck, and the governor without a reasonable path for just proceeding, the Goodman objection presents an opening for the high court, finally, to get the matter settled.

Developing Clarity

Ohio Third Frontier program grants and awards finally are flowing again, the money funding investments in high-tech ventures that hold the promise of accelerating growth and creating new jobs. Yet at a time when Gov. John Kasich says speed is of the essence in economic development, his administration has opened the Third Frontier spigot just part way, with funding delays and a lack of clarity creating unnecessary obstacles for entrepreneurs across the state.

The Third Frontier Commission ended its fiscal year June 30 having left unspent most of the $190 million it had available, thus rolling the money over into the next year. In July, the panel picked up the pace, allocating $21 million, with several million flowing in grants to business-university partnerships in Northeast Ohio. Kent State received $3 million to work with four local companies on polymer and liquid crystal technologies.

As welcome as the investments are, the Third Frontier Commission, over which Kasich has gained greater control than Bob Taft and Ted Strickland, is still at work revisiting the Entrepreneurial Signature Program, conduit for tens of millions that support agencies such as Akron's Global Business Accelerator. These operations fulfill a crucial role providing support and early-stage funding to start-up businesses, fulfilling the Third Frontier's mission of serving as a catalyst for new products and technologies.

President Barack Obama hits the magic 50 percent mark against Gov. Mitt Romney among likely voters in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, with wide support for his plan to hike federal income taxes on upper-income voters, according to a Quinnipiac University/ CBS News/New York Times Swing State Poll released today.

"If today were November 6, President Barack Obama would sweep the key swing states of Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania and - if history is any guide - into a second term in the Oval Office," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

"The president is running better in the key swing states than he is nationally. Part of the reason may be that the unemployment rate in Ohio is well below the national average. In Florida it has been dropping over the past year, while nationally that has not been the case."

View More Images Here

Activists protest Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal who made a brief speech to about 150 Romney campaign supporters, volunteers, and staff at a headquarters office in Columbus, Ohio on 7/18/12.

Watch Slideshow:

In Ohio's U.S. Senate race, Democratic incumbent U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown tops State Treasurer Josh Mandel, the Republican challenger, 50 - 34 percent according to a Quinnipiac poll released this morning.

This the biggest margin Quinnipiac has given to Brown in months. In May, they showed Brown with just a six point lead; in March, the poll gave Brown a ten point lead. 

Outside groups having already spend over $8 million attacking Senator Brown on behalf of Mande, but the negative campaign seems to be back firing as the attacks have earned Mandel nothing but negative press.

June 27, 2012 - Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania Swinging To Obama, Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll Finds; Voters Back President On Immigration, Split On Economy

In Ohio's presidential face-off, men split with 45 percent for Obama and 42 percent for Romney. Women go Democratic 50 - 35 percent. White voters tip to Romney 45 - 41 percent. The president wins 92 percent of black voters, with 6 percent undecided and no measurable black support for Romney.

The president leads 85 - 5 percent among Democrats and 45 - 36 percent among independent voters, while Republicans back Romney 84 - 5 percent.

Obama gets a 50 - 44 percent favorability rating, compared to Romney's negative 32 - 46 percent favorability score.

Ohio voters give the president a split 48 - 46 percent job approval rating and say by a tepid 49 - 46 percent that he deserves to be reelected.

Voters say 47 - 42 percent, however, that Obama would do a better job on the economy than Romney and say 47 - 42 percent that the president would be better for their personal economic future.

Voters back Obama's immigration policy 52 - 38 percent and say 45 - 38 percent he would do a better job than Romney on immigration.

Gov. John Kasich gets a slightly negative 40 - 44 percent job approval rating from Ohio voters, continuing an 18-month run of negative scores with the exception of a tie in March. Women disapprove 46 - 36 percent while men split 44 - 43 percent.

In Ohio's U.S. Senate race, Democratic incumbent U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown tops State Treasurer Josh Mandel, the Republican challenger, 50 - 34 percent.

"The president's lead is largely due to his lead among independent voters, the group that usually decides Ohio elections," said Brown.

Poll: Brown's lead expanding in Ohio

Sen. Sherrod Brown's (D-Ohio) lead over Republican Josh Mandel has expanded slightly, and his margin is back into the double digits, according to a poll released Thursday.

Brown leads Mandel by 14 points in the NBC-Marist poll, besting the first-term state treasurer 51-37. Twelve percent were undecided.

When NBC-Marist polled the race in March, Brown had a 10-point advantage on Mandel. But a Quinnipiac University poll in early May and other surveys from both Democratic and Republican firms had showed Mandel narrowing the gap to just a handful of points.

The Cleveland Plain Dealer reported today that Mandel will return $105,000 in donations from Suarez Corporation Industries employees that are the subject of an FBI investigation.

Related:

Mandel Gets State Pension Assets Wrong By $65 Billion

Obama up 7 in Ohio

Barack Obama continues to have the upper hand in Ohio, even if Mitt Romney puts one of the Buckeye State's leading politicians on his ticket.

Obama leads Romney 50-43. That 7 point margin is unchanged from late January when he was ahead by a 49-42 spread. Obama also led 50-41 when PPP polled the state in early November so this makes three polls in a row over the span of six months with him leading by 7-9 points. Obama certainly looks like the favorite in Ohio at this point.

Big backlash from the GOP's War on Women:

The GOP's struggles with women and young voters really show themselves in Ohio. Obama's up 55-36 with women and has a 62-30 advantage with those under 30. If you extend the definition of 'young' voters to those under 45 Obama still holds a massive advantage at 56-35. Romney's winning seniors 49-45 but he needs a much bigger lead than that to make up for his weakness with young people.

Dear Mr. Romney:

Your welcoming letter to President Obama felt a little sketchy to me.  I remember, as I am certain my fellow Ohioans remember, you supporting actions, or in many cases inaction, which would have cost Ohioans their jobs, their homes and their rights.

You, Mr. Romney, made it clear that you don't understand how average Ohioans live and support their families.  That is why you did not support the auto industry bail out and in fact said "Let Detroit go bankrupt."  Unlike you, President Obama understands that the auto industry is the backbone of livable-wage jobs for Ohio's middle class and without those jobs they could not feed their families or pay their mortgages.  That is why President Obama bet on the America worker and as a result, 120,000 Ohioans now work in an auto-industry job, while another 848,000 Ohio jobs thrive because of the auto industry's influence.  Mr. Romney, what do you say to those nearly 1,000,000 people now working because of the auto industry, do you tell them you do not support their jobs?

Mr. Romney, you also said government needs to get out of the way and allow the foreclosure process to "run its course and hit the bottom."  Clearly you do not understand what hitting bottom means.  Bottom means families, children and elderly people homeless.  Ohioans without anywhere to go, people thrown into turmoil without a way out.  Does that sound responsible and reasonable to you? President Obama didn't think that was responsible or reasonable, that is why he enacted legislation to keep families in their homes. If you were president would you encourage banks to throw hardworking Americans into the streets?

Mr. Romney, you also supported Governor John Kasich's quest to pass Senate Bill 5 - which was unsafe, unfair and would have hurt us all.  Being a man of extreme privilege, there is no way you can understand what is means to struggle financially or be worried about harsh working conditions that could threaten your life. Supporting laws that strip union rights from hardworking healthcare professionals, fire fighters and police officers shows just how out-of-touch you are with Ohio's middle class.  President Obama supports workers and worker rights, it's unfortunate that you want the person saving your life or protecting you to be over worked and underpaid.

You are right about one point Mr. Romney - we do need proper leadership. America needs a strong leader that will wake up each day concerned about struggling middle-class families and those that aspire to be in the middle class. President Obama is that leader - you, Mr. Romney, are not.

Washington is already full of politicians and special interest groups that rig the system against average people. We certainly don't need one occupying the White House.

Sincerely,

Becky Williams
President
SEIU District 1199

Becky Williams is President of the Service Employees International Union, District 1199 which represents 35,000 healthcare and social service workers in Ohio, West Virginia and Kentucky.

With a commanding lead among women, Ohio U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown, the Democratic incumbent, leads Republican challenger Josh Mandel 46 - 36 percent, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

This compares to a 48 - 35 percent Brown lead in a February 15 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University.

In today's survey, the Democrat leads 48 - 31 percent among women while men are tied with 43 percent for Brown and 42 percent for Mandel. Independent voters go with the Democrat 46 - 28 percent.

"Sen. Sherrod Brown retains his double-digit lead in the Ohio U.S. Senate race. As is the case with President Barack Obama's lead in the White House race, the Democratic margin is made up almost completely of the votes of women," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. "At this point, Josh Mandel is not very well known and he can take some solace in the fact that Brown is not over the magic 50 percent threshold. There are seven months until Election Day, but Mandel needs to show some signs of life if he is going to make the Senate race competitive."

From March 20 - 26, Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,246 Ohio voters with a margin of error of +/- 2.8 percentage points. Live interviewers call land lines and cell phones.

Editorial From The Akron Beacon Journal:

Sneak Attack

Senate Republicans began last week a push to repeal House Bill 194, a controversial elections law that passed last year, only to be put on hold by a referendum drive. With the law up for a statewide vote in November, Republicans hope to wipe the issue off the ballot, avoiding what is likely to be an embarrassing defeat at the polls.

Although there has been talk on the Republican side about reaching a compromise with Democrats on a revised bill before November, the repeal measure, set to come up again today in the Senate, has been touted as straightforward legislation, merely setting the stage for further discussion.

As it is, after a careful examination, State Rep. Kathleen Clyde made a disturbing discovery. The Kent Democrat found that the Senate's "repeal" bill, Senate Bill 295, really amounts to a sneak attack. Instead of simply striking down House Bill 194, the repeal bill seeks to reinstate one of the most objectionable features -- imposing a deadline on in-person absentee voting starting the Friday before Election Day, cutting off a three-day window when interest reaches its peak.

The status of that early deadline remains unclear. Yes, the referendum drive put H.B. 194 on hold. Then, last summer, Republicans amended a separate bill, one mainly devoted to military and overseas voting, to try once again to kill those final three days of in-person absentee balloting.

At the time, Democrats objected to the amendment, arguing it would make the referendum process meaningless. Initially, Jon Husted, the secretary of state and a Republican, seemed to agree, asking lawmakers for clarification. Then, he wobbled, opting for the party line. He argued the legislature gave him no choice but to cut short early voting in last November's election.

It is that confusion about early voting Republicans are, again, trying to paper over with S.B. 295, burying the change in 350 pages of language reconciling various sections of Ohio elections law.

There are many voting procedures in Ohio that need to be fixed. A stripped-down repeal bill would be a good start, avoiding the confusion of a referendum on Election Day. After votes have been counted, as Husted first suggested, Republicans and Democrats should restart the conversation to find common ground.

"John Kasich awarded wealthy bankers, frackers and campaign contributors. He did take time out to threaten the future funding of Cleveland schools if his preferred legislation doesn't pass."

"It's a bully budget that rewards friends and contributors. It's nothing new."

- Brian Rothenberg, Executive Director, ProgressOhio

A new Quinnipiac poll of Ohio shows Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown with a big lead over his Republican challenger, state Treasurer Josh Mandel, though Mandel could have some room to grow -- if voters find out that he exists.

The numbers: Brown 48%, Mandel 35%. The survey of registered voters was conducted from February 7-12, and has a ±2.6% margin of error. In the previous Quinnipiac poll from mid-January, Brown led by a similar margin of 47%-32%.

In the new poll, Brown has an approval rating of 47%, to 34% disapproval. Mandel is currently an unknown, with a personal favorable rating of 16%, to 12% unfavorable, and an overwhelming 71% who have no opinion.

The latest NYT poll shows a big majority for the Obama original decision, which has now been adjusted further to keep the Bishops' hands clean of any direct involvement. Here are the numbers:

61 percent of Americans support federally-mandated contraception coverage for religiously-affiliated employers; 31 percent oppose such coverage. The number is similar among self-professed Catholics surveyed: 61 percent said they support the Obama administration's rule, while 32 percent oppose it.

Majorities of both men and women said they are in favor of the rule, though support among women is especially pronounced, with 66 percent supporting and 26 percent opposing it. Among men, 55 percent of men are in favor; 38 percent object.

Two-thirds of women back Obama over the hierarchy. 61 percent of Catholics back the president over the Pope.

A Public Policy Polling survey conducted on Friday similarly found that 57 percent of Catholic voters -- and 59 percent of Catholic women -- support the requirement.

Under the administration's policy, "women who work for institutions like Catholic hospitals and universities can obtain birth control from their insurance company without a co-pay, but their employers don't have to include contraception in their healthcare plans."

Innovation Ohio, a progressive think tank headquartered in Columbus, today questioned whether Lt. Gov. Mary Taylor is "becoming an independent political agent who is increasingly 'going rogue' with a personal agenda that is often at odds with that of the Kasich Administration."

The phrase "going rogue" was coined in 2008 by senior McCain for President campaign officials to describe the tendency of former Alaska Governor and Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin to ignore directives, refuse to be a team player, and to act and speak independently of the campaign of which she was a part. Palin later embraced the term and even used it as the title for one of her books. Like Palin, Mary Taylor is a favorite of the Tea Party wing of the GOP.

A Hart Research survey of Ohio voters who voted in Tuesday's election finds Democrats nearly unanimous in opposing restrictions on collective bargaining, 94% to 6%, and that independent voters also decisively rejected the measure, 57% to 43%.

There is also significant political fallout for Gov. John Kasich. Among those who voted for Kasich last year but voted against the measure, his job approval rating has fallen to just 28%.

A reader sends in this Op-Ed that for some reason he couldn't get published in Cleveland's Plain Dealer:

Issue 2  is bad for business

I am writing today as a patriot and owner of an insurance agency in Cleveland. I amopposed to Issue 2 and I would like to share my perspective on why a "NO" on Issue 2 is needed.

First, as a patriot I believe America is the greatest country in the world.  We threw off the dictatorship of another country that ruled from the top down and resulted in only two classes--elites and peasants.  In its place we instituted our vibrant democracy and have arich history of open dialogue, a sometimes raucous but civil exchange of ideas.  It's a testy process but ultimately results in respectful negotiations for common solutions from all interested parties. 

That is the America I love and why I think that Issue 2 is flawed.  None of us should want to undo the peoples' rights to open debate and negotiations and replace them withtop down control from the elite--elected or otherwise. 

With all the talk about Issue 2 (Vote NO!) there is another ballot issue that seems to be slipping under the radar for most voters.  While supporters of Issue 3 try to say it is just about stopping the Affordable Care Act, this poorly-written law will do damage to Ohio. 

Law professors from across the state agree that Issue 3 is so badly worded that it would likely throw a wrench in many of the following programs:  

• Workers Compensation
• COBRA
• insurance coverage in child support orders
• college student health insurance requirements
• disease and immunization tracking or requirements
• stopping pill mills
• court ordered healthcare for the mentally ill and substance abusers
• consumer protection against fake health insurance
• consumer protection against false medical treatments
• medical worker and insurance agent licensing
• and many more... 

That is why every major newspaper editorial board, including newspapers who opposed federal healthcare reform, like the Columbus Dispatch and the Plain Dealer, have endorsed a No vote on Issue 3. 

The NO on Issue 3 committee has put together a quick video highlighting some of the many important health and safety programs that would be banned or curtailed if Issue 3 passes. 

Please watch this important video and share the word to your friends and family: Issue 3 is bad medicine for Ohio.  Vote NO on Issue 3!

A recent memo written by ProgressOhio's Brian Rothenberg was leaked by parties unknown to the Washington Post. This puts us in a bit of an awkward position, but it didn't seem right not to comment on it, now that it is out there.

The truth is we will be shocked (delighted, but still shocked) if Issue 2 and SB5 are defeated by anywhere close to the margins currently being bandied about. There are a number of obstacles that still stand in the way of victory, let alone the big double digit victory margin we'd like to see.

While the record-setting protests this spring at the Statehouse showed that this issue really resonated with middle class Ohioans, there are a lot of barriers between having support in a poll and winning big at the ballot box:

• SB5 = Issue 2? - Many people do not realize that SB5 will be repealed or upheld via Issue 2. After months of misleading ads from Building a Better Ohio and their Beltway allies, another subset of voters aren't certain which way they need to vote to get rid of SB5.
• Poll questions - The wording people are being asked in surveys does not sync up with what they'll see at the ballot box and what they're hearing on television.
• Turn-out models - As was referenced in article, polling numbers were way off in most of the recent major ballot fights, such as the same sex marriage ban, 2009 casino measure and the 2005 election reform initiatives. Frankly, it is hard to know exactly who will turn out to the polls during for an issue campaign. This is true especially during an off-year election: the last round of polling on the casinos was 16 points off the final tally.

Bottom line: this race is too critical to be confident. If one side fails to walk, knock, talk and vote during the next two weeks, things can change dramatically.

The march toward a clean sweep of newspaper editorial endorsements against Issue 3 continues.

Friday, the Canton Repository (a usually reliable "conservative" newspaper) joined the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Columbus Dispatch, Akron Beacon Journal and Toledo Blade in urging a "No on Issue 3" vote. 

Labor is poised for a big victory in Ohio next month- PPP's newest poll of the state finds that voters intend to reject Senate Bill 5 by a 56-36 margin. Although that margin is consistent with what we found in the state earlier this year, when we polled Ohio in August the support for repealing SB 5 had tightened to 50-39.  These numbers suggest that momentum is back on the side of the groups trying to kill the bill.

The preferences of Republicans and independents on Senate Bill 5 are mostly unchanged from two months ago.  Independents are evenly divided on the issue, 46/46. And Republicans want to uphold it 61/30. But Democrats have unified in their support for repealing SB 5.  In August they were only planning to overturn it by a 69/21 margin. Now that figure is 80/13. That increase in Democratic support for repeal may be indicative of voters becoming increasingly aware what the implications of a 'yes' and 'no' vote are on this somewhat complicated referendum.

The new National Journal poll spells it out as clearly as you could want.

A majority of Americans agrees with the Occupy Wall Street protestors and is paying attention to the protests -- even as an even bigger majority also backs the Dem plan for a surtax on millionaires to pay for the government to act on unemployment.

The poll finds that 59 percent of Americans completely agree or somewhat agree with the protestors, and, crucially, that almost two thirds say they've heard "a lot" or "some" about the rallies. Meanwhile, 68 percent back hiking taxes on millionaires to pay for the Dem jobs plan.

And get this: Nearly one third of Republicans agree with the protesters, and 37 percent of them back the millionaire surtax.

Has the public spoken clearly enough on these matters yet? What more will it take?

Gov. John Kasich and Senate Bill 5 aren't as unpopular as they once were but the governor's approval rating is still under water and a majority of Ohio voters want to repeal the collective bargaining reform law in November, according to a new poll released Tuesday by Quinnipiac University.

Great Editorial from Becky Williams, President of SEIU District 1199 in today's Canton Repository.  Here's an excerpt:

This Labor Day as you head out with your family, think about those in our community who are suffering because they cannot find work. Think about those who struggle every day, working low wage jobs with no benefits. Think about that waitress in Massillon and all of the other waitresses like her who are working themselves literally to death to provide for their families.

My mother used to say, "All but death can be changed." I believe that to be true. We must do our part as advocates for those who feel they have no voice. It is our responsibility to hold politicians and bad corporate citizens accountable until everyone who wants to work can find a job and those who are working can afford the basic benefits of health care and retirement security.

Change is not elected. Change is not selected. Change is affected by what you and I do in our daily lives.

Click here to read the full editorial, you will be glad you did.

Ehh, sometimes you have got to wonder if John Kasich views the world through fox-colored glasses only. I mean after all, anyone watching Wall Street would know this is not exactly the time to sell key state assets for pennies on the dollar.

That's why you have to question Gov. Kasich's motives at this time for his never ending crusade to privatize practically every state asset and give it to investors, all in the name of fiscal responsibility.   Kasich is selling the Prisons and Liquor profits for pennies compared to their true value, allowing his investor friends to gain huge windfalls while shortchanging the citizens and hurting our communities.  Kasich signed HB133, which opens up our State Parks and other public lands, including schools and universities, to oil and gas drilling.  HB133 was a huge give-away to big oil while putting some of our best economic engines, tourism and travel, and our most protected environmental areas at risk.

Now Kasich has a new con to raise some "quick cash" for the state:  privatize the Ohio Turnpike.  Recently, Kasich held a press conference in Toledo to talk about his privatization plan and, once again, was not honest.  Kasich referred to Indiana's example of leasing their turnpike and how the residents of Indiana are "happy" about it.  In fact, this could not be farther from the truth.

In this week's episode of Kasich's Cons, we explore what actually did happen in Indiana and why selling off the Turnpike will be bad for Ohio businesses, residents, and economy. 

Dr. Bob is the Parkinson's victim who was terrorized by the tea party during the health care debate as shown in a video by the Columbus Dispatch that went viral nationally.

This society has forgotten to share

The divisive politics of recent months moves me to remind Americans that caring for each other is still legal, and that sharing with others is a way to show such caring.

My grandparents' generation used to share putting up food and barn-raisings -- and supporting the New Deal. If anyone's grandparents had died from malnutrition during the Great Depression, chances are good those grandchildren wouldn't be tea partiers.

My parents' generation slept on fold-out couches, used "party lines" and fought the last Good War. If readers' parents had demanded a balanced-budget amendment as a condition for entering World War II, chances are good that they would not now be tea partiers, nor would English be their first language.

My generation shared one telephone line and one television. We spent time learning to follow my mother's admonition, "Share and share alike."

Might our ugly politics signify that Americans are so caught up in "I, me, mine" that they have too little time and energy to learn the value of "we"?

July 20, 2011 - Ohio Gov's Low Approval Slips Further, Quinnipiac University Poll Finds; Support For Photo Id To Vote Almost 4-1

"Gov. John Kasich is sinking lower in the eyes of Ohio voters, dropping from an 11-point approval deficit two months ago to a 15-point deficit today," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. "Even after the state budget has been approved as he promised without raising taxes, and even though the Quinnipiac University poll finds that 63 percent say they favor such an approach, Gov. Kasich's name remains mud in the eyes of the Ohio electorate.

"Voters may say 2-1 they wanted him to balance the budget just through spending cuts rather than with a combination of spending cuts and tax increases, but they don't like the cuts that he and the Legislature approved. By 50 - 32 percent, voters say the budget is unfair to people like them. When voters think a politician is treating them unfairly, that's not good for the politician's political health."

Kasich's job performance gets a 66 - 19 percent approval from Republicans, but disapproval is 76 - 12 percent among Democrats and 48 - 34 percent among independent voters. The depth of his problem is evidenced by his split 43 - 42 percent rating among white evangelical Christians, typically a very pro-Republican group.

The numbers on the proposed effort to repeal SB5 limiting collective bargaining in a November referendum are similar to those on Kasich personally. Republicans oppose repeal 56 - 35 percent, while repeal wins 75 - 14 percent support from Democrats and 52 - 33 percent support from independent voters.

"Kasich has until 2014 when he presumably will face the voters, to turn his political fortunes around, but the timeline for the vote on SB5, which is obviously a referendum on the governor's agenda, is much shorter," said Brown. "A loss on SB5 would be a no confidence vote on the governor from the voters of Ohio."

Read The Full Poll Results Here

My fellow citizens, we are about to find out.   Yesterday evening, a budget balanced on the backs of hard working Ohioans was passed out of the Senate on a party line vote.  Instead of laying a foundation for the prosperity of all people, this bill would stifle the ability of our state and its citizens to reach their full potential.  It guts support for schools, cities and higher education, meaning higher fees, higher local taxes and higher tuition; all amounting to middle class tax increases. 

This is the legislature passing its responsibility to balance the state's budget onto those who don't have a say, or don't have a choice.  This is pass-the-buck budgeting at its worst.

This budget lacks jobs and a framework to create them, and will only add to the unemployment rolls.  This was touted as "the jobs budget," but over 2,000 public servants have been laid off since it was unveiled and the livelihoods of thousands more hang in the balance. 

The people of Ohio deserve better.  Fortunately, we have 22 days before the General Assembly is constitutionally obligated to pass the budget, and it is my hope that with this time we can craft a plan that will reverse these wrongs and help Ohio's citizens realize their own American Dream.

Instead of deferring our dreams, we need to work together to create an environment in which they can be realized.  Our future is in our hands, Ohio.  Let's make it a bright one!

Op-Ed from the venerable Martin Gottlieb of The Dayton Daily News:

Now that the legislature -- so overwhelmingly Republican and docile as to be, in effect, an arm of the Kasich administration -- has approved the original idea, the governor is saying the time has come to pause over that idea. This is not the ideal sequence, but better late....

He no longer wants to chair JobsOhio or even to sit on its board. And the chief financial officer wouldn't be under his purview, but that of the board.

The administration is also modifying its original plan that lawsuits against JobsOhio must go first to the state Supreme Court. And it's addressing the matter of the state absorbing financial losses if things don't work out. (At this writing, people are still parsing exactly what the proposals are and mean.) There are 10 amendments in all, just on JobsOhio.

The question arises, why now. After all, a lot of people have been criticizing the JobsOhio plan all along. They've said it's unconstitutional for the government to invest in private business. They've said that setting up Jobs-Ohio outside regular government was transparently phoney, because the governor would head it.

They've said that for a governor to have a second job is unconstitutional.

At one stage, even the Republican speaker of the House raised constitutional issues.

But the Kasich bus just kept going. ("Get on the bus," the governor once said, in an injunction that resonates in Columbus, "or the bus is going to run over you.")

The fact that the governor's critics took him to court seems to be playing a big part here. Progress- Ohio, a liberal activist group, helped by research by Policy Matters Ohio, a liberal think-tank, teamed with a couple of legislators.

No court has acted. But keep in mind that Jobs-Ohio is one of the two major policy thrusts of the Kasich administration, setting aside budget cuts.

The other is SB5, the bill that sharply restricts union rights. Opponents of SB5 are apparently going to get a repeal of that measure put on the ballot in November, and polls are showing an uphill battle for the Kasich side.

The governor can hardly have both his signature ideas undone.

This is a story about the importance of non-government groups. It would be a mistake to say that Kasich is somehow being thwarted by unelected, unappointed people. Those people would be nowhere without the law, the state constitution and the courts. But still.

And I'm going to insist this story is about, not politics, but democracy. You know, the founders, checks and balances, and all that.

Read the full piece at The Dayton Daily News

Progressohio's work on the budget continues with our efforts to hold the Kasich Administration accountable.

New budget deficit projection requires independent review

 . . .the Republicans are delivering pain and suffering because of their projected deficit. But, the latest estimates show that the real shortfall could be between $5.9 billion and $6.1 billion. If proved to be true, it means there could be more money available for necessary services that are now at risk.

Tim Kean, the governor's budget director, acknowledged to the Cleveland Plain Dealer that "conceptually, I agree" that the so-called "structural imbalance" is turning out to be something in the $6 billion range. But Kean disagreed with the way the newspaper applied the various revenue projections and budgetary assumptions.

Given that ProgressOhio, a liberal policy group, is challenging the Republican biennium budget on the grounds that it is based on faulty numbers, an independent, transparent analysis is required. The political climate in Ohio today does not lend itself to the traditional Legislative hearings. An outside view of the budget would serve to not only cut through the political flak, but would reassure Ohioans that the sacrifices they are being asked to make are justified.

Read the full article at the Youngstown Vindicator

An article in Sunday's Cleveland Plain Dealer, Ohio's $8 billion budget hole: Was it really that big?, quoted ProgressOhio's Executive Director as follows:

"In the end, it wasn't an $8 billion hole at all," said Brian Rothenberg, executive director of ProgressOhio, a liberal public policy group, as he ticked off a number of factors, starting with higher-than-expected tax revenues in recent months. "It's hard to know how big it really was -- and it's made more so by the lack of transparency in this budget."

Public Policy Polling: Blackwell, Romney favored in Ohio

If Ken Blackwell decides to run for the Republican Senate nomination in Ohio next year he's going to be very difficult to beat in a primary. In the most likely current configuration of candidates Blackwell gets 49% to 16% for Josh Mandel and just 4% for Kevin Coughlin. 31% of voters say they're undecided.

You can explain some of that by Blackwell's name recognition. 61% of Republican primary voters know enough about him to have an opinion compared to just 24% for Mandel and 14% for Coughlin. That's not the whole story though- GOP voters don't just know Blackwell, they also really like him. His favorability is 42/19. And even with the 24% of voters that do know who Mandel is, Blackwell has a 36-29 advantage. And with the 14% who know Coughlin Blackwell gets 51% to 24% for Mandel and 13% for Coughlin. Those numbers suggest Blackwell will be working from a position of strength even as his opponents do become better known.

Blackwell polls well because he's the darling of the far right in the state. With moderate Republicans he leads Mandel only 28-20. But as you go across the ideological spectrum that leads increases, to 48-15 with 'somewhat conservative' voters and all the way to 62-17 with 'very conservative' ones. If this race develops as a choice between a conservative Blackwell and a more moderate Mandel, well, we know how that generally worked out in Republican primaries last year.

We also asked a broader Republican primary question including these three candidates and also Mary Taylor and Jim Jordan who have been discussed at various points as folks who could potentially throw their hats in the ring. Blackwell gets 40% in that configuration to 12% for Jordan, 9% for Mandel, 7% for Taylor, and 4% for Coughlin.

Read more from Public Policy Polling

Related:

Senator Brown Leads All Challengers in Ohio

Poll: Blackwell, Taylor Lead Mandel In Potential GOP Primary, Senator Brown Defeats All In General Election

Blackwell Confirms Interest In Ohio Senate Race Against Sherrod Brown

Why Is Ohio's Treasurer Endorsing Extremist Legislation That Will Saddle Taxpayers With Extensive Legal Bills?

Checking in on John Kasich

John Kasich, already unpopular in Ohio when PPP polled the state in March, has seen his numbers continue to head even further in the wrong direction and is now tied with Florida Governor Rick Scott as the least popular Governor in the country out of 38 that we have polled on.

Just 33% of voters in the state now approve of Kasich to 56% who disapprove. In March it was a 35/54 spread. Kasich's numbers are basically identical to where they were then with independents, and he's actually ticked up a little bit with Democrats.

What's really plunging him is that Republicans aren't even all that enthused about him anymore- he's gone from a +53 (71/18) spread with them in March to now +30 (58/28) with them in May. That 23 point decline within his own party is largely responsible for his overall drop.

Ohio voters are having some serious, serious buyer's remorse about voting for Kasich.

They now say if they could do it over again they'd vote for Ted Strickland by a 25 point margin over Kasich, 59/34.

Our final poll before the election last fall, which hit the results on the head, found Kasich winning independents by 18 points. Now they say they would vote for Strickland by 16. And while only 9% of Republicans crossed party lines to support Strickland last year, now 26% say they would if they had the chance to do it over again.

A new Quinnipiac University poll of Ohio registered voters documents the opposition. According to the poll, Ohio voters oppose limiting collective bargaining rights for public employees (51-38), do not believe limiting collective bargaining for public employees is necessary to balance the state budget (52-38), oppose banning public employee strikes (58-35), and oppose banning public employee bargaining over health insurance plans (54-38).

Via Center For American Progress

HB 86, now being considered in the State Senate, contains juvenile justice reforms that will help Ohio cut juvenile crime, cut costs, and help kids.

• It currently costs an average of $123,000 a year to house a juvenile in secure correctional facilities, which often serve as academies of crime for impressionable youngsters.  Providing rehabilitative services closer to their home communities for the vast majority of juveniles convicted of lesser offenses saves millions of taxpayer dollars going forward, while giving those juveniles far better chances to become productive, taxpaying adults.

• HB 86 fixes some of the biggest barriers to improving the juvenile justice system by investing some of the savings from closing unneeded correctional facilities into rehabilitative programs that yield far lower recidivism rates.

• HB 86 reserves scarce youth prison beds for those young people who are at the highest risk of reoffending seriously. It also will maintain and enhance programs that tackle the underlying problems relating to family dysfunction and addiction that drive much of the anti-social and criminal behavior in order to give the vast majority of juveniles ensnared in the criminal justice system a second chance to turn their lives around.

• HB 86 enhances judges' ability in handling juvenile cases by giving them discretion - or, in other words, the ability to apply judgment - in cases which today require long, mandatory sentences judges, prosecutors and other law enforcement officials believe are too long, a drain on public safety dollars and yield high recidivism by juveniles when they are eventually released.

• HB 86 would raise the age at which judges apply blended adult and juvenile sentencing guidelines for juveniles from the current 10 years old to 14.

Allowing Guns In Bars A Bad Idea

When Ohio's concealed-carry law was enacted in 2004, opponents warned it would lead to Wild West shootouts on the streets. They were wrong. The legislation licensing qualified Ohioans to carry concealed firearms, forged through years of tough debate, struck a sometimes awkward yet reasonable balance between liberty and safety.

But now, Ohio lawmakers, with signals of support from Gov. John Kasich, are poised to upset that balance with a measure to allow concealed weapons in any establishment, whether a sports stadium, five-star restaurant or corner saloon that serves alcohol -- spiking an already volatile substance with added potential danger.

This is a bad idea, even if four other states (Tennessee, Arizona, Georgia and Virginia) already allow guns in bars. Lawmakers in the Ohio House, which approved the measure 56-40 recently, and in the Senate, which passed its own version of the bill 25-7 in April, should reconsider -- and get plenty of second opinions from voters.

Now, we believe in citizens' Second Amendment right and recognize that legal experts and courts are increasingly taking the view that it is an individual right.

But this is getting a little creepy. As now-Ohio Chief Justice Maureen O'Connor wrote in a 2003 decision, "The police, the state, the legislature have the right to regulate the right to bear arms. It's not an unfettered right."

-- The Cincinnati Enquirer

A new Quinnipiac poll in Ohio finds Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) leading each of his possible Republican challengers.

Brown leads Ken Blackwell (R), 44% to 35%, tops Josh Mandel (R), 45% to 31%, and beats Kevin Coughlin (R), 44% to 28%.

Said pollster Peter Brown: "Brown obviously begins the campaign with a strong lead against any Republican. But he is not necessarily home free. He is unable to get 50 percent against any of the three potential challengers, which is the dividing line for incumbents who are overwhelmingly favored for re-election."

Ohio Gov's Approval Up, But More Still Disapprove, Quinnipiac University Poll Finds; Voters Back Repeal Of Law That Limits Unions

Ohio voters disapprove 49 - 38 percent of the job Gov. John Kasich is doing, compared to 46 - 30 disapproval in March, while by 54 - 36 percent they say that SB 5 should be repealed, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

Registered voters disapprove of Kasich's handling of the state budget 53 - 35 percent compared to 51 - 31 percent disapproval in a March 23 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University.

And by 53 - 36 percent they say the governor's proposals are unfair to people like them, identical to the March 23 survey findings.

"Gov. John Kasich's job approval has ticked up slightly, but he still has a long way to go to get back even to parity among voters," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. "Most of his increase has come among independents and women voters who have turned slightly less negative on him."

In today's survey, independent voters disapprove of Kasich's job performance 47 - 37 percent, better than the 49 - 25 percent disapproval in March. Republicans approve 66 - 22 percent compared to 63 - 18 percent in the last survey, while Democrats disapprove 73 - 15 percent compared to 67 - 11 percent in March.

There is still a large gender gap on Kasich: Men split with 44 percent approving and 46 percent disapproving, while women disapprove 51 - 33 percent.

"Although it is a long way until November when opponents of SB 5 hope to ask voters to overturn it, at this point there is strong support for repealing Gov. Kasich's signature plan."

"Not only does he need to rebuild his image, but the governor will need to move a lot of voters over the next six months if he wants his plan to survive," said Brown. "Voters also say they are opposed to several parts of the new law."

Calling for repeal of SB 5 are Democrats 72 - 14 percent and independent voters 56 - 35 percent, while Republicans support the law 58 - 33 percent. Men want repeal 49 - 42 percent, while women back repeal 58 - 31 percent.

Voters say 52 - 38 percent that limiting collective bargaining for public employees is not needed to balance the budget.

Read The Full Release at Quinnipiac University

Here is my take:

When I served as a felony trial court judge, I was routinely called on to exercise judgment as to what photos from killing scenes and of corpses should and could be seen by juries. This was not a part of my job I relished, since it resulted in my seeing all the photos and deciding which ones the jury could safely and fairly see. Part of what I took into account was how difficult it would be for them, as human beings, to see what I saw. The other purpose of that judgment call was to be fair to both the prosecution (to be able to adequately prove its case) and to the defense (to avoid bias against the defendant with sensationalism and shock), all to allow for fair verdict.

Here, the President is faced with a similar judgment call, but in a world forum. First, the human aspect must be considered, and that consideration transcends all cultures and societies. In the Iliad, Achilles dragged Hector's body by chariot around the city of Troy, shouting, "I killed Hector." After persuasion from Priam, Achilles agreed to return the body for its weight in Trojan gold. The question becomes, what occurs if a photo of bin Laden's bloody head is released? There is no recalling of such a photograph, not even for bin Laden's weight in gold. It becomes an indelible part of human history and the legacy of the United States, for our children and children's children to see. Do we want that?

Senator Brown Leads GOP Challengers in New WS Election Poll

Senator Sherrod Brown, a longtime Congressman, was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 2006, when he defeated incumbent Republican Mike DeWine. 

Brown won that race in what was considered a significant year for Democratic Party gains both statewide and nationally, but - if the election were held today - he would hold his seat against any of these three GOP challengers. 

* Against former State Treasurer, Ohio Secretary of State, and 2006 candidate for governor Ken Blackwell, Brown would win by a 49% to 36% margin. 

* Against sitting Lieutenant Governor Mary Taylor, he would win by a 50% to 36% margin.

* Against sitting Ohio Treasurer Josh Mandel, Brown would win 48% support, compared to 33% support for Mandel.

The Wenzel Strategies survey shows things get interesting in a prospective GOP primary. 

In a Republican Primary election three-way match-up between these three GOP candidates, Blackwell leads with 33%, Taylor finishes second with 19%, while Mandel plays third-fiddle with 15% support - including only those voters who said they were most likely to participate in the Ohio GOP primary election.

However, if Taylor doesn't get in the race, Blackwell maintains only a slim 35% to 33% edge over Mandel, which means that Mandel picks up almost all of the Taylor support.

Read The Full Report From Wentzel Strategies

Related:

Why Is Ohio's Treasurer Endorsing Extremist Legislation That Will Saddle Taxpayers With Extensive Legal Bills?

Blackwell Confirms Interest In Ohio Senate Race Against Sherrod Brown

56% disapprove of Governor, 43% Say Kasich is doing a "poor job!

Wenzel Poll: Majority Favors Repeal of Senate Bill 5

If the repeal of Ohio's Senate Bill 5 were on the ballot today, the repeal would be successful by a double-digit margin, largely on the strength of independent voters, 54% of whom favor repeal of the law, latest Wenzel Strategies telephone survey shows. Another 41% of independents said they would vote to keep Senate Bill 5 in place, according to the recent poll.

Overall, 51% said they favor repeal, compared to 38% who said they would vote to keep the new law in place.  Another 11% said they were unsure on the question.

Governor Kasich appears to be caught in the political maelstrom of Senate Bill 5, as just 37% in the survey gave him positive job approval marks, compared to 56% who gave him negative marks, including 43% who said he is doing a "poor" job, the strongest negative option available to poll respondents. Even among fellow Republicans, just 65% give him positive job performance ratings, but he is clearly in trouble among independent voters - 59% of whom gave him negative marks for his job performance.

Kasich's poor poll numbers also reflect a general downcast attitude that Ohioans now hold about the current state of the state, as just 37% said they think things are headed in the right direction, compared to 51% who said they think things are generally off on the wrong track.  It is notable here that women were far more likely to have a negative view of the current state of affairs in Ohio, compared to men.  While 43% of men said things were generally on the right track, only 32% of women agreed.

Read The Full Poll Results at Wentzel Strategies

Police and firefighter unions have been aligned with Republican candidates for a long time, and even the callous treatment of 9/11 workers wasn't enough to turn them against the Republicans.

The new reality:

WASHINGTON -- Leaders from two unions known to support the Republican Party warned of serious repercussions for GOP candidates in the 2012 elections, saying the onslaught of anti-labor bills in state capitals has shifted their political allegiances.

"Our political principles are pretty straightforward. We'll support those that support us," Harold Schaitberger, general president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, told HuffPost. "We tend to stick with those who stick with us."

"There is a distinct possibility that the pro-labor candidate in the next election will be looked at much more favorably than their overall record," Chuck Canterbury, national president of the Fraternal Order of Police, told HuffPost. "The vast majority of our membership will put other issues aside."

The inclusion of police and fire unions in an Ohio bill that stripped collective bargaining rights from public employees may have been the last straw for the two conservative-leaning groups. But even in Wisconsin, where Gov. Scott Walker's actions exempted them, cops and fire fighters marched shoulder to shoulder with teachers and other public workers.

Now, the public safety unions are signaling what could be a tectonic shift in the political landscape, one that could result in a level of labor solidarity missing for recent elections.

"I don't want to say we are unhappy with Republicans but we are very unhappy with the far-right wing of the party that seems to have taken the Republican Party hostage," said Canterbury, whose union endorsed George W. Bush and John McCain in the last three presidential elections. "We are extremely unhappy with the snowball that rolled in in Ohio and we are traditionally a very conservative organization. We've been bipartisan.....But with the actions that have taken place, there's going to be tremendous reprisals taken out at the polls" by police and their families."They feel like their public officials turned their back on them."

Crooks and Liars via Huffington Post

1,000+ Send Petition to GOP Leaders Protesting Restrictions on Collective Bargaining, Budget Cuts

A new survey of 2,000 Ohio registered voters, commissioned by Faith in Public Life and conducted by Public Policy Polling, finds that Catholics and evangelical/born-again Christians in the battleground state of Ohio overwhelmingly reject restrictions on collective bargaining, as well as Governor Kasich's proposed budget that cuts spending on vital public services while preserving corporate tax loopholes and low tax rates for the wealthiest residents of the state.  More findings from the survey below and here.

"We need responsible leaders who will work together to protect families and good jobs, but Republican leaders in Congress and states like Ohio and Wisconsin are using our faltering economy as an excuse to push an immoral agenda that punishes innocent people and makes working families pay for tax giveaways to corporate special interests," said Rev. Jennifer Butler, executive director of Faith in Public Life.  "Attacks on workers' rights and reckless cuts to needed investments in education, public safety, and protections for the most vulnerable don't honor our values, and people of faith are standing up to these immoral policies."

Several Ohio clergy leaders, including Rev. Tim Ahrens of First Congregational Church and Rev. Mark Diemer of Grace of God Lutheran Church in Columbus, and Fr. Vinny McKiernan, C.S.P. of Ohio State University, gathered at the Ohio Statehouse today to deliver petitions to Governor Kasich, Ohio Senate president Sen. Tom Niehaus and Speaker of the Ohio House William G. Batchelder.  

Father Vinny McKiernan, a campus chaplain at Ohio State University and member of Catholics United said, "I'm here today for a very simple reason: workers deserve a voice in their workplace.  This is a fundamental principal of Catholic Social Teaching.  By stripping public employees of their right to collectively bargain, we are also threatening their dignity as human beings."

The petitions, sponsored by Faithful America (Faith in Public Life's online community of people of faith taking action for the common good), Catholics United, and Interfaith Worker Justice, stand against attacks on collective bargaining rights and budget cuts to education, health and public safety measures for thousands of Ohioans. Petition text here and here.

Once again, our elected majority is telling the young, the old, the poor and the dark-skinned that we have lost confidence in their ability to vision the future of Ohio.

Two states have similar photo ID laws and split Supreme Court decisions have upheld them. But the Court only allowed those specific laws, where voter rolls were in worse shape than Ohio and where there are easily obtained free photo IDs available. Ohio, on the other hand, has heavily invested in improving our voter rolls. And this bill makes it more difficult to obtain a photo ID than those two other states while putting in place fewer protections for voters. Based on these key differences, costly law suits will no doubt follow passage of this bill. And they are likely to succeed.

But it shouldn't have to come to that. I am disappointed that this bill passed on a party-line vote. I'm disappointed that we are having this debate in 2011. This is not the legacy that traditional Republicans want. It is not the legacy Ohio wants. It is antithetical to our shared history -- and burden -- of preserving our democracy by expanding voter participation.

I hope the Ohio Senate and/or the governor agree that disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of voters is unacceptable in 21st Century Ohio.

The Citizens United decision last year, allowing unlimited corporate campaign spending, was a terrible blow to true democratic participation. What the public rightly takes away from that case is that while average voters out there still count, money counts more.

What House Bill 159 really says is that now some people don't count at all.

Related:

The New Poll Tax: House Bill 159 is Unnecessary, Expensive, and Unconstitutional

"Gov. John Kasich has gotten off to a rocky start with Ohio voters, perhaps not surprising given the size of the cuts in public services and state spending that he has proposed," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling institute. "Although there is almost nothing in these numbers that Kasich can point to as evidence of his popularity or that of his proposals, he can take solace from the fact that he has almost four years to turn around public opinion.

"The size of the gender gap in Gov. Kasich's approval rating is noteworthy. There also are gender gaps on other questions regarding how to deal with the state's budget.

Ohio voters disapprove 46 - 30 percent of the way Gov. John Kasich is handling his job, with women disapproving 48 - 25 percent and men disapproving 44 - 37 percent, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. Voters say 53 - 36 percent that Gov. Kasich's budget is unfair to them.

Republicans approve of Kasich's job performance 63 - 18 percent, but his disapproval is 67 - 11 percent among Democrats and 49 - 25 percent among independent voters.

Kasich's budget proposal is fair to people like them, Republicans say 63 - 25 percent. Democrats say it's unfair 73 - 17 percent, as do independent voters 57 - 32 percent. Men say "unfair" 49 - 43 percent and women say "unfair" 57 - 29 percent.

Voters oppose 58 - 35 percent banning public employees from striking, but they support 66 - 27 percent the part of Kasich's budget that would require public employees to pay at least 15 percent of their health insurance premiums.

By 46 - 39 percent voters oppose Kasich's plan to sell five state prisons to private firms as a way to save money.

Read Full Poll Results Here

There's not a ton of consensus among Ohio Republicans about who they'd like their Senate candidate to be next year but their top choice is a blast from the past- Ken Blackwell.

The new survey showing Blackwell with a significant following among Ohio Republicans was conducted by Public Policy Polling, which described the results:

17% say they'd like the former Secretary of State and Gubernatorial candidate to be their nominee, followed by 14% for current Secretary of State Jon Husted, 12% for comedian Drew Carey, 9% for Lieutenant Governor Mary Taylor, 8% for Congressmen Jim Jordan and Steve LaTourette, 6% for Treasurer Josh Mandel, and 1% for state senator Shannon Jones.

If you take Drew Carey out of the equation the preference for Blackwell expands to 21% naming him as their top choice compared to 14% for Husted and 10% for LaTourette and Jordan.

From Public Policy Polling:

Ohio Senate Bill 5 may not be in effect for very long...54% of voters in the state say they'd repeal it in an election later this year while just 31% say they'd vote to let the bill stand.

The support for repealing SB 5 is reflective of a high level of support for unions and workers in Ohio, more so than we saw in Wisconsin a couple of weeks ago. 63% of voters in the state supportive collective bargaining for public employees to only 29% who oppose it. 52% of voters think public employees should have the right to strike, to 42% who think they should not. And 65% think public employees should have the same rights they do now- or more- while only 32% believe they should have fewer rights.

There are two things particularly notable in the crosstabs on all of these questions. The first is that non-union households are supportive of the public employees. 54% support their collective bargaining rights to 36% in opposition and 44% say they would vote to repeal SB 5 to 38% who would let it stand. Obviously that level of support is not nearly as high as among union households but it still shows that the workers have even most of the non-union public behind them.

The other thing that's worth noting is the independents. A lot of attention has been given to the way what's been going on in Ohio and Wisconsin is galvanizing the Democratic base, but it's also turning independents who were strongly supportive of the GOP in the Midwest last year back against the party. 62% of independents support collective bargaining for public employees to 32% opposed and 53% support repeal of SB 5 to 32% who would let it stand.

All of this is having an absolutely brutal effect on John Kasich's numbers. We find him with just a 35% approval rating and 54% of voters disapproving of him. His approval with people who voted for him is already all the way down to 71%, while he's won over just 5% of folks who report having voted for Ted Strickland last fall. Particularly concerning for him is a 33/54 spread with independents.

Read More At Public Policy Polling

Full results here

Cincinnati, OH--The latest Ohio Poll finds more Ohioans disapprove than approve of Governor John Kasich's performance as governor. The latest Poll also asked Ohioans their opinions on Ohio's budget situation.

KASICH'S FIRST OHIO POLL APPROVAL RATING AT 40 PERCENT

The latest Ohio Poll finds 40 percent of Ohio adults approve of John Kasich's performance as governor, 47 percent disapprove and 13 percent neither approve nor disapprove.

Kasich's approval rating is lower than the initial gubernatorial approval rating recorded by the Ohio Poll for former Governors Strickland (68%), Taft (49%) and Voinoich (61%). Kasich's rating is higher than the initial approval rating of former Governor Richard Celeste (32%).

As is often the case, Ohioans are sharply split along partisan lines when it comes to ratings of their governor. While far more Democrats disapprove (63%) than approve of Kasich's performance (25%), far more Republicans approve (65%) than disapprove (26%). More independents disapprove (52%) than approve (30%) of Kasich's performance at the present time.

Kasich's approval rating for handling the economy (38%) is similar to his overall approval rating.

OHIOANS WEIGH IN ON STATE BUDGET

Ohio adults were asked their opinions about how Governor Kasich and the Ohio General Assembly should balance Ohio's budget. Fifty-three percent of Ohio adults say they would like to see Ohio's budget balanced through "a combination of tax increases and state spending reductions," 35 percent would like to see the budget balanced through "reductions in state spending on programs and services," six percent would like to see "state tax increases" and six percent "don't know."

View Full Poll Results and Methodology Here

Brian Rotheberg, Executive Director of ProgressOhio and Doug Priese, Chairman of the Franklin County Republican Party debate, Gov. Kasich's State of the State Address, SB 5, the coming Budget and the Kvamme Lawsuit filed by Progressohio on this morning's NBC4 "The Spectrum."

Watch It:

Canton Rep Letter to the Editor

There has been massive opposition to Senate Bill 5 since it was introduced by Sen. Shannon Jones to aid in Gov. John Kasich's promise to balance the Ohio budget by eliminating the collective bargaining rights of more than 350,000 public employee taxpayers.

Which group of workers is next? You decide by replacing the words "bargaining rights" with any of the following words -- human, civil, basic, legal, etc. -- to understand why we have to stop SB 5.

An enormous amount of time has been spent on making the problems of Wall Street appear to be the result of collective bargaining contracts of teachers, safety forces, nurses and public servants. How long before Ohio's middle-class families relocate to other states who value their hard work, dedication and willingness to take pay freezes and concessions under collective bargaining contracts?

My entire 24-year teaching career was under a collective bargaining agreement that made my profession rewarding, despite accepting a wage freeze to alleviate the budgetary crisis that the unconstitutional school funding problems of Ohio created for our school systems. My local, district and state leadership positions within my teachers' association increased my successes in the classroom, where I was honored as the Stark County Law Related Teacher of the Year, Ohio Teacher of the Year nominee and Outstanding Minority Teacher of the Year from the Doris L. Allen Minority Caucus of the Ohio Education Association.

Amazingly, the Ohio Senate President, Tom Niehaus, removed two elected senators who were in opposition to SB5 from committees in order to pass this bill, despite the lack of evidence to support it as a cost-saving measure in the budget.

My teacher grade for SB5 is an F!

KATHLEEN PURDY,

LEXINGTON TOWNSHIP

Americans Oppose Republican Attack on Unions in Poll

Americans reject Republican efforts to curb bargaining rights of unions whose power they say is dwarfed by corporations, a Bloomberg National Poll finds.

As battles rage between state workers and Republican governors in Wisconsin and Ohio, 63 percent don't think states should be able to break their promises to retirees, and respondents split over whether governors aim to balance their budgets or weaken unions that back Democratic foes, according to the poll conducted March 4-7.

The poll shows that political challenges to government workers are failing to draw broad support from a public more concerned about unemployment than government deficits. Respondents are divided over whether public employees should sacrifice to help states ease their fiscal crises: About half say governors are unfairly targeting unions and 46 percent say public employees should be willing to accept benefit cuts. The fracture largely reflects party lines. [...]

Overall, poll respondents with a favorable view of unions outnumber those with an unfavorable view 49-to-40 percent. Even with the attention received by both Wisconsin Governor Walker and New Jersey's Christie, at least half weren't sure how they viewed either politician.

A majority says unions are appropriate for firefighters, nurses, teachers, prison guards and police officers. Respondents were divided only over whether custodians and office workers also should be unionized.

Poll respondent Margaret Coakley, 72, a retired psychiatric social worker from New York who lives in New Harbor, Maine, says politicians are wrong if they blame public employees for the financial ills of their state.

"It's outrageous they're pointing to public employees now," she says. "That's not where the problems are."

Watch It:

A new survey of Ohioans and residents of four other battleground states [pdf] show broad support from gun owners and non-gun owners alike on common sense firearm safety regulations.

The Ohio Statehouse clearly has a different set of priorities from the Ohioans surveyed, as their top gun priority is allowing guns in bars and open-air stadiums and increasing access to guns for convicted drug criminals.

Here are some highlights from the national survey:

• 90% of those surveyed and 90% of gun owners back fixing gaps in the database that are meant to prevent the mentally ill, drug abuser and others from buying guns.
• 86% of Americans and 81% of gun owners want to require all gun buyers to pass a background check on all firearm purchases.

A bill introduced by Senator Charles Schumer would address many of the flaws in the current background check system. States frequently fail to report the information that would make our existing background check system more effective. Schumer's bill would reduce federal funding to states that fail to meet certain reporting standards. It would also close the gun show loophole, by requiring private sellers at shows have a licensed dealer conduct a check on all buyers.

The survey was coordinated by Momentum Analysis and the Ohio polling was conducted by Bellwether Research. There was a margin of error is 4%.

Polls Show Strong Support for Collective Bargaining Rights

Columbus - Yet another national poll today shows that Americans do not support partisan legislation such as Senate Bill 5 that would take collective bargaining rights away from police officers, firefighters, teachers and other public employees.  According to a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, 62% oppose efforts to strip government workers of their rights to collectively bargain.

"The public sees Senate Bill 5 for what it really is--a highly political assault on the rights of middle class workers," said Senator Cafaro.  "I am grateful that six republicans in the Ohio Senate joined with Senate Democrats in opposing this deeply flawed legislation.  If it wasn't for last minute chicanery, the bill would not have even reached the floor of the Senate for a vote."

The Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll also points out that 77% percent of Americans believe public employees should have the same rights to negotiate over health care, pensions and other benefits as workers in the private sector.

"Senate Bill 5 would turn our public employees into second class citizens," said Senator Cafaro.  "The sad truth is this legislation would leave public employees with fewer rights to negotiate on issues such as safety equipment than their counterparts in the private sector."

The findings of the Wall Street Journal/NBC News survey are backed up by other recent public opinion polls.   A USA Today/Gallup poll puts support for public employee collective bargaining rights at 61% and a New York Times/CBS News poll has the number at 60%.

As debate rages in Ohio, Wisconsin and other states over limiting the power of unions, a new CBS News/New York Times survey finds that many Americans are siding with organized labor.

A majority of Americans say they oppose efforts to weaken the collective bargaining rights of public employee unions and are also against cutting the pay or benefits of public workers to reduce state budget deficits, according to the poll.

As labor battles erupt in state capitals around the nation, a majority of Americans say they oppose efforts to weaken the collective bargaining rights of public employee unions and are also against cutting the pay or benefits of public workers to reduce state budget deficits, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll. [..]

But the nationwide poll found that embattled public employee unions have the support of most Americans -- and most independents -- as they fight the efforts of newly elected Republican governors in Wisconsin and Ohio to weaken their bargaining powers, and the attempts of governors from both parties to cut their pay or benefits.

Americans oppose weakening the bargaining rights of public employee unions by a margin of nearly two to one: 60 percent to 33 percent. While a slim majority of Republicans favored taking away some bargaining rights, they were outnumbered by large majorities of Democrats and independents who said they opposed weakening them. Those surveyed said they opposed, 56 percent to 37 percent, cutting the pay or benefits of public employees to reduce deficits, breaking down along similar party lines. A majority of respondents who have no union members living in their households opposed both cuts in pay or benefits and taking away the collective bargaining rights of public employees.

Related:

Public Overwhelmingly Backs Collective Bargaining Rights for State Workers

Ohio Gov. John Kasich seeks to eliminate collective bargaining rights for state workers. He claims this change is necessary to bring Ohio's budget under control.

But a simpler explanation is that he's deeply conservative, doesn't like unions, and sees a budget crisis as a perfect opportunity to get rid of them. The public, he reasoned, would take his side against the "greedy" unions.

That doesn't seem to be happening.

In a just-released USA Today/Gallup poll, an overwhelming majority (61-33) say they would oppose a bill in their state to take away public union bargaining rights as Kaisch aims to do in Ohio.

Gov. John Kasich should wake up and realize that what he's trying to do is a bridge too far in the public's eyes.

Sure, public workers should be willing to make some sacrifices in a budget crunch--we all should be willing to--but taking away their bargaining rights is not fair and the public knows it.

Ohioans overwhelming rejected the idea of eliminating collective bargaining for teachers, nurses, firefighters, and other public service in an online poll conducted by the Columbus Dispatch earlier this month.  

The poll followed another recent Dispatch online poll where Ohioans rejected the idea of passing a right to work for less law - a measure that hopes to destroy unions and a voice on the job workers by taking away the requirement all workers in a unit to pay their fair share of dues or fees if the workers in their unit have voted to have a union - by a huge majority.

HT: Center For American Progress

Ohioans overwhelming rejected the idea of eliminating collective bargaining for teachers, nurses, firefighters, and other public service in an online poll conducted by the Columbus Dispatch earlier this month.  

The poll followed another recent Dispatch online poll where Ohioans rejected the idea of passing a right to work for less law - a measure that hopes to destroy unions and a voice on the job workers by taking away the requirement all workers in a unit to pay their fair share of dues or fees if the workers in their unit have voted to have a union - by a huge majority.  

Here are some of the great comments left by some of the hundreds who voted no on the poll:

 - This is a distraction from the real solution to restore the budget in Ohio. Potentially this will destroy hard working families with no immediate solution for new jobs.  Elected officials have the role of preserving Ohio not pushing through laws that will ruin the education of children and destroy the security of neighborhoods.

 

- This "need" for cuts is just a veiled attempt by corporations and those who will do their bidding to break the backs of unions in the United States. It's a concerted effort that is happening elsewhere like Wisconsin right now. People choose to be represented by unions because of abuses that occur in the workplace. Now that right is under attack!

 

- This has absolutely nothing to do with helping Ohio's economy. The governor needs to look at why so many corporations have moved overseas, not pick on public service unions.

By Becky Williams

Massillon resident Becky Williams is president of Service Employees International Union District 1199, covering Ohio, West Virginia and Kentucky.

In the days following the gubernatorial election, I waited to hear Gov.-elect John Kasich shift from campaign rhetoric to the reality of governing a state as diverse and complex as Ohio. Campaign slogans and attack ads are behind us, but Kasich continues to place the blame on Ohio's workers.

Our fellow citizens understand that our state is facing a very serious budget problem. Kasich argues that Ohio's burdensome tax policies are driving businesses out of our state.

However, the Ohio budget had a surplus in 2005 when then-Gov. Bob Taft passed his tax cuts (House Bill 66), and unemployment was at 5.9 percent. The budget is not the problem -- the economy caused this $8 billion shortfall.

Instead of belittling public servants and the services they provide, Kasich should fulfill his campaign promise and help entrepreneurs get off the ground and small businesses grow, which translates to jobs.

The people of Ohio do not favor the quick-fix solutions the governor proposed. Privatizing our prisons and leasing the Ohio Turnpike are not popular with voters and will create a greater long-term financial burden for the state.

We need a balanced approach, including increasing revenue, which allows the state to continue to provide services to the community.

Read The Full Op-Ed at The Canton Repository

Last week President Williams was interviewed on WSYX ABC News.

SEIU1199 President Becky Williams takes on Governor John Kasich's attack on public employees:

The report showing government workers are paid less than their private sector counterparts referred to at the end of the clip can be found here.

Congressman Dennis Kucinich will not challenge President Obama for in the 2012 Democratic primaries--"I'm focusing on being re-elected to the House of Representatives"--but he thinks Obama should face a foe for the presidential nomination.

"I think primaries can have the opportunity of raising the issues and make the Democratic candidate a stronger candidate,"Kucinich, who sought the party nod in 2004 and 2008, said Thursday. "I think it's safe to predict that President Obama will continue to be the nominee of the Democratic primary, but he can be a stronger nominee if he receives a strong challenge in a primary.

"Kucinich won't speculate on who could, or should, run against Obama, who has disappointed much of the Democratic base with moves to the right on issues ranging from last year's healthcare debate--in which he abandoned first the single-payer reform he had once backed and then the public option--to tax policy and entitlement reform.

But the Ohio congressman did suggest the issues that he's like to see raised by another Democrat in the primary states where Obama will begin his re-election campaign."I'm very interested in making sure that creation of jobs, healthcare for all, protection of Social Security and Medicare, those things are fundamental--and education," Kucinich explained in a C-SPAN interview. "Those are issues that certainly should be brought up in primaries. And, finally, getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan. We have to stop roaming the world looking for dragons to slay--we've things to take care of right here at home."

Watch It:

Ohio estate tax: Fair and equitable
Published: Sunday, January 23, 2011
by Mike Foley State Representative

I strongly disagree with weakening or eliminating what I think is one of the fairest taxes we as a people impose on ourselves.

Ohio's estate tax only affects the value of estates over $338,333. For example, if you had an estate valued at $339,000, the heir would only be charged 6 percent of the $667 above the $338,333 threshold, or $40. (The rate rises to 7 percent above $500,000). That's a pretty good deal for someone inheriting a large amount of money or property.

Right now, the richest 1 percent of Americans control 33.8 percent of private wealth in this country. That's the greatest income discrepancy since before the Great Depression. I tend to agree with a quote associated with Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis: "We can have concentrated wealth in the hands of a few or we can have democracy. But we cannot have both."

We should keep the estate tax.

Mike Foley State Representative - District 14 Cleveland

While more people self-identify as "conservative," they're absolutely more liberal when they're polled issue-by-issue.

Apparently the same goes for government spending. Greg Sergent posts the results of the new Pew Poll:

The poll finds that in general, more Americans think deficit reduction is a more important priority (49 percent) than spending to help the economy recover (46 percent).

So Americans are opposed to government spending. But when they're asked about spending, issue-by-issue, they actually support government spending by wide margins. In chart form:

In other words, on most issues, Americans want spending to increase or stay the same. A significantly small minority want to cut spending issue-by-issue. And, of course, issue-by-issue is a more accurate and specific measure of opinion.

Findings like the above, which are supported by other polls, suggest that if Obama and Dems can keep the fight focused on a battle over specifics, maybe the public will agree.

This op-ed was originally published by USA Today HERE.
 
Reagan saw that 'we are all patriots'
By Barack Obama

Ronald Wilson Reagan was a believer.  As a husband, a father, an entertainer, a governor and a president, he recognized that each of us has the power - as individuals and as a nation - to shape our own destiny.  He had faith in the American promise; in the importance of reaffirming values like hard work and personal responsibility; and in his own unique ability to inspire others to greatness.  
 
No matter what political disagreements you may have had with President Reagan - and I certainly had my share - there is no denying his leadership in the world, or his gift for communicating his vision for America.  
 
President Reagan recognized the American people's hunger for accountability and change - putting our nation on a bold new path towards both.  And although he knew that conflicts between parties and political adversaries were inevitable, he also knew that they would never be strong enough to break the ties that bind us together.  He understood that while we may see the world differently, and hold different opinions about what's best for our country, the fact remains that we are all patriots who put the welfare of our fellow citizens above all else.
 
It was a philosophy that President Reagan took to heart - famously saying that he and Democratic Speaker Tip O'Neill, with whom he sparred constantly, could be friends after six o'clock.  It's what led him to compromise on issues as contentious as Social Security and tax cuts.  And it's what allowed him to work with leaders of all political persuasions to advance the cause of freedom, democracy and security around the world, including reducing nuclear weapons and imagining a world, ultimately, without nuclear weapons.   
 
But perhaps even more important than any single accomplishment was the sense of confidence and optimism President Reagan never failed to communicate to the American people.  It was a spirit that transcended the most heated political arguments, and one that called each of us to believe that tomorrow will be better than today.  At a time when our nation was going through an extremely difficult period, with economic hardship at home and very real threats beyond our borders, it was this positive outlook, this sense of pride, that the American people needed more than anything.
 
When the future looked darkest and the way ahead seemed uncertain, President Reagan understood both the hardships we faced and the hopes we held for the future.  He understood that it is always "Morning in America."  That was his gift, and we remain forever grateful.

The Editorial Board of The Columbus Dispatch recently weighed in on why they think state lawmakers considering opening state parks for drilling for gas and oil is very risky business. 

Editorial: Step carefully

State parks, water shouldn't be put at risk by drilling

Now, the state's budget deficit has mushroomed to $8 billion and counting, lawmakers are eager to find ways to balance the budget and a new drilling technique has the energy industry promising new riches beneath eastern Ohio's forests and farmlands.

But lawmakers should consider carefully the costs of hydraulic fracturing of the shale that lies deep beneath Salt Fork State Park.

The oil-and-gas-extraction technique, sometimes shortened to fracking, has generated a lot of excitement and some payoff in Pennsylvania, where large parts of the state contain oil-and-gas-bearing Marcellus shale. Eastern Ohio's Utica shale also is energy-rich.

Drilling horizontally deep underground, the technique involves blasting millions of gallons of water into the rock, smashing it apart and releasing the gas or oil. The problem is that the briny wastewater, sometimes containing industrial chemicals, has to go somewhere. In Pennsylvania, most of it goes into rivers, after passing through treatment plants that can remove only some of the salt and chemicals.

New regulations in Pennsylvania are expected to improve the treatment, and more drilling companies are developing processes to reuse the wastewater instead of discharging it. Other states require drillers to inject the wastewater into deep wells.

Leaping into hydraulic fracturing without adequate regulations was costly in Pennsylvania; in 2008, the Monongahela River downstream from a treatment plant that handled fracking waste became so salty at times that it corroded machinery at a steel mill and power plant.

If Ohio shale is to be subject to fracking, in or out of state parks, regulators should learn from other states' mistakes and successes. Under nearly four decades of protection from the federal Clean Water Act, Ohio's rivers and streams have recovered greatly from the pollution of earlier times. Their health, and the safety of drinking-water supplies, shouldn't be put at risk again.

You can read the full editorial here.

Daniel Hernandez Jr., the intern who cared for Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords after she was shot in the head and the family of a 9-year-old girl who was the youngest of six people killed in the same shooting will sit with first lady Michelle Obama for President Barack Obama's State of the Union address.

Giffords' husband, astronaut Mark Kelly, however, was not expected to join them.
Kelly was invited to attend but will remain in Houston, where he is based and where Giffords is now receiving medical care, her office said Monday. She was transferred to a facility there last Friday to begin rehabilitation after being hospitalized in Tucson since the Jan. 8 shootings.

"He wants to stay in Houston to be near his wife," said Mark Kimble, Giffords' spokesman in Tucson.

The polls tell the tale. Republican approval ratings are plummeting as the American people see them ignoring the economy and wasting time with political stunts that have zero chance of passing. NBC's First Read summed it up: "The House GOP's first impression isn't on jobs".

As Republicans choose to spend the first days of the new Congress trying to re-open the donut hole and take away tax breaks from small businesses, two polls in the last 48 hours show that they are severely out of step with the American people.

• CBS News poll: "House Republicans may be focused on fulfilling their campaign promise to work to overturn the health care reform law, but a new CBS News/New York Times survey finds that a plurality of Americans prefer they focus instead on creating jobs. The poll finds 43 percent of Americans believe the most important thing for the new Congress to focus on is job creation - compared to just 18 percent who say the top priority should be health care...The Republican Party is seen favorably by 40 percent of Americans and unfavorably by 49 percent."

• NBC News poll:  "Only 25% say the Republicans in Congress will bring the right kind of change (versus 42% who said that about the Dems in Jan. 2007, and 37% who said that about the GOP in Jan. 1995)... And then there's this: The GOP's fav/unfav has gone from a net positive in December (38%-37%) to a net negative now (34%-40%). 'I think this has been a pretty short Republican honeymoon,' McInturff says. Hart adds, 'I think the president has the benefit of the doubt, and the Republicans -- based on this data -- have the burden of proof.'"

Not exactly an auspicious start for Republicans. We hope they will take the hint, drop the political charade, and start working with the other side of the aisle to create jobs and build a prosperous middle class.

In the space of one year, Fox News has lost its perch as the most trusted TV news network in the US and is now average at best, a new survey has found.

A poll gauging public trust in TV news has found that PBS is the most trusted name in news, while trust in Fox News has dropped significantly.

According to a survey from Public Policy Polling, "a year ago a plurality of Americans said they trusted Fox News. Now a plurality of them don't."

A year ago a plurality of Americans said they trusted Fox News. Now a plurality of them don't. Conservatives haven't moved all that much- 75% said they trusted it last year and 72% still do this time around. But moderates and liberals have both had a strong increase in their level of distrust for the network- a 12 point gain from 48% to 60% for moderates and a 16 point gain from 66% to 82% for liberals. Voters between left and center tend to be more trusting of the media across the board, which is why a fair number of them were still rating Fox favorably even a year ago at this time. But it looks like with a lot of those folks it has finally crossed the line to being too political to trust.

Key point: Ohio voters say 45 - 30 percent that Sen. Sherrod Brown deserves to be re-elected in 2012, while they say the same thing about President Barack Obama by 48 - 44 percent, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

Quinnipiac University Poll:

Ohio voters give President Obama a 49 - 46 percent job approval rating, reversing a negative 45 - 49 percent approval rating the last time Quinnipiac University surveyed Ohio registered voters June 30. By 44 - 39 percent they said they would vote for him rather than an unnamed Republican in 2012.

Democrats say Obama deserves re-election 84 - 10 percent. He does not deserve a term, Republicans say 83 - 7 percent and independent voters say 51 - 40 percent.

Sen. Brown has a 45 - 25 approval rating, similar to the 46 - 29 percent he received in June. In a matchup against an unnamed Republican he would win 45 - 33 percent. Democrats back Brown 84 - 4 percent while Republicans back an unnamed GOP candidate 75 - 6 percent. Independent voters split with 35 percent for Brown and 32 percent for a Republican.

"Given the shellacking Democrats took in the November election both here in Ohio and around the country, both Sen. Brown and President Obama begin their 2012 campaigns in reasonably good shape," said Brown.

Those numbers won't scare away prospective GOP challengers from looking at the race, but they are better than you'd expect given the large gains Republicans made in Ohio last year. Brown will undoubtedly be a top target for Republicans, but he appears to have a solid base to build on, as fully 84 percent of Democrats said they'll support him for re-election.

The poll also found that a plurality -- 37 percent -- are undecided on whether House Speaker John Boehner's (R-Ohio) penchant for crying is a sign of strength rather than weakness.

Key Point: "For the most part, Ohioans are not receptive to a number of proposals that would cut spending or sell state assets as a way to balance the budget," said Brown. "Gov. Kasich has a serious selling job on his hands when it comes to convincing the people of Ohio on the wisdom of his ideas."

Ohio Voters Don't Believe Gov. Kasich's No-Tax Pledge, Quinnipiac University Poll Finds; Jury Is Out On New Governor

After one week in office,  Kasich gets 30 - 22 percent job approval rating, with 48 percent of voters undecided. But voters are generally optimistic, 59 - 29 percent, about the next four years in Ohio with Kasich as governor.

"Gov. John Kasich starts out with a barely positive job approval from the voters, although in fairness almost half have yet to develop an opinion of his performance given he is only a little more than a week in office," said Peter A. Brown assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. "Kasich, however, does have an electorate that is optimistic about his ability to turn the state around. Voters are aware of the problems facing Ohio: 96 percent call the state's budget problems 'very serious' or 'somewhat serious,' the highest level of concern we've ever measured in the state."

While voters may be aware of the budget problems, they are not happy about some of the ideas being advocated by Kasich and/or Republicans who control both houses of the legislature.

By 53 - 32 percent voters say they would rather cut services than raise taxes to balance the budget. Service cuts win 76 - 13 percent support from Republicans and 56 - 29 percent support from independent voters, while Democrats favor tax hikes 50 - 36 percent.

But voters say 51 - 36 percent that eliminating the tax on estates of more than $338,000 is a bad idea.

Ohio voters oppose a number of proposals to help balance the state budget:

• 46 - 43 percent against layoffs for state workers;

• 51 - 30 percent against leasing the Ohio Turnpike to a private company;

• 51 - 33 percent against hiring a private company to run state prisons.

A proposal to limit the ability of state and local government workers to bargain collectively is a bad idea, voters say 51 - 34 percent.

"Ohioans do not want a tax increase to deal with the budget crisis but are skeptical that Gov. Kasich will be able to avoid one, despite his promises," said Brown.

One Ohio Now, a coalition of over 30 groups across the state is offering a balanced approach to balancing Ohio's budget.  Learn More.

A new ABC News/Washington Post poll finds President Obama's approval rating at 54%, the highest it's been in more than a year.

And given overwhelming approval of his response to the Tucson attack, Americans by an 18-point margin, 58% to 40%, say Obama "understands the problems of people like you." That's up from a mere 2-point split, 50% to 48% in September.

A new CNN/Opinion Research poll finds Obama's approval rating is up five points to 53% "as a growing number of Americans consider him a strong leader who is tough enough to handle a crisis."

Key finding: The president's approval rating among Democrats and Republicans is virtually unchanged since December, but among independents it has grown from 41% in December to 56% now.

A new Associated Press-GfK poll finds 53% of Americans approve of how President Obama is doing his job -- his best numbers since the vote on health care reform 10 months ago.

Also interesting: "Democrats generally are back to being viewed in a positive light by most Americans -- 53% favorable to 45% unfavorable. That's better than at any point during the height of the 2010 campaign. Views of the Republican Party are evenly split at 48%."

If Chris Christie is the new Republican role model for Governors, then the 2012 Presidential race doesn't look to good for the GOP.

Public Policy Polling: "Barack Obama would easily win New Jersey again if he had to stand for reelection today, even if Republicans put forth Chris Christie as their candidate. Obama leads Christie by a 17 point margin in a hypothetical contest, the same amount Mike Huckabee and Newt Gingrich trail by. Mitt Romney does the best of the leading Republican contenders in the state, trailing Obama by 15, and Sarah Palin has one of her worst performances in any state we've polled to date, lagging the President by a whooping 30 points."

HT: Taegan Goddard's Political Wire

Columbus, OH - Brian Rothenberg, ProgressOhio Executive Director issued the following statement in response to the report released today by the Ohio Metropolitan Chambers of Commerce and the Ohio Chamber of Commerce that makes recommendations for reforming state government:

"Ohio's state workforce remains a leader in implementing quality improvement at the workplace and our quality improvement process has saved a lot of taxpayer dollars over the years. I would caution however that any large job losses, public or private, can devastate Ohio's economy."

"Ohio does have large growth in middle management ranks consisting of hundreds, if not thousands, of excess managers. In the Chambers haste at political payback at unions, there seems to be blinders about middle management and instead an attack on front-line delivery staff, we need to redirect resources to service delivery and away from administrative waste."

Rothenberg continued, "One thing that is important to note is that the report recommendations related to implementation of the Affordable Care Act recognize the cost savings the health care reform bill will deliver. That is encouraging in spite of the Governor-elect and Attorney General-elect's rhetoric related to health care reform."

"But we also remain staunchly opposed to Governor-elect Kasich, the Chamber of Commerce, or anyone else that attempts damaging things to our economy or workers such as gutting public services or opposing the freedom to form a union all in the name of political payback."

Among other areas of contention for ProgressOhio in the report:

Yesterday, the House approved a permanent extension of middle-class tax cuts by a vote of 234-188, with only three Republicans supporting the bill. Leading the opposition, incoming Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) declared that "the American people want us to stop all the looming tax hikes" on high-income earners, which yesterday's measure did not address. Other Republicans have used the midterm election results to justify their opposition to any plan that does not also extend Bush-era tax cuts for the richest two percent.

But a new poll from CBS News finds that Boehner and his party are badly distorting public opinion. According to the survey, 67 percent of Americans disagree with the GOP's unyielding stance: 53 percent want the tax cuts "extended only for households earning less than $250,000 per year" and 14 percent want to let all of the tax cuts expire. Conversely, just 26 percent -- and only 46 percent of Republicans -- favor "extending the cuts for all Americans, even those earning above the $250,000 level, which is the GOP proposal."  

~ Political Correction

This month's election results were cheered by conservatives, but left liberals lamenting and progressives pondering. Conservative groups announced the results of the November general election mean voters didn't like the change they got in 2008, and are angry about what's happening with the economy, with government programs and spending that they say are dangerously out of control.

But progressives say that Republicans are now in the same spot President Obama was two years ago and that the electorate's frustration and resulting "shellacking" swung the pendulum too far to the right.

Talking about the election and the upcoming budget battle are Matt Mayer from the Buckeye Institute, a self-described free market think tank, and Brian Rothenberg from ProgressOhio, a non-profit coalition of left leaning groups and activists.

Watch It:

Editorial at The Cincinnati Enquirer:

When Ohio Gov.-elect John Kasich visited The Enquirer in September for an endorsement interview, we asked him for his views on openness in government, particularly in light of his proposal to put state development policy in private hands.

Here's what the GOP gubernatorial candidate said:

"I'm not worried about transparency. I'm not going to get hung up on that stuff. If you've got something you want to know, I'll tell you. I'm not here to 'hide the pea.' My bias is toward openness."

Well, apparently that was then, and this is now.

Mere weeks after defeating incumbent Gov. Ted Strickland, the Kasich team has said it won't make the names or resumes of applicants for state jobs public - an outrageous nose-thumbing at well-established principles of openness and disclosure of public information.

Within a day of opening his FixOhioNow.com website, Kasich had received more than 1,500 resumes for public jobs via e-mail to the site.

But if he gets his way, the public will never know who applied, what criteria were used in hiring - or who might have been more qualified choices.

The rationale behind this reasoning: FixOhioNow.com is not a state government site but a private site, paid for by the Kasich-Taylor New Day Committee Inc. Is this how Kasich intends to operate? As a "private" governor?

If this is "transparency," we'd hate to see what opacity looks like in a Kasich administration.

Read the Full Editorial at Cincinnati.com

The Fiscal Commission Co-Chairs' Social Security proposals are an equal opportunity disaster. So soon after an angry electorate has expressed its frustration with a Washington political class that does not appear to be listening, it totally ignores the will of the people. Poll after poll has shown that Democrats, Republicans, and Independents reject the punitive cuts in America's economic security that the co-chairs have proposed. Their proposal:

1. Deeply cuts the benefits of middle-class families. The proposal would cut retirement benefits by as much as 36% for young people entering the workforce today. Today's 20-year old workers who retire at age 65 would see their benefits cut by 17% if their wages average $43,000 over their working lives, by 30% if their wages average $69,000 over their working lives, and by 36% if their wages average $107,000 over their working lives, according to the Social Security Chief Actuary.¹ The proposed cuts would apply to retirees, disabled workers and their families, children who have lost parents, and widows and widowers.
    
2. Closes Social Security's long-range funding gap primarily by cutting already low benefits, rather than by raising taxes on those who can most afford to pay. Ninety-two percent of Social Security's projected funding gap is closed by cutting promised benefits, according to the proposal. The benefit formula change eliminates 45% of the projected shortfall, raising the retirement age eliminates 21%, and reducing the COLA eliminates 26%.² Social Security's benefits are already inadequate - just $13,000 a year on average³ - and should not be cut further. Instead, Social Security's long-range funding gap could be closed, as most Americans want, by requiring those employees (and their employers) who make more than $107,000 a year to pay Social Security taxes on all their wages, as the rest of us do who earn less.⁴
   
   
3. Raises the retirement age to 69. This is a 13% benefit cut on top of the 13% cut already made when the retirement age was increased from 65 to 67, according to the Social Security Administration.⁵
   

Obama Better Positioned For Re-Elect Than Reagan

More Americans want Pres. Obama to seek re-election in 2012 than wanted Ronald Reagan to run for a second term when he was facing his first midterm election in 1982, according to new polling.

Still, Obama's position isn't particularly strong in the Pew Research/National Journal Congressional Connection poll that was sponsored by SHRM. The poll found that 47 percent want Obama to seek a second term. In August of 1982, only 36 percent wanted Reagan to run again.

And, unlike Reagan, less say Obama should not run for re-election. Forty-two percent responded that Obama should sit out 2012, compared to a majority -- 51 percent -- who said the same of Reagan in 1982.

The numbers indicate the well-documented struggles presidents typically have when they face their first midterm election after winning the White House. Both Reagan and Obama faced severe economic problems in their first two years in office. Like Reagan, Obama will undoubtedly seek to rebound after what looks like it will be a devastating midterm election for his party this year.

Obama's numbers are most reminiscent of Pres. Bill Clinton's when he was going into the GOP tidal wave in the 1994 midterm election. That year, 44 percent wanted Clinton to run again while a higher percentage -- 47 percent -- said he shouldn't.

We wanted to be sure that you caught Senator Brown's op-ed in Monday's New York Times.

Sherrod has been fighting for tough enforcement of trade rules with China for years. Our country's trade relations with China are anything but normal. China's unfair trade practices are costing us jobs and hurting Ohio manufacturers, including the clean-energy industry. It's time the administration takes a stand.

The full op-ed is below:

TEN years ago this fall the Senate sold out American manufacturing. By a vote of 83 to 15, it established so-called permanent normal trade relations with China, paving the way for that country to join the World Trade Organization. As a result, Chinese imports to the United States fell under the same low tariffs and high quotas as those from countries like Canada and Britain.

Today, though, our trade relations with China are anything but normal. The 2000 agreement's proponents insisted it would enable a billion Chinese consumers to buy American products. Instead, our bilateral trade deficit has increased 170 percent, largely because China has undermined free-market competition through illegal subsidies and currency manipulation.

Unless the administration takes punitive steps in response to China's unfair trade practices, the American economy -- and the American worker -- will continue to suffer.

The old agreement on trade with China was never really about promoting American manufacturing. Rather, it was a cynical ploy on the part of many multinational companies. They lobbied Congress to approve it, promising a boost to American exports; then, once it passed, they closed domestic plants, moved production overseas and sold their products back to American consumers.

As for those billion Chinese consumers? We now know that what the companies were really so excited about was a billion inexpensive Chinese workers.

True, our exports to China have increased. But reporting only exports is like reporting just one team's score in baseball: the Cubs scoring five runs sounds good, until you hear that the Reds tallied 12.

Indeed, our exports pale in comparison to the torrent of artificially cheap Chinese imports. Economists, including free-traders, estimate that price manipulation keeps Chinese products 40 percent cheaper than comparable American-made goods.

Inexpensive products might sound nice, but we lose 13,000 net jobs for every $1 billion increase in our trade deficit. Our $226 billion deficit with China has meant shuttered factories, lost jobs and devastated communities across America.

And it's no longer just Chinese bicycles and electronics that are flooding our markets. China will soon make half the world's wind turbines and solar panels, most of which it plans to export to America. And, as usual, China's clean-energy industry relies on large government subsidies, in direct violation of international trade laws.

In response, the Obama administration recently accepted a petition, filed by the United Steelworkers under Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act, to investigate China's state support for clean-energy exports. If the White House finds that the support violates international trade rules, Section 301 allows it to respond with a range of aggressive measures, including tariffs.

This strategy has worked before: in the 1980s and '90s, the United States used its 301 authority to combat Japanese and Korean subsidies and trade barriers. Though critics warned of bitter trade wars, the get-tough approach actually led to more balanced trade relationships, and even encouraged foreign investors, like Asian auto companies, to build plants in America.

In trying to get China to play fair, though, Washington has instead relied on rhetoric and moral suasion. It hasn't worked. Only rigorous enforcement of trade rules by the Obama administration can reverse the harm caused by the permanent normal trade relations agreement.

Congress has a role to play, too: when the Senate reconvenes next month, it should vote, as the House did in September, to expand the president's authority to impose tariffs on China or any other country that unfairly manipulates its currency.

Many politicians claim they support products "made in America." But the phrase is more than an empty slogan; it means standing up for American manufacturers. Only by learning the lessons of "normal" trade with China -- and acknowledging buyer's remorse -- can we reach a truly balanced bilateral relationship that works for America.

Rolling Stone has a great article about Barack Obama in its October 18th edition called "The Case for Obama".

The charges are familiar: He's a compromiser who hasn't stood up to the GOP or Wall Street. But a look at his record reveals something even more startling -- a truly historic presidency.

When the history of this administration is written, Obama's opening act is likely to be judged as more impressive than any president's -- Democrat or Republican -- since the mid-1960s.

"If you're looking at the first-two-year legislative record," says [conservative American Enterprise Institute scholar Norman] Ornstein, "you really don't have any rivals since Lyndon Johnson -- and that includes Ronald Reagan."

Less than halfway through his first term, Obama has compiled a remarkable track record. As president, he has rewritten America's social contract to make health care accessible for all citizens. He has brought 100,000 troops home from war and forged a once-unthinkable consensus around the endgame for the Bush administration's $3 trillion blunder in Iraq. He has secured sweeping financial reforms that elevate the rights of consumers over Wall Street bankers and give regulators powerful new tools to prevent another collapse. And most important of all, he has achieved all of this while moving boldly to ward off another Great Depression and put the country back on a halting path to recovery.

Along the way, Obama delivered record tax cuts to the middle class and slashed nearly $200 billion in corporate welfare -- reinvesting that money to make college more accessible and Medicare more solvent. He single-handedly prevented the collapse of the Big Three automakers -- saving more than 1 million jobs -- and brought Big Tobacco, at last, under the yoke of federal regulation. Even in the face of congressional intransigence on climate change, he has fought to constrain carbon pollution by executive fiat and to invest $200 billion in clean energy -- an initiative bigger than John F. Kennedy's moonshot and one that's on track to double America's capacity to generate renewable energy by the end of Obama's first term.

On the social front, he has improved pay parity for women and hate-crime protections for gays and lesbians. He has brought a measure of sanity to the drug war, reducing the sentencing disparity for crack cocaine while granting states wide latitude to experiment with marijuana laws. And he has installed two young, female justices on the Supreme Court, creating what Brinkley calls "an Obama imprint on the court for generations."

What's even more impressive about Obama's accomplishments, historians say, is the fractious political coalition he had to marshal to victory. "He didn't have the majority that LBJ had," says Goodwin. Indeed, Johnson could count on 68 Democratic senators to pass Medicare, Medicaid and the Voting Rights Act. For his part, Franklin Roosevelt had the backing of 69 Senate Democrats when he passed Social Security in 1935. At its zenith, Obama's governing coalition in the Senate comprised 57 Democrats, a socialist, a Republican turncoat -- and Joe Lieberman.

In his quest for progress, Obama has also had to maneuver against an unrelenting head wind from the "Party of No" and its billionaire backers. "Obama is harassed as well as opposed," says Princeton historian Sean Wilentz. "The crazy Republican right is now unfettered. You've got a Senate with no adult leadership. And Obama's up against Rupert Murdoch, Dick Armey, the Koch brothers and the rest of the professional right." Compared to the opposition faced by the most transformative Democratic presidents, adds Wilentz, "it's a wholly different scale."

Despite such obstacles, Obama has succeeded in forging a progressive legacy that, anchored by health care reform, puts him "into the same conversation with FDR and LBJ," says Brinkley, "though those two accomplished more." Goodwin, herself a former Johnson aide, likens the thrust of Obama's social agenda to LBJ's historic package of measures known as the Great Society. "What is comparable," she says, "is the idea of using government to expand social and economic justice. That's what the health care bill is about. That's what Obama tried to do with the financial reforms. That's what he's doing with education. The Great Society was about using the collective energies of the nation to make life better for more people -- and that's what Obama has tried to do."

Read the full article at Rolling Stone

When I learned of it last Thursday, it sounded innocuous to me, but then I started looking at the timing of the bill. GMAC, owned by Ally, had just suspended its foreclosure actions in 23 states, including Ohio. I had already referred Chase Home Finance, LLC, on August 23, 2010, to the U.S. Department of Justice, asking it to review and investigate Chase's document notarization practices in home foreclosures (18,000 documents per month were being notarized by 8 people, along with other irregularities). I license notaries in the State of Ohio. Even though I don't have the power under state law to investigate or prosecute, I couldn't stand idly by without acting. That's why I'm asking you to email or call the President at 202-456-1111 to ask him not to sign the bill.

Banks demand we follow every letter of their contracts. We must demand they follow the law. It's that simple. Please join me in urging President Obama not to sign the bill by sending an email or calling 202-456-1111.

Thank you Secretary Brunner for once again leading the way on this issue!

See Also:

Secretary Brunner Takes Leading Role On Issue Of Notary Abuse In Home Mortgage Foreclosures

Secretary Brunner: Please tell President Obama NOT to sign the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act

Secretary Brunner Issues Directive Regarding Voting Rights And Foreclosures; Refers Specific Cases Of Notary Abuse To Federal Prosecutors

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) argued in an op-ed that the Tea Party is divisive, driven by anger and doesn't like America "the way we are."

Writing in Monday's USA Today, Brown said that liberals should be proud to run on healthcare and Wall Street reform and discuss the accomplishments "in specific, understandable terms."

Progressives are an impatient bunch. We fight for people who have waited too long already -- for health care, for educational opportunity, for jobs to keep them in the middle class.

But for generations, conservatives have appealed to fear to protect the privileged and preserve the status quo -- fear of immigrants, fear of diversity, fear of big government. For conservatives in 2010, it's easy:

"Stop."

"No."

"Repeal."

Meanwhile, for more than a century -- in churches and temples, in union halls and neighborhood centers, in the streets and at the ballot box -- progressives have moved the country forward. Progressives brought us minimum wage and Social Security in the 1930s, civil rights and Medicare in the 1960s, and health care and Wall Street reform in 2010.

Opponents of these accomplishments -- some of society's most privileged and well-entrenched interest groups -- have not changed much. The John Birch Society of 1965 has bequeathed its fervor and extremism to the Tea Party of 2010.

History tells us that rage on the right should not be confused with populism. The far right attacks government regulation as it feeds Wall Street and the insurance companies. It rails against government spending for the least privileged as it lavishes tax cuts favoring the most privileged.

Read Senator Brown's Full Op-Ed at USAToday

Elections can be productive or destructive, but are rarely both.

And this year, it is particularly destructive.

These days John Kasich is employing a predictable campaign tactic - if his opponent, Gov. Ted Strickland, is for something he's against it. Doesn't matter what it is or what his rhetoric would mean for Ohioans if it ever came to pass.

So while there's no surprise that Rep. Kasich is blowing hot air on Gov. Strickland's energy bill that will create wind farms on Lake Erie, it is destructive nonetheless. It is sucking the air out of a bipartisan, job-creating policy, and is exactly the type of destructive political wind that far too often has set Ohio back.

Finally Ohio harnessed a natural asset, wind, for positive gain. Rep. Kasich's diatribe on the other hand, blew political smoke on a major industrial expansion for Ohio. How much longer must Ohio's economic sails be battered by political winds, instead of steered towards the jobs that clean energy industries will bring over the horizon?

This latest storm stemmed from recent public comments where Kasich referenced plans for "putting some sort of wind turbine in Lake Erie in a spawning area.... I know some people that fish up there at Lake Erie once a year - they're not gonna put windmills - that's just dumb. If the facts of that hold to be true, it isn't gonna happen. We're gonna fight it." He has since tried to explain and backtrack but still supports potentially changing the legislation.

General Electric, the world's second largest company, has a major division headquartered in Ohio, just miles from Lake Erie. They're hoping to become known not only for their light bulbs, television networks and jet engines, but also their wind turbines - particularly the five massive ones planned for a few miles off Cleveland's shore.

Usually politicians fight for jobs, not against them. What gives, John?

Alternative energy is a burgeoning industry in Ohio. The Ohio Department of Natural Resources has signed off on protections. The wind is already there John, all we have to do is put the windmills up there for it to propel. The whole thing sounds politically fishy to me.

There is no great affection for the Republican Party in this country, a senior Obama administration official said last week. That creates the opportunity for competitive races district by district.

The official noted that the GOP's unpopularity marks a critical difference between the election this November and 1994, when the party's sweep of more than 50 seats won it the majority in the House for the first time in 40 years. Then, the official argued, Republicans had been out of power for more than four decades and voters were ready to try something different. This time, voters know what they would be getting with Republicans in charge and don't like it, the source said.

AP Congressional Approval/Disapproval
Dems 38/60
Reps 31/68

CBS/NY Times, 9/15

Dems 30/58
Reps 20/68

ABC/WaPo, Deserve Reelection

Dems 34
Reps 31

~Daily Kos

Life for John Kasich must be eerily similar to his life on Fox News.

The biggest fear in televisions is people tuning out.

Yesterday's debate was my first look live at the erstwhile challenger. He hasn't been the most public of candidates and watching him I see why.

Where his opponent Ted Strickland was well Ted, stoic, in control of his words and thoughts, sometimes even long pauses as he thought, Kasich was the guy that knew what he was going to say before his opponent answered.

Off camera from the angle of the audience, Kasich was a bundle of unseen energy. Legs rocking, his body fidgeted to life when his mind clicked on his answer to Governor Strickland seemingly tuning out the rest of Strickland's answer, hands then clasp as if to hold him and his energy back from the answer.

From the outset Kasich had set talking points straight from the Fox studios - lower taxes, cut state red tape, train workers better and it's Ted's fault 382,000 Ohio jobs were lost.

Think that overstates it - well let's look at the debate from just Kasich's statements:

• Question about Jobs and Ohio's recovery - Kasich 651 CEOs, CNBC and someone else say Ohio is a bad economic environment. "We're not business friendly"  the man from McKees Rocks Pennsylvania said for the first of many times.

• Question about Kasich's phasing out of the Income tax - Ted raised taxes. Reduce taxes and reduce spending says Kasich.

• Question about both candidates and raising taxes - Ted raised taxes, drained the Rainy Day Fund and took stimulus funds.  "We need a Governor who understands business."

• Question about Lehman Brothers - Ted lost 382,000 jobs. "I speak the language of business."

• Question about how to approach the budget deficit - "I won't expand government." The federal government has it wrong on stimulus. State employees could have been cut 4,000 more than the 5,000 Strickland already cut.

• Question about High Speed Rail - Turn the money back and ask Congress to spend it on Roads, waterways and airports.

• Question about the Unemployment Fund debt - Pay the debt but Congress will have to bail it out.

Strickland had answers and true to his personality a few light zingers.  Also true to form he took on the tough debate skill of polite attack about Kasich's role as an adjunct Professor at Ohio State where he earned $50,000 for four hours of work each month.

He had strong answers for each of Kasich's  soundbites, but for Kasich the disciplined DC operative, message mantra discipline remained. What Strickland said mattered little as the right-wing rhetoric repeated itself over and over and over, save some irritated looks, dismissive lines about Strickland changing the subject from jobs with innuendo, and the obligatory lovefest question about liking your opponent personally.

The latest Kaiser Family Foundation poll released this morning finds that public support for the Affordable Care Act has held strong and unfavorable views have decreased:

By a 15-point margin, Americans express a favorable view of the new health reform law – 50% to 35% (down from 41% unfavorable in June).

By an 8-point margin, 43% of Americans believe that the country as a whole will be better off under the new law, while 35% believe that the country will be worse off.

Support among seniors is also growing:

The percentage of seniors who held an unfavorable view of the bill has decreased – from 56% to 46% (from April to July).

The gap between seniors who have a favorable vs. an unfavorable view of the bill has narrowed to 8%.

The poll also found only 27% of Americans support repeal. Despite this lack of support, House Republicans continue their efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act. In an interview published last week, House Republican Leader John Boehner repeated the GOP’s intention of repealing the Affordable Care Act:

I guarantee there will be a bill on the floor that will repeal the healthcare bill…

And if the Republicans fail in their efforts to repeal the bill, Leader Boehner pledges they will simply refuse to fund it:

…and if they can’t do away with healthcare reforms, they can cut the funding to hire people to run it.

“They’re not going to get one dime from us to hire these new federal employees to run this,” he said.

Congressional Republicans – eager to return to the “exact same agenda” of failed Bush economic policies that put us into this mess – continue to call for an extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest few despite the staggering $678 billion cost to the deficit (after voting against tax cuts for small businesses and 98% of working families).

President Obama and Democrats in Congress are committed to fiscally responsible tax policies, including ensuring middle-class American families and small businesses continue to see tax relief. As Speaker Pelosi explained at her weekly press conference last week, “if we want to lower taxes for the middle class and reduce the deficit and create jobs, extending the tax cuts at the high end are not in furtherance of reaching those goals.” The Washington Post agrees.

Washington Post Editorial - Extending the Bush tax cuts wouldn’t help the economy:

The tax cuts passed under President Bush are about to expire. The deficit is at a once unimaginable level. In a saner political environment, that would counsel revisiting the sustainability of all the tax cuts. Certainly, given the yawning debt, there is no reason to extend the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans…

Analyzing the best bang-for-the-buck policies to stimulate the economy, the Congressional Budget Office found that the least effective was extending tax cuts for the top brackets. The reason is obvious. “The higher-income households . . . would probably save a larger fraction of their increase in after-tax income,” the CBO said…

…Those truly worried about the nation’s dire fiscal picture should seize this moment to lock in those substantial, badly needed, savings.

Steven Pearlstein - On tax fight, Obama can’t afford to lose:

…Given the fragile state of the economic recovery as well as the competing imperative to bring deficits under control, the right policy would be to extend the lower rates for another two years while limiting them to lower- and middle-class households…

Republicans, of course, are already vowing that they won’t support anything less than a permanent extension for all taxpayers, claiming that anything less would be a “massive” and “jobs-killing” tax increase…

In reality, raising marginal tax rates on the rich wouldn’t be a huge deal. Even Douglas Holtz-Eakin, top economic adviser to John McCain’s presidential campaign, told the Senate Finance Committee earlier this month that excluding upper-bracket households from a one-year tax-cut extension would only reduce employment by 300,000 in 2012 and raise the unemployment rate by one-tenth of 1 percent. That’s more like statistical noise than the economic calamity conjured up by Republicans…

Indeed, if Republicans were truly interested in stimulating the economy and creating jobs, cutting marginal tax rates turns out to be one of the least cost-effective strategies. In January, the Congressional Budget Office calculated that $1 million in tax cuts would generate between one and four additional jobs in the economy, compared with six to 15 jobs from increasing unemployment assistance, three to nine jobs from providing aid to states and four to 10 jobs from investing in infrastructure — all ideas that Republicans opposed as unaffordable. Go figure…

Ruth Marcus - Why Congress should let the Bush tax cuts expire:

…Think back to the beginning of the Bush administration tax cuts. It seems almost impossible to believe, but the argument then was that the budget surplus was too large. There was, or so President George W. Bush assured us, ample cash to cut taxes for everyone and protect the Social Security surplus and set aside $1 trillion over the next decade for “additional spending needs” and pay down the national debt…

“The people of America have been overcharged, and, on their behalf, I’m here asking for a refund,” Bush told Congress in February 2001.

You know what happened next. The refund came. The supposed surplus evaporated. The Social Security surplus was spent. Instead of being paid down, the $3.3 trillion national debt ballooned to $9 trillion.

The only thing that remained the same was the clamor for tax cuts. Same argument, different rationale. The Bush tax cuts are set to expire at the end of this year, and the argument now is that they must be extended — for everyone. This time not because the fiscal bottom line is too healthy but because the economy is too shaky…

But the Republican position seems even more intransigently divorced from reality. Perhaps there is some magical point at which Republicans might accept the reality that the government needs more revenue than it is currently set to take in — but I haven’t heard it yet…

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell proclaimed the other day that the Bush tax cuts actually raised money. “There’s no evidence whatsoever that the Bush tax cuts actually diminished revenue,” the Kentucky Republican told Brian Beutler of the Web site TPMDC. “They increased revenue, because of the vibrancy of these tax cuts in the economy.”

Here’s some evidence. Tax revenue fell from 21 percent of GDP in fiscal 2000 to 17.5 percent in 2008. (I’m leaving out the recession-induced plunge, to under 15 percent this year and last.)…

…The economic and fiscal circumstances may change, but the prescription remains the same. And the patient is too ill to tolerate another dose of this quack medicine.

The conservative mantra these days is that no action can be taken to help create jobs if it would increase the deficit. They believe the public is behind them because concern is running high about the deficit. But that doesn’t necessarily mean concern about the deficit is running higher than concern about unemployment. In fact, questions that directly ask the public whether unemployment or the deficit should be the higher priority tend to return lopsided majorities saying unemployment should be the higher priority.

The public, for example, said by 64-30 in a mid-July Quinnipiac poll that reducing unemployment is more important the reducing the federal budget deficit.

Similarly, in a Bloomberg poll conducted just prior to the Quinnipiac poll, an even more overwhelming 70-28 majority said reducing the unemployment rate should be a higher priority than reducing the budget deficit.

So policymakers shouldn’t be stampeded by conservatives’ single-minded focus on the deficit. That may be their obsession, but it is not the public’s obsession. The public has other stronger priorities that policymakers ignore at their peril.

Source: Center For American Progress

Shirley Sherrod, a Family Farmer's Friend

The real story of Shirley Sherrod deserved to be told a long time ago. She has had an amazing impact on the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of families and communities throughout the South. Farmers of every race have struggled with the income inequities that have persisted for generations, and advocates like Ms. Sherrod have moved mountains to ensure that families can remain in their homes and on their farms.

While all family farmers in our country face an uphill battle to stay on their land, growing good food for rest of us, black farmers have lost their land at an alarming rate, faster than any other family farmers. Lending discrimination and inequities in agriculture programs are largely responsible for the shrinking number of black farmers. Farm Aid began supporting the Federation in 1985, where Shirley worked at the time, because of the group's unique ability to reach out and help struggling farm families in the South. Many had owned their land for generations and were, and continue to be, under constant threat. We continue to support the Federation's work to this day, and hundreds of farmers are still on their land because of Ms. Sherrod's efforts.

Read The Full Post From Willie > >

Washington Post: GOP arrogance, hypocrisy on energy policy
Washington Post Editorial Board Writer Stephen Stromberg

Ohio Republican Senate candidate Rob Portman previews one of the GOP’s primary lines of attack this midterm election year in a new ad. He blasts the Democrats’ cap-and-trade “energy tax,” saying that the scheme will charge Americans for turning on a light bulb or cooking dinner. Scary? Perhaps. Misleading? Yes. Hypocritical? Definitely.

At the end of the ad, Portman claims that he has a better way to protect the environment, and he asks the viewer to check it out on his Web site. I obliged. His plan relies on "support" -- read: subsidies and other government interventions -- for things that he likes -- corn ethanol, nuclear power, natural gas, coal.

Some of these things might become an essential part of weaning the country off fossil fuels. Or not. We don’t really know, and that’s the point of cap-and-trade and other carbon pricing proposals -- take the decisions regarding which green technologies prosper out of the hands of lawmakers with incentives to spend Americans’ money on parochial interests; instead, send a price signal to consumers and the companies that serve them, spurring private individuals to find and invest in the cheapest routes to a greener economy. Another thing Portman doesn’t tell you is that proceeds from this “national energy tax” should be rebated back to consumers, making most of them whole or better.

Read The Full Story at The Washington Post

What's the big deal?

This: Portman’s energy plan is fairly representative of where many in the GOP are on energy -- long on government expenditure and near-sighted arrogance about Washington’s ability to decide which energy technologies should succeed; short on the sort of faith in private enterprise that Republicans are supposed to champion.

Columbus Public Library’s Board may have over-reached in renewing a Library property tax that is expiring.

The Board is pushing a permanent continuing tax increase on County Commissioners who sources say have their hands tied as the current renewal levy expires and they are acting against the clock.

According to the Columbus Dispatch, the library board decided on a 2.8 mill levy for the permanent tax last week. It would replace a 10-year, 2.2-mill levy that expires at the end of the year. Originally passed in 1986, the expiring levy is being collected at 0.75 mill because of increased property values.

The Dispatch reported that the new levy would generate $58.2 million a year and cost Franklin County homeowners $86 a year for every $100,000 of property valuation. That is $63 a year more than the existing levy, which was renewed in 2000.

But here is where the games come in. The Library Board is chaired by Steve Rasmussen.  Mr. Rasmussen has hosted, at his Miranova digs, fundraisers for Patrick Tiberi. Tiberi’s opponent, none other than Paula Brooks, one of the Franklin County Commissioners whose hands are tied over the library issue.

Could it be that Mr. Rasmussen wants to create a tax issue for Mr. Tiberi? Most political strategists will tell you in an economic environment like this you renew what you already have and come back at a later date for a permanent levy.

Unless of course you are angling to hand a tax issue to hang on a County Commissioner in a year where tax is a four letter word.

‘Tis election season.  But really – playing with library funding, Mr. Rasmussen. Here’s hoping for the sake of library readers that this isn’t just a move on the Congressional campaign chess board. If it is, you might just saddle Columbus Libraries with some draconian cuts just to score political points.

Some things used to be off limits in politics. Rarely so these days.

• the health insurance exchange (94% of Democrats (D) have a favorable view, 88% of independents (I), and 77% of Republicans (R)

• tax credits to small business (89% D, 79% I, 79% R)

• assistance with the Medicare doughnut hole (96% D, 77% I, 71% R)

• high-risk pool for those with pre-existing conditions (85% D, 78% I, 67% R)

• insurance subsidies for individuals (90% D, 73% I, 63% R)

• Voters split on who would do a better job rebuilding the state economy, with 39 percent for Kasich and 38 percent for Strickland;

• Voters say 41 - 37 percent that Kasich would do a better job handling the state budget;

• Voters split on who they trust more to keep campaign promises, with 37 percent for Strickland and 36 percent for Kasich.

Now that Democrats have agreed on a Wall Street reform bill, President Obama is set to have an incredible year of accomplishments. He's already signed major health care reforms into law and is more than likely to have energy/climate change legislation on his desk later this year.

Not since FDR has a president done so much to transform the country.

First Read: "The agreement -- and the likelihood that Obama will sign it into law -- is yet another reminder about how much the White House and the Democrat-controlled Congress have done in the past year and a half (stimulus, health care, Wall Street reform, perhaps energy). You can't say this is a Do-Nothing Congress; Then again, Republicans would argue it's a Do-Too-Much Congress."

Mike Allen: "Two legs of the triple crown: This means President Obama will sign health reform and Wall Street reform within four months of each other. Plus there's the likelihood he'll get some sort of energy-climate bill by year's end -- an astounding year."

What a strange day in politics and nature.

A brilliant General implodes, gulf oil explodes, the midwest has an earthquake, John Kasich's campaign implodes, and Ted Strickland's best news got buried.

What you say -- Strickland created jobs. Yep. In fact day after day, week after week he's been creating them.

The lead got buried. The Dispatch reported today that the jobs heartbeat is getting stronger even if commercials and political opportunism say otherwise. Win the fight over that jobs headline and win in November.

First let's go back to the General. brilliant, independent and arrogant. The fact of the matter is that when you think you're smarter than everyone else, the arrogance permeates your business associates and office political culture. Rolling Stone was not just about General McChrystal, it was about a leadership that encouraged a superiority complex among his aides as well. Brilliant guy yes -- brilliant leader not so much. Hence the new verb known as McChrystaling -- the art of imploding through arrogant office culture.

And the first victim of the new verb McChrystaling, would have to be John Kasich. It's no secret that Kasich and his staff believe their rhetoric. Journalists, politicos and others all over town have heard the snide comments about their opponent -- a country bumpkin, doesn't know what he's doing, not sharp enough for the job -- typical political crap unless you believe it.

So big surprise that Rep. Kasich's spokesperson took the Governor's humble beginnings and arrogantly used the chicken coop redubbed "shack" in his vernacular. That is cultural within the campaign. Regardless of who wins there are quite a number of folks who have made the same mistake with Governor Strickland in the past. I'm sure there are more than a few folks who got schooled by the man from "Duck Run" by underestimating him in Congressional races. The man and his wife both have doctorates and a pulse for pop political culture. 

Jim Rhodes would be first to sneer at Rep. Kasich over this one (although as legends go, I doubt it would just be a sneer and likely more a verbal lashing.)

Rhodes also always knew the way to an Ohioans heart is through athletics. Just look around at the sports palaces built under his watch at Ohio universities, and the fact that he wasn't about to let Paul Brown leave Ohio so he brought him a stadium and team in Cincinnati (helping with voters in two of the three Cs in the process.)

So Rep. Kasich dissing on LeBron signing with the Cavs would elicit a pretty nice guffaw from the Governor from Jackson County. Who knows what it means long term. If LeBron resigns with the Cavs Rep. Kasich might get a break -- if not -- well it remains to be seen if Rep. Kasich will be Modelled in November.

But that said, with earthquakes, the cap on gulf oil breaking and General McChrystal imploding, the one thing James Rhodes always says matters most in Ohio got buried. That flatline of jobs created by Bush budget guru Rob Portman's economic planning and Wall Street John Kasich's profiteering, shown in this small little graph today in the Dispatch got lost here at ProgressOhio as well.

Jim Rhodes would have never left his mantra of "jobs, jobs, jobs."

The fact is everyday job by job, the Governor is announcing an innovative solution that led to that heartbeat in today's paper, as he did in this Wooster article . If only his office would tally the total of those created and announced -- maybe just maybe Jim Rhodes would smile up yonder knowing it's not the tally it's the total that folks need to hear.

The world may keep changing with rogue generals, natural disasters anew, ideological arguments, and gotcha journalism. But it's really not that different. 

After all, the chicken "shack" and LeBron may fade, the gulf oil well will (one hopes soon) be capped, and Afghanistan will end -- but the jobs and industries Ohio creates in our current adversity will sustain us.

But the volume from the Strickland Administration has got to continue to be consistent and amplified with the same vigor as the "shack" and "LeBron."

Job by job, day by day. The biggest enemy in November for either candidate is if the "noise" of the campaign trumps jobs. Today, that lead got buried all around.

A new Associated Press-GfK poll finds public support for President Obama's new health care law has risen to its highest point with 45% in favor and 42% opposed.

The nation remains divided, but the shift in public sentiment is significant. Opposition to the overhaul increased after Congress passed it in March. And last month, supporters were outnumbered 39 percent to 46 percent. But the latest survey found the strongest backing for the health care plan since the AP-GfK poll began asking in September.

Meanwhile on Tuesday  Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.) introduced an amendment that, if passed, would have scrapped the individual mandate passed as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. It failed, 230-187 --a considerably larger margin than the one by which the original act passed

If you follow the "midterm election polls" day by day, I hope you enjoy the roller coaster ride.

After a very discouraging poll for Democrats from NPR yesterday, a new Associated Press/GfK poll finds people want Democrats to win control of Congress by a 46% to 39% margin.

That is the second straight month in which Democrats have held an advantage on that question in the survey since April, when Republicans held a small edge.

WASHINGTON - There's encouraging news for Democrats battling to retain control of Congress in this fall's elections, with the party holding a slender edge in public trust for shepherding the economy and small gains in those saying their finances are healthy, according to a new poll.

The reeling economy remains people's top concern, according to an Associated Press-GfK Poll conducted earlier this month, making public attitudes about it crucial for both parties' hopes in November. The good news for Democrats: By a margin of 47 percent to 42 percent, people trust them more than Republicans to guide the economy, and slightly more — 64 percent — say their household budgets are in good shape.

In addition, people want Democrats to win control of Congress by a 46 percent to 39 percent margin. That is the second straight month in which Democrats have held a delicate advantage on that question since April, when 44 percent preferred Republicans and 41 percent picked Democrats.

The Gulf Coast catastrophe underscores the need for comprehensive energy and climate reform to rein in Big Oil and reduce our reliance on dirty and foreign fuels.

A new poll released by the Pew Research Center shows the American people strongly support comprehensive energy legislation that includes provisions encouraging alternative energy production and limits on carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions. From the poll:

• 87 percent of Americans support requiring utilities to produce more energy from renewable sources

• 78 percent support comprehensive energy legislation that includes tougher efficiency standards

• 66 percent support putting limits on carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions

BP denies the existence of giant oil plumes, while Kevin Costner and Chuck Grassley come up with their own solutions.

Watch It:

Yesterday, a vote by the Ohio House of Representatives and Senate passed legislation deregulating the telecommunications industry.

The Ohio Telecommunications Association and Communications Workers of America supported the bill but consumer groups said it would wipe out consumer protections and bring higher monthly bills.

In response to yesterday’s vote, the following statement was issued by Ohio Consumers’ Counsel Janine L. Migden-Ostrander:

“While we were pleased that the General Assembly incorporated the most consumer-friendly provisions from both the Senate and House versions, the OCC remains concerned about the long-term effects of this legislation on residential landline telephone consumers, particularly those with bundles or packages of services. Many of the consumer protections in the bill apply only to those who take basic service, creating a two-tiered system. Customers with bundles should not lose protections they have had for many decades. These consumer protections should apply uniformly to all customers.

“The OCC remains concerned that the legislation allows telephone companies to raise rates up to $15 annually. This will be a particular hardship in areas of the state where customers have no other competitive options. We are especially disappointed that Lifeline customers, many of whom are already struggling to remain current with their utility bills, will eventually be required to face these increases as early as January 2012. We had asked that Lifeline increases be frozen for five years. Phone service remains a basic necessity that low-income citizens should be able to afford.

“This legislation was presented as a ‘jobs and economic development’ bill, but was passed without any specific commitments from the industry. We hope the telephone industry delivers on its promise. The OCC looks forward to serving on the committee that will study the impacts of the new law.”

Ohio is providing a case study in the challenges of running as a Democratic incumbent. For Gov. Ted Strickland, it's all about the jobs picture.

Watch It:

Doug Kelly, Executive Director, Ohio Democratic Party has an blog entry up on the Huffington Post saying that "Ohio Republicans are bitterly fractured going into November's election. And neither the Party nor its candidates know how to address this growing problem."

Soon after anointing their candidates, the Ohio Republican Party realized they had a problem on their hands. Tea Party leaders began lashing out at the GOP. County Republican parties in all corners of the state bucked the state Party and endorsed the Tea Party candidates. And the Tea Party was recruiting a strong slate of candidates at the local level, with the stated intention of taking over the Ohio Republican Party from the ground up.

The Ohio Republican Party-endorsed candidates then sprinted to the right and focused only on Tea Party issues - even in the Secretary of State's race, in which the Party-endorsed Republican candidate, Jon Husted, ran ads (complete with Biblical imagery and a "Don't Tread on Me" flag) saying that he "wants to stop immoral government debt, to protect our children's liberty."

The Ohio Republican Party then sent controversial mailers, which included an image of a teacup and the words "Tea Party Values," even though their candidates were opposed, vigorously, by Tea Party supporters. One Tea Party candidate filed an elections complaint against the Ohio Republican Party over the mailer.

In the end, the Ohio Republican Party was forced to spend as much as $2 million to defeat the Tea Party in the primary election. And, while the statewide Tea Party candidates were defeated, it is clear that trouble is brewing for our friends on the other side of the aisle.

Read More >>

Bill and his roundtable guests - Philippe Cousteau, Jr., Jonathan Alter, Patrick Ruffini, Dr. Cornel West and Scott Turow - answer fan questions after this week's show.

Watch It:

Ep. 186: May 28, 2010 - Overtime

In response to a Dispatch article about the arrest of one of the men featured in the latest video of horrifying animal abuse shot by Mercy For Animals "tea man" was prompted to write:

I think the person who shot this video tape should be prosecuted for trespassing. Conklin's owns those cows and should be able to do whatever they want with them. Are you aware of the basic American principle of PROPERTY RIGHTS? These PETA people want to shovel humans into ovens to protect animals - they fantasize about billions of people dying so that animals can roam unfettered. The Lord gave man dominion over the beasts - they were put here for our use! I deplore some sneaky limp-wrist taking pictures of someone else's business.

"End Child Labor Laws," suggests one helpful participant. "We coddle children too much. They need to spend their youth in the factories."

"How about if Congress actually do thier job and VET or Usurper in Chief, Obama is NOT a Natural Born Citizen in any way," recommends another. "That fake so called birth certificate is useless."

"A 'teacher' told my child in class that dolphins were mammals and not fish!" a third complains. "And the same thing about whales! We need TRADITIONAL VALUES in all areas of education. If it swims in the water, it is a FISH. Period! End of Story."

"Build a castle-style wall along the border, there is plenty of stone laying around about there." That was in the "national security" section of the new site.

"Legalize Marijuana, cause, like, alcohol is legal. Man. Also." That was in the "traditional values" section.

"I say, repeal all the amendments to the Constitution." ("American prosperity" section.)

"Don't let the illegals run out of Arizona and hide. . . . I think that we should do something to identify them in case they try to come back over. Like maybe tattoo a big scarlet 'I' on their chests -- for 'illegal'!!!" (Filed under "job creation.")

Far-right conservatives posture as nuclear tough guys, but push a shockingly naive policy. Clinging to Cold War doctrines, they play politics with our nuclear weapons. It is a dangerous game that puts American security at risk.

Representative Mike Turner (R-OH) rammed through an amendment at the House Armed Services Committee mark-up of the Defense Authorization Bill last week that condemns the new U.S. nuclear strategy endorsed by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the directors of the nation's nuclear laboratories. Why? Rep. Turner wants to use nuclear weapons in Afghanistan.

That is the logic of what he wrote in USA Today,

"When it comes to defending the United States against a devastating attack, our message should be clear and simple: If our nation is attacked, we will use all means necessary to defend ourselves. Period." We were attacked by terrorists on September 11. Turner apparently believes we should reserve the right to use nuclear weapons in Afghanistan. Or Iraq. Or Venezuela. Or anywhere, at anytime.

This tough-sounding policy is just dumb. It would reverse decades of strategy followed by Republican and Democratic presidents who have told other nations: "If you don't have nuclear weapons, we won't attack you with ours." The new U.S. policy simply updates this long-standing pledge. It recognizes, as the Joint Chiefs know, that we have enough conventional firepower to deliver a devastating response to any attack. Turner's nuclear bravado would simply encourage other countries to get their own nuclear bombs.

We cannot afford this crude, naive approach to national security. We must be tough and smart.

The Obama Administration's approach is smarter. As Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Adm. Mike Mullen said, "The chiefs and I fully support the findings of this nuclear posture review, because we believe it provides us and our field commanders the opportunity to better shape our nuclear weapons posture, policies and force structure to meet an ever-changing security environment."

Read More

There are 30 days left for public voting on who will replace former Ohio Gov. William Allen in the National Statuary Hall in DC. Allen, who ran the state during the 1870s, is now famous for little more than supporting slavery and being one of Ohio's two representatives in the Statuary Hall.

You can get your ballot online here and send it to ohiostatue@ohiohistory.org.

The nominees are:

• abolitionist and former member of Congress James Ashley
• inventor Thomas Edison
• 18th President of the United States and Civil War General Ulysses S. Grant
• former congressman who led the fight to enact historic civil rights legislation William McCulloch
• Olympic athlete Jesse Owens
• astronaut Judith Resnik, who was killed while serving on the Challenger mission
• Doctor Albert Sabin, who developed the oral polio vaccine
• Harriet Beecher Stowe, who authored “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”
• suffragist Harriet Taylor Upton
• the Wright Brothers, who are credited with inventing, building and successfully flying the first airplane. 

To me, the biggest names on the list suffer from the same problem - they're more identified with other places over Ohio. In the case of Edison, this is warranted, since he lived most of his life outside of Ohio. Grant is certainly an important person in US history but all the noteworthy moments in his life happened after he was 17 and left Ohio.

The Wright Brothers are a different case. One was born in Ohio, both died here and in between they did much of their work here. However Kitty Hawk, North Carolina steals much of the geographic glory by virtue of being their testing ground.

My vote for who should represent Ohio?

Well, post-primary silly season sure arrived fast this cycle.

First there was the over-the-top NRSC blog-ad with Lee Fisher and now we find that John Kasich claims his role with Lehman Brothers amounted to -- well akin to Joe Louis role as a Las Vegas casino greeter post-boxing. All smiles and autographs but no impact on marketing and sales.

C'mon, John a little reality spin goes a long way toward credibility. 

You see John, they came to the casino to see ole' Joe and play the slots, and it ain't no different in the high-income world of pension dollars. 

In today's Columbus Dispatch, Reporter Jack Torry reports that Kasich set up two meetings with Lehman folks and officials at Police and Fire Pension and the Ohio Public Employee Retirement System. But outside of setting up the meeting -- the erstwhile former Congressional Budget Master claims he had no juice.

The Kasich campaign told the Dispatch:

Kasich campaign officials said in a statement that "these meetings did not result in business for Lehman Brothers, and John earned no commission from this or any other public sector business." Kasich never approached any other Ohio governmental entity about doing business with Lehman, the campaign said.

"John's work at Lehman Brothers wasn't focused on the public sector but on helping entrepreneurs and private companies raise capital to expand and grow," Rob Nichols, a Kasich campaign spokesman, said in the statement. "At the request of a New York-based colleague, he was glad to help arrange two introductory meetings, and then his colleagues took things from there." (Torry, Columbus Dispatch)

 Look, Ohioans can expect back in forth in the Governor's race, but for crying out loud we're not idiots.

 Rep. Kasich got the job at Lehman Brothers because of his connections. In 2002, at the time of the meetings, one party -- his -- ruled all in Ohio. His New York friend who asked Kasich to set up the meeting -- did so because he was a former leader in Congress who had the juice to set up the meeting. And eventually Lehman did do some type of business with the pension funds because as Torry points out the Pension funds lost money when Lehman collapsed.

According to state records, the Lehman holdings of OPERS declined in value from $441.4 million in 2007 to $73.3 million at the end of 2008. The police and fire fund had 14 separate investments managed by Lehman Brothers that declined in value from the purchase price of $14.3million to $2.4 million in 2008. (Torry, Columbus Dispatch)

 At some point even in politics, a spade is a spade.

 Campaign pollsters might tell candidates with ties like Kasich's to Wall Street to distance themselves fast -- but there is a risk of losing credibility with Main Street.

Anyone out there really think John Kasich set up a meeting and had no juice to a) get the meeting and b) get business for his employer?

That bridge just doesn't sell.

AS OHIO'S general election campaign begins, a little more transparency from the Republican nominee for governor, John Kasich, would go a long way.

Mr. Kasich - a former congressman, Fox News pundit, and executive of the bankrupt Lehman Brothers investment firm - still resists full disclosure of his income and investments. His Democratic opponent, incumbent Ted Strickland, has released about a decade's worth of his federal tax returns. By contrast, Mr. Kasich gave reporters a half-hour to review part of a single tax return from 2008 that could not be copied.

No state law requires gubernatorial candidates to release their full tax returns, but they usually have done so. A spokesman for Mr. Kasich says the nominee and his wife "have already released more than is required under Ohio law." But voters ultimately must be satisfied with what Mr. Kasich has disclosed about his business dealings and bonuses from Lehman Brothers. So far, that disclosure is inadequate.

Ohio Governor: Kasich 46% Strickland 45%

Democratic Governor Ted Strickland and Republican challenger John Kasich are now in a virtual tie in Ohio’s gubernatorial race.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely voters in the state shows Kasich holding a statistically insignificant lead of 46% to 45%. Early last month, Kasich led Strickland by 11 points, 49% to 38%. Only two percent (2%) of Ohio voters prefer some other candidate, while seven percent (7%) are undecided.

Strickland seems to have made his biggest gains this month among voters not affiliated with either major party. A month ago, Kasich led among these voters by nearly three-to-one. Now the Republican's lead among unaffiliateds is 49% to 40%.

March 30, 2010 - Fisher Leads In Ohio Dem Primary For Senate, Quinnipiac University Poll Finds; But Many Dem Voters Undecided Or Might Change Mind

With five weeks until the May 4 Democratic primary for Ohio's U.S. Senate seat, Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher leads Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner 33 - 26 percent among likely voters, but 40 percent are undecided and 65 percent of those who back a candidate say they might change their mind, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

The numbers indicate that Fisher's major advantage in the race is that by 37 - 18 percent, likely Democratic voters think he is more likely to win the general election in November.

Fisher holds a 37 - 26 percent lead among men and leads 30 - 27 percent among likely women voters in the Democratic primary, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University survey finds.

The Democratic primary winner will face Republican Rob Portman, who is unopposed for the Republican nomination, in the November election. The U.S. Senate seat is currently held by George Voinovich, who is not seeking re-election.

Fisher's lead is much smaller when Democratic voters are asked about how they view the views and values of the two candidates.

"Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher is ahead as the candidates enter the home stretch, but the lead is not that large and the size of the undecided vote with a relatively short period until primary election day underscores the potential volatility of the contest," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. "Fisher's lead shouldn't be all that surprising since he has been active in statewide politics for going on two decades and is better known than Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner because she is much newer to the statewide political scene."

"And the fact that Fisher is viewed as a better general election candidate appears to be a big reason he is currently ahead," Brown added.

Read More

An Absence of Class
By BOB HERBERT
Published: March 22, 2010

Some of the images from the run-up to Sunday’s landmark health care vote in the House of Representatives should be seared into the nation’s consciousness. We are so far, in so many ways, from being a class act.

A group of lowlifes at a Tea Party rally in Columbus, Ohio, last week taunted and humiliated a man who was sitting on the ground with a sign that said he had Parkinson’s disease. The disgusting behavior was captured on a widely circulated videotape. One of the Tea Party protesters leaned over the man and sneered: “If you’re looking for a handout, you’re in the wrong end of town.”

Another threw money at the man, first one bill and then another, and said contemptuously, “I’ll pay for this guy. Here you go. Start a pot.”

In Washington on Saturday, opponents of the health care legislation spit on a black congressman and shouted racial slurs at two others, including John Lewis, one of the great heroes of the civil rights movement. Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat who is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, was taunted because he is gay.

At some point, we have to decide as a country that we just can’t have this: We can’t allow ourselves to remain silent as foaming-at-the-mouth protesters scream the vilest of epithets at members of Congress — epithets that The Times will not allow me to repeat here.

Read The Full Piece at The New York Times > >

The hatred is bad out there. But they are NOT the majority in this country.

Read some of the nearly 4,000 comments on the video of the Columbus incident and you shall see for yourself.

Or read some of the comments directed at Bob the Parkinson's victim in the brief interview we did with him after the first video went up.

President Barack Obama made it very clear at the health care summit last Thursday that while he was open to ideas from every quarter, he was not willing to compromise away comprehensive health care reform where extending coverage and serious health insurance market reform are pursued at the same time. Baby steps, as he pointed out, just won’t do. He also pointed out that most of the components of comprehensive health care reform are popular with the public, suggesting that the bills in Congress would fare better if the public actually knew what was in them. Predictably, this claim was greeted with derision by conservatives.

But it turns out the president’s claim is well founded. The latest evidence is in a recent Newsweek poll that first asked respondents whether they supported or opposed Obama’s health care reform plan, then gave them a list of key provisions in the plan, and then asked them again whether they supported Obama’s plan.

Never one to let the facts get in his way, it's campaign season again and that means "The Hero of Ohio's Righty Blgosphere" Matt Naugle is running wild with his crazy attempts at smearing anyone with whom he disagrees. 

You know you're doing something right when Rush Limbaugh attacks you by name.

On his radio show Tuesday, Rush read aloud local coverage about the health care rally ProgressOhio and our partners organized in Columbus Saturday.

He called Ohioans fighting for affordable health care "thugs."

Rush is telling lies about you and me on 16 different radio stations across Ohio.

Can you give us $16 to help us get on the air to set the record straight?

This is just the latest of Limbaugh's increasingly desperate attacks of health care reform. As you may have heard, Rush hit a new low recently when he told millions of listeners that health care reform is "a civil rights bill" that amounts to "reparations" that "needs to be aborted."

Meanwhile, ProgressOhio continues to lead the way toward health care reform. Over the past seven months, we've held 130 live events in 35 Ohio cities throughout the state, including Saturday's rally in Columbus - the one that apparently got under Rush's skin.

Rush calls health care activists thugs. We know better - we are honored to count among our activists doctors and nurses, faith and community leaders, cancer survivors, caretakers, and people like you who are doing their part to win quality, affordable health care for all.

Maybe you've heard the saying "first they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win!"  Rush Limbaugh's attack on ProgressOhio shows we're close to winning.

Click here to help us hit Rush back!

Very curious that righty blogger Matt Naugle demonstrates his inability to read by questioning whether Rush posted ProgressOhio's Brian Rothenberg's name in his diatribe against Health Care Finish Reform Right Rally and then provides a broken link to the "members only" version of Rush Limbaugh's website that clearly shows it.

So we'll provide Matt a little help.  From Rush Limbaugh's website:

View larger full page image here

Thanks again Matt for demonstrating that your lonely social life consists of spending your Friday evening's reading ProgressOhio's website. And Thank You to all who contributed to fight back against the lies of Rush Limbaugh and his allies like Matt Naugle.

Here it is, your Matt Naugle Moment of Zen:

Courtesy Plunderbund

Washington (CNN) - Two-thirds of Americans think that the Republicans in Congress are not doing enough to cooperate with President Barack Obama, according to a new national poll. But a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey, released Wednesday morning, also indicates the public says that the Democrats should be the ones to take the first step toward bipartisan cooperation and they want the Democrats to give up more than the GOP to reach consensus.

Full results (pdf)

Sixty-seven percent of people questioned in the poll say that the GOP is not doing enough to cooperate with the White House, up 6 points from last April. Americans appear split on whether the president is doing enough to reach out to the Republicans, with 52 percent saying Obama's not doing enough to cooperate with the GOP and 47 percent saying he is doing enough to reach across the political aisle. The 52 percent who say the president's not doing enough to encourage bipartisanship is up 16 points from last April.

"That's a big change from last spring, when Obama was still in the honeymoon phase of his first term," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "Congressional Republicans were familiar to Americans, but Obama was new to them, so his early attempts to reach out to the GOP continued to resonate even after it became clear that bipartisanship was not within easy reach."

According to CNN poll numbers released Sunday, Americans overwhelmingly think that the government in this country is broken, but the public overwhelmingly holds out hope that what's broken can be fixed.

Quinnipiac University Poll

Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland leads Republican challenger John Kasich in the race to be Ohio's next governor, 44 - 39 percent, up from a 40 - 40 deadlock November 11, and has improved his standing slightly, but consistently, on a broad array of measures, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

Strickland leads Kasich 48 - 33 percent among women while Kasich leads 45 - 38 percent among men. Kasich leads 73 - 11 percent among Republicans, while the Governor leads 82 - 9 percent among Democrats. Independent voters split 38 - 38 percent.

"There has been an improvement in voters' views of Gov. Ted Strickland," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. "The movement is a few points, but it is consistent across a number of measures. Voters, however, remain negative on his handling of the state budget and the state economy.

"John Kasich remains unknown to most voters. The campaign will be a race by the candidates to define Kasich for the 62 percent of voters who don't know enough about him to have an opinion," Brown said. "Given that, the race's closeness may say much about Strickland. While the Governor's horserace numbers are good, he has a long way to go and what is keeping him ahead is his support among women."

Ohio voters approve 48 - 40 percent of the job Strickland is doing, up from a 45 - 43 percent split November 11. The Governor gets a 45 - 36 percent favorability rating, up from a 38 - 37 percent split in November.

For Kasich, 62 percent of voters do not know enough about him to form an opinion.

Voters disapprove 53 - 35 percent of the way Strickland is handling the economy, little changed from November, and say 45 - 34 percent that he has not kept his campaign promises.

Strickland also gets a negative 32 - 51 percent approval for handling the state budget, down from 36 - 47 percent in September.

Kasich would do a better job rebuilding the state's economy, voters say 41 - 35 percent, and do a better job handling the state budget, voters say 42 - 36 percent.

Voters split on which candidate is more likely to do in office what they promise during the campaign, with 35 percent naming Strickland and 36 percent choosing Kasich. Strickland most shares their values, voters say 40 - 36 percent.

Since it was shown on Sunday, an episode of the Fox animated comedy “Family Guy” has drawn the repeated condemnation of Sarah Palin, the former Republican governor of Alaska and 2008 vice-presidential nominee.

In the episode, the teenage character Chris dates a girl named Ellen, who has Down syndrome, and who tells him over dinner that her mother is “the former governor of Alaska.” Ms. Palin, whose son Trig also has Down syndrome, has said that the “Family Guy” show “really isn’t funny” and was the work of “cruel, cold-hearted people” and "a kick in the gut."

Ms. Palin’s daughter Bristol has written that the “Family Guy” writers were “mocking my brother and my family,” and called them “heartless jerks.”

Ms. Friedman Responds:

My name is Andrea Fay Friedman. I was born with Down syndrome. I played the role of Ellen on the "Extra Large Medium" episode of Family Guy that was broadcast on Valentine's day. Although they gave me red hair on the show, I am really a blonde. I also wore a red wig for my role in " Smudge" but I was a blonde in "Life Goes On". I guess former Governor Palin does not have a sense of humor. I thought the line "I am the daughter of the former governor of Alaska" was very funny. I think the word is "sarcasm".

In my family we think laughing is good. My parents raised me to have a sense of humor and to live a normal life. My mother did not carry me around under her arm like a loaf of French bread the way former Governor Palin carries her son Trig around looking for sympathy and votes.

No one with a genuine understanding of Ohio taxation would make the kind of outlandish statements that the Tax Foundation recently circulated in a guest column to Ohio newspapers.

Take the group's claim that Ohio's economy could be improved by repealing taxes on "capital stock" and "intangible property."

That's preposterous. Here's the problem with that strategy: Ohio doesn't tax capital stock or intangible property, at least not in any meaningful way.

For example, those supposed taxes on intangible property? They were repealed almost 25 years ago.

I should know. I was there when it happened, serving as deputy tax commissioner for policy at the Ohio Department of Taxation.

In other words, the Tax Foundation's recipe for improving Ohio's economy appears to include repealing business taxes that exist primarily in the Tax Foundation's imagination.

What next? Will they demand a repeal of taxes on pixie dust and unicorns, too?

Part of the problem facing professional naysayers such as the Tax Foundation might be that they are running out of real, actual business taxes in Ohio to criticize.

Under the leadership of Gov.Ted Strickland, Ohio almost has completed a groundbreaking five-year package of tax reforms launched by the Ohio General Assembly and former governor Bob Taft in 2005. Collectively, these changes have eliminated Ohio's two largest business taxes. Overall, they represent the largest reduction in state taxes in at least 70 years.

The changes include:

• A 17 percent reduction in individual income tax rates. A family of four that earns $60,000 will save about $350 this year alone. Another income tax cut is scheduled for 2011.

• Elimination of Ohio's century-old corporation franchise tax on net profits or net worth. This is the "capital stock" tax the Tax Foundation professes to oppose. For nearly all corporations, it's a thing of the past. The last payments were due last year.

• Elimination of personal property taxes on business machinery and equipment -- taxes that dated back to well before the Civil War.

• A new commercial activity tax (CAT) that imposes less than half the burden of the two major business taxes it replaced.

Ohio's individual income tax rates are now lower than they have been since 1981, and Ohio is now just one of two states that taxes neither business personal property nor corporation profits. These are significant competitive advantages for Ohio. And the savings for taxpayers is very real: about $2.1 billion this year alone.

Even before this program of tax reforms and reductions began, Ohio's state government taxes were lower than average. Since then, these reforms have reduced Ohio's taxes from 96 percent of the average of all states to just 89 percent.

The truth is, Ohio is not the high tax state some people want to make it out to be.

Sarah Palin has upped her national profile in recent weeks, but a new poll shows that the extra attention hasn't done her any favors. In the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll, the amount of people with a favorable view of Palin has dropped to its lowest point ever recorded by the pollster.

More than 70% of respondents said she's not qualified to be president.

Palin's numbers don't improve much when just Republicans are asked to give their opinion of her, the poll found.

Even former Vice President Dick Cheney took issue yesterday on ABC with her recent suggestion that President Obama could win re-election by starting a war with Iran.

Watch It:

During the same Sunday show appearance Cheny also declined to endorse the former Alaska governor's potential 2012 presidential bid, saying that he has not yet decided on a candidate to support.

Cheney did not say whether he thinks Palin is capable or qualified of being president so she still might get his vote in 2012.

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Perceptions of U.S. leadership worldwide improved significantly from 2008 to 2009. The U.S.-Global Leadership Project, a partnership between the Meridian International Center and Gallup, finds that a median of 51% of the world approves of the job performance of the current leadership of the U.S., up from a median of 34% in 2008.

Watch IT:

In an oped in USA Today, John Brennan -- Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism -- responds to critics of the Obama administration's counterterrorism policies by saying "Politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda."

Brennan writes that, "Terrorists are not 100-feet tall. Nor do they deserve the abject fear they seek to instill."

In the oped, titled "'We need no lectures': Administration disrupts terrorists’ plots, takes fight to them abroad," Brennan writes that politics "should never get in the way of national security. But too many in Washington are now misrepresenting the facts to score political points, instead of coming together to keep us safe."

Brennan provides a detailed defense of the administration's handling of failed Christmas Day bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab whom, he says, was "thoroughly interrogated and provided important information."

He suggests that many critics are hypocritical and clueless.

John Brennan is Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism:

Opposing view: 'We need no lectures'

Administration disrupts terrorists’ plots, takes fight to them abroad.

Politics should never get in the way of national security. But too many in Washington are now misrepresenting the facts to score political points, instead of coming together to keep us safe.

Immediately after the failed Christmas Day attack, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was thoroughly interrogated and provided important information. Senior counterterrorism officials from the White House, the intelligence community and the military were all actively discussing this case before he was Mirandized and supported the decision to charge him in criminal court.

The most important breakthrough occurred after Abdulmutallab was read his rights, which the FBI made standard policy under Michael Mukasey, President Bush's attorney general. The critics who want the FBI to ignore this long-established practice also ignore the lessons we have learned in waging this war: Terrorists such as Jose Padilla and Saleh al-Mari did not cooperate when transferred to military custody, which can harden one's determination to resist cooperation.

It's naive to think that transferring Abdulmutallab to military custody would have caused an outpouring of information. There is little difference between military and civilian custody, other than an interrogator with a uniform. The suspect gets access to a lawyer, and interrogation rules are nearly identical.

Would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid was read his Miranda rights five minutes after being taken off a plane he tried to blow up. The same people who criticize the president today were silent back then.

Read Te Full Piece At USAToday

See Also: John Brennan: All Former Detainees Who Returned to Terrorism Were Released By Bush

The selection of Yvette McGee Brown is an interesting pick.

It's safe. The downside is her relatively unknown status outside social service communities and Central Ohio. The upside is varied.

Yes, as a female, African-American leader with a rather spotless record in the judiciary she solves a few of the obvious mechanical choices:

·         She contrasts with Mary Taylor, the pick of GOP John Kasich.

·         She puts racial diversity on the ticket.

But it is the tactical choices that make the pick interesting.

Strickland has had rumblings in the social service community -- hard hit by state budget cuts – and in the progressive community. McGee Brown appeals to both with a strong background in the social service sector, statewide connections and an approachable reputation.

The pick also comes with some Fundraising cache.

McGee Brown has long been an effective advocate politically and in the non-profit world with broad corporate friendships and support. Mr. Kasich, seemingly has his Ohio fundraising base in the boardrooms of Central Ohio – in fact he serves on the Worthington Industries Board. McGee Brown brings that same kind of entrée, creating an interesting tactical fundraising competition among the titans in Columbus.

And don’t forget, it was Lee Fisher, the outgoing Lt. Governor who set the standard for the role of Fundraiser in Chief back in 2006. McGee Brown certainly brings a similar role to the table of the Strickland campaign.

Finally, in a close race, Central Ohio becomes the battleground – and that is Kasich’s base. If McGee Brown both motivates the Columbus base and appeals to the masses – she won handily in her contested judicial races in a Franklin County with much redder hues than there are now – that creates a numbers problem for Kasich’s own base.

McGee Brown has been highly sought after by a number of previous Democratic recruiters -- more than once her name surfaced in discussions about both past Attorney General races and Ohio Supreme Court races.

Ironically, outside of Columbus, McGee Brown's diversity isn't an automatic pass – established women's groups and urban communities have been burned before and will need to build trust in a new face.

So while the obvious is that this pick is about racial and gender diversity, in reality it seems more a pick about the fundraising role Fisher created so successfully, the tactical issues involving Strickland’s opponents base and Franklin County’s role in the upcoming race. Oh... and the name "Brown" sure doesn't hurt either.

The rest of 2010 will come down to the rate of turnout of Obama surge voters and the motivation and mood of economically distressed voters next fall.

And McGee Brown certainly does no harm to those sectors. With work, she can help with both groups.

“There are those who choose not to speak about African-Americans or the working class.

We can no longer be in denial that certain sectors of our population, including the African-American community, are feeling the recession to a greater extent.”

- Rep. Maxine Waters

Last year began with tears of joy.

First the tears in Grant Park as a man of color won the White House, followed by the tears by those millions winding their way to the Inauguration.

A barrier was gone. A man’s skin no longer was his measure.

But as skin matters not for our nation’s highest office, the skin of our leaders should not overshadow the growing problems of a population in crisis.

The year of joy in the body politic ended disproportionately in tears of economic distress for many college-educated African Americans.

Ohio’s African American population is not only hard hit by the recession, there are some disturbing trends that fly in the face of past economic theory:

• Cleveland, which is Ohio’s largest minority center, has the 13th highest literacy rate in the nation, but as recently as 2007 was ranked 2nd in poverty. Ohio had six cities last year among the nation’s poorest. (Cincinnati ranked 8th and Columbus, with a growing immigration population, was 22nd.) More than a few African American leaders have questioned if this has more to do with literacy standards given other education demographics in the state.
• Real wages in African American households have substantially diminished in the past two years.
• The unemployment rate among college-educated African Americans is nearly twice as high as that of similarly educated whites.
• The underemployment rate for African Americans and Hispanics remains substantially higher than those in other labor demographics.
• The sub-prime loan foreclosure crisis has ravaged a once rising middle class African American sector disproportionately in racially segregated areas (Cleveland and Cincinnati among those studied) affecting
  • Property values in urban and urban and inner-ring suburban areas
  • Less access to lending – housing or business – disproportionately affecting African American households.
  • Devaluing the major middle class asset/savings of African American households through homeownership.

While there is real and justified pride in Barack Obama’s historic election to the White House, political and community leaders need to understand the problem doesn’t stem from racial politics, per se, but sociological politics.

Home ownership is generally thought of as the dividing line between middle class prosperity and poverty. Homes are the single greatest asset for middle class Americans. However in this recession, they’re equally likely to be a liability, a holding cell or grave yard for middle class wealth. Both high and low salary positions retain more stability in a recession, which has only amplified this problem.

One reason that recent middle class African American gains have been wiped out, is they did not have a strong foundation in generational wealth to withstand this market tsunami – the quaking housing market, followed by waves of unemployment.

And it is not just a black problem. Plenty of first generation white middle class homeowners got wrapped in the same economic cellophane, just at lower rates than Black America. Solving this problem, aids non-blacks as well.

The question is, will the polls that put Barack Obama in the White House allow him to reach out his hand to America’s black community? For in the complicated prism of race in America today, America’s first Black President is forced to walk tepidly in comparison to Bill Clinton or George W. Bush.

Today’s more subtle racism, is a cauldron of open-minded bigotry – where helping a disproportionately damaged population – lends itself to the whispers and innuendo of racial economics.

But this is America’s problem, regardless of who is in the White House. Fortunately, there are plenty of ideas to solve the dilemma.

Rasmussen's latest survey (500 LVs, 1/12, MoE +/- 4.5%) shows former Rep. and OMB Director Rob Portman (R) leading each of his potential Democratic foes, Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher and Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner.

General Election Matchups
Portman 44 (+6 vs. last survey, 12/7)
Fisher 37 (+1)
Und 14 (-4)

Portman 43 (+3)
Brunner 40 (+7)
Und 13 (-7)

Fisher is the pick so far of most establishment Ohio Democrats, while Brunner has struggled to raise money. But this result seems to show that Brunner might actually be the better general election candidate, something she says Democrats have conceded to her privately.

Favorable Ratings
Portman 49 / 25
Fisher 41 / 39
Brunner 37 / 39

Tom Geoghegan tilts at the filibuster windmill in the New York Times this past weekend and lays out the argument that the filibuster is unconstitutional.

The filibuster, Geoghegan says, has probably always been unconstitutional, but in its current form, where no actual floor debate is required and it's been morphed into a routine requirement for 60 votes to pass any bill, it's super duper unconstitutional.

He lays out three reasons:

First, the Constitution explicitly requires supermajorities only in a few special cases: ratifying treaties and constitutional amendments, overriding presidential vetoes, expelling members and for impeachments. With so many lawyers among them, the founders knew and operated under the maxim “expressio unius est exclusio alterius” — the express mention of one thing excludes all others. But one need not leave it at a maxim. In the Federalist Papers, every time Alexander Hamilton or John Jay defends a particular supermajority rule, he does so at length and with an obvious sense of guilt over his departure from majority rule.

Second, Article I, Section 3, expressly says that the vice president as the presiding officer of the Senate should cast the deciding vote when senators are “equally divided.” The procedural filibuster does an end run around this constitutional requirement....

Third, Article I pointedly mandates at least one rule of proceeding, namely, that a majority of senators (and House members, for that matter) will constitute a quorum....It would be illogical for the Constitution to preclude a supermajority rule with respect to a quorum while allowing it on an ad hoc and more convenient basis any time a minority wanted to block a vote. Yet that is essentially what Senate Rule 22 achieves on any bill that used to require a majority vote.

Read The Full Story at The New York Times

GOP Wheels Out Top Terrorist Attack Dog Cheney

Every since the failed underpants bomber plot on Christmas day the GOP has made every effort to politicize the event in an attempt to portray President Obama as somehow weak on terror.

Based on a poll released by CNN today the results of their efforts are in.

AEF: ANOTHER EPIC FAIL!

In the wake of the Christmas day attempt to blow up a U.S. airliner, most Americans remain confident that the Obama administration can protect the country from terrorism, according to a new national poll.

Nearly two-thirds of people questioned in the poll say they have a moderate or great deal of confidence in the administration to protect the public from future terrorist attacks, up 2 points from August. Thirty-five percent say they have not much or no confidence at all, down 1 point from August.

A number of Republicans have criticized the president over his handling of the attempted bombing of Northwest flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit. But according to the survey, 57 percent approve of the way President Barack Obama's responded, with 39 percent disapproving of how he handled the situation.

"Only a third of Republicans have a positive view of Obama on this matter, but the key for the administration is the 55 percent of independents who approve of how the president responded to the incident on Christmas Day," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

"The public seems to react calmly to individual incidents, possibly because most Americans believe that the government cannot prevent every single terrorist plot from occurring."

Six in 10 say the terrorists will always find a way to launch an attack, no matter what the government does, he adds - identical to the number who felt that way during the Bush administration.

That 1937 Feeling

Here’s what’s coming in economic news: The next employment report could show the economy adding jobs for the first time in two years. The next G.D.P. report is likely to show solid growth in late 2009. There will be lots of bullish commentary — and the calls we’re already hearing for an end to stimulus, for reversing the steps the government and the Federal Reserve took to prop up the economy, will grow even louder.

But if those calls are heeded, we’ll be repeating the great mistake of 1937, when the Fed and the Roosevelt administration decided that the Great Depression was over, that it was time for the economy to throw away its crutches. Spending was cut back, monetary policy was tightened — and the economy promptly plunged back into the depths.

This shouldn’t be happening. Both Ben Bernanke, the Fed chairman, and Christina Romer, who heads President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, are scholars of the Great Depression. Ms. Romer has warned explicitly against re-enacting the events of 1937. But those who remember the past sometimes repeat it anyway.

As you read the economic news, it will be important to remember, first of all, that blips — occasional good numbers, signifying nothing — are common even when the economy is, in fact, mired in a prolonged slump. In early 2002, for example, initial reports showed the economy growing at a 5.8 percent annual rate. But the unemployment rate kept rising for another year.

Read Paul Krugman's Full Piece at The New York Times

They like to call themselves "Patriots". but they are not.  They are Fox News Teabaggers who are ill-informed about the most basic foundations of our country particularly the tenets of our Constitution and what we as a nation stand for.

Their "movement" is little more than Reality TV created by Fox and corporate interests and covered far beyond it's significance by a willing right wing media that fills the airwaves and 24 hour news cycle with their rally's and protests which are nothing more than the political equivilent of MTV's "Jersey Shore".

Because their protests are entirely based upon misinformation and outright falsehoods (IE: the protests began based upon the slogan "T.E.A. Taxed Enough Already", yet at that time President Obama and the Democratic held Congress had already passed the largest middle-class tax cut in history), when you talk to them individually they have to resort to lies to explain their agenda.

The teabaggers don't care that they don't know what they are talking about.  They are sheep being led by physcopaths like Glenn Beck, Dick Armey, and Rush Limbaugh and nationally recognized liar Sarah Palin.

After accomplishing absolutely nothing of political significance in Ohio in 2009, we wish them well in 2010.  May they get their supported candidates on the ballot in as many races across Ohio as possible.

D) The place where the family of a married person resides shall be considered to be the person’s place of residence; except that when the spouses have separated and live apart, the place where such a spouse resides the length of time required to entitle a person to vote shall be considered to be the spouse’s place of residence.

other than his personal statement that he lives in Kettering.

Watch a compilation of Husted's testimony before the Montgomery County Board of Elections:

Ultimately under Ohio Law Husted was found to not be a resident of Kettering for voting purposes by Ohio Secretary of State Brunner.

From her decision:

"Engaging in a legal fiction that a legislator remains a 'resident' of his district by virtue of holding office regardless of his actual, physical presence in the district violates this constitutional requirement".

"While Senator Husted's subjective testimony claims an intention to return to a 'fixed' habitation, the weight of the evidence based on his actions and those of his family under the relevant legal provisions tip the scale so clearly against his assertions that I am convinced and hold the firm belief that he is no longer a resident of Montgomery County and therefore is not eligible to vote there,"

So Jon ran to the all Republican Ohio Supreme Court. who overturned 7-0 the Secretary of State's finding in a tortured ruling reminisent of Bush V. Gore.

In doing so "Slick  Jonny's" strategy backfired in that  the Court had to support very strick voter challenge provisions in the Ohio law which in the future will provide election and voting protections for all Ohio voters that will go a long way to ending the Ohio GOP's ongoing voter caginjg strategies forever.

The true story of his "rise to power" in the Republican part perhaps should have prepared us for the fact that in 2009 he remained the most despised politician in the country for much of the year.

If former Ohio Congressman Donald “Buz” Lukens hadn’t been caught having sex with a minor 18 years ago, Boehner might very well not be in Congress at all.

And if Florida Congressman Mark Foley hadn’t been caught sending sexually explicit messages to Congressional pages...and Jack Abramoff hadn’t been caught bribing politicians...and Tom DeLay hadn’t been caught up in conspiracy charges—in short, if the Republican Party hadn’t seen its best-laid plans go up in scandalous smoke over the last two years, then Boehner likely wouldn’t now be in leadership, let alone the minority leader.

Then there's this factoid about John Boehner . . . turns out his nickname in the halls of Congress and further up the Republican power structure really is "Boner".

BOEHNER LIKES TO say that he’s just a regular guy with an important job. He prefers that no one address him as “Congressman” but instead call him “John” or simply “Boehner.” Close friends and colleagues, President Bush among them, endearingly refer to him as “Boner.”

"Boner" consistently met our expectations for wing-nuttiness throughout the year. From his commentary on President Obama's first State of the Union address to his admission that he needed an anti-depressant to perform his duties as leader of the Republican House Caucus, John regularly delivered.

John's wingnut rating definitely rose when we found out that he doesn't know the Consitution from the Declaration of Independence, (a wingnut trademark) and when he called the Cap and Trade bill passed by the House "a pile of sh*t", he earned inclusion in Ohio's Stone Age 5.

Of course the "Boner" quote of the year was when with polls showing that 57% of Ohioans supporting the public option, he told reporters that he's never met "anyone" who supports the public health insurance option.

"This is about as unpopular as a garlic milkshake," Boehner said, noting that he had never consumed such a milkshake.

We wanted to deliver John's Wingnut Award to him personally at his office, but apparently he's in Florida golfing for the holidays.

“Coach” Dave Daubenmire, the local Christian talk radio host and blogger and the founder of  Pass the Salt ministries is equal parts Glenn Beck conspiracy nutcase and Rod Parsley over the top fire-and-brimstone rhetoric.

Here's Daubenmire leering at a child, who is staring at a fetus he has out for display on the streets of Columbus.

Here's another picture of him burning a freshly-ripped Koran:

Earlier this year, he wrote of President Obama:

With his silver tongue, and his mulatto ancestry he was able to lure away enough-middle-of-the roaders to carry him on his magic carpet to the highest office in the land.  [...]

But let there be no doubt, he is the marionette that the communist puppet masters had been grooming for years. A true Manchurian Candidate he was the perfect hand-picked front man programmed to do the communist’s bidding. With the help of the socialist media, the socialist labor unions, and the socialist entertainment industry he was swept into office with the bogus claim that he was America’s first “black” president. He was the first president “of color,” to be sure. But the color is red, not black.

On his radio broadcast he regularly spouts birther conspiracies and who can forget his Fox News-documented stalking of Congressman Zack Space in the name of killing health care reform.

"Coach" was fired from the London schools (what he now calls "goverment schools") in Madison County in the wake of a lawsuit resulting from his refusal to stop praying with his players. The school district settled the suit out of court with the ACLU, which cost Daubenmire his position.

Like all good wingnuts Daubenmire is a hypocrite. Little known is that while Daubenmire wants to tell everyone else how to live their lives, his own son is a convicted pedophile. Ummm, I seem to remember something about removing the log in your own eye first there, Dave.

Anyway, Daubenmire will be off to a good start to raise his wingnut ranking in 2010 when he holds the Shake The Nation teabagger gathering in Columbus featuring  . . . wait for it . . . Alan Keyes on January 9, 2010.

Sunday, we discussed what needs to be fixed in terms of affordability before the final health care bill reaches the President's desk. Today, let's talk about insurance accountability.

Holding the insurance industry accountable has always been a key goal of health reform. In fact, one of the main promises of health reform - that you'll never be denied needed care - is based off the sad reality that insurance companies routinely deny health care to increase their profits.

The abuses of the Wall Street-driven insurance companies are legion, and have been thoroughly chronicled here and elsewhere, but here's a quick rundown [pdf]:

• Insurers deny medically necessary coverage for profit
• Insurers discriminate against women, children, older people, and sicker people
• Insurers drop coverage when you get sick
• Insurers reward employees for denying care
• Insurers collude with providers to drive up prices
• And insurers and Wall Street reward CEOs for increasing profits by using all the abuses listed above

These insurance company abuses must be stopped. And insurance companies need to be given an incentive to serve their customers as opposed to their Wall Street investors, perhaps a more important goal. This should be accomplished in two ways: Strong, enforceable insurance company regulations, and a national public health insurance option available on day one.

As bloggers fight back and forth over whether the Health Care reform bill coming out of the Senate is a good thing or not, the "nattering nabobs of negativity" seem to have lost perspective of the giant hole created by George W. Bush and the Republicans that we are trying to climb out of.

WASHINGTON -- The jury is in on the Bush decade, and it's not looking good. At least according to a new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll.

A decisive 58 percent of respondents described the 2000-2009 years as "awful" or "not so good." Twenty-nine percent called it "fair," and a mere 12 percent said it was "good" or "great."

Time Magazine described it as "the decade from hell."

While the Bush administration can't be blamed for all of it, its influence in driving the national pessimism is difficult to deny. Thirty-eight percent said the 9/11 attacks had the "greatest negative impact on America this past decade." Twenty percent said it was the Iraq war.

In what appears to be the most likely complaint, a massive 74 percent said the United States lost ground on economic prosperity, while 66 percent thought it had jettisoned some of its moral values. Fifty-five percent said America treated other nations less respectfully, and 54 percent believed conditions of peace and national security worsened.

"Not the decade from hell," NBC reflected. "But close."

More Here

Matt Zone represents Ward 17 on Cleveland City Council and is president of the Northeast Ohio City Council Association.

Ohio should take the lead in clean-energy revolution

We have done much in our state and nation to move America away from a single-minded dependence on foreign oil. Even so, as I discovered in Copenhagen, we are in an international race to develop clean energy. I'm convinced that Ohio has made a great start, but we have much more to do. Together with the rest of America, we can be the leader.

Ohio has a lot to gain. According to a joint 2009 report from the Political Economy Research Institute and Center for American Progress, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, in conjunction with a system like that laid out in the U.S. House-passed American Clean Energy and Security Act, would drive a major increase in demand for clean energy. This shift will yield a net boost of more than 67,000 statewide jobs, while also driving a net increase of state investment revenue by $5.6 billion. Another report, from PERI, the Natural Resources Defense Council and Green for All, projected that clean-energy investment would bring 10,421 new jobs to the Cleveland metropolitan area alone, almost half of those jobs for workers with a high school degree or less.

And this is no vague shot at a distant future. The clean-energy revolution is already happening. According to a Pew Charitable Trusts report, clean-energy jobs in Ohio grew by 7.3 percent between 1998 and 2007, compared to a 2.2 percent decline for all other jobs. In 2007, there were more than 2,500 clean-energy businesses operating in the state. An NRDC Green Jobs report found that there are already more than 550,000 jobs in Ohio in a wide range of job areas that could see "job growth or wage increases" as part of the push for clean-energy renewal and climate-change mitigation.

Read The Full Op-Ed From Matt Zone at The Plain Dealer

Vice President Joe Biden has an op-ed in the Sunday New York Times making the case for - you guessed it - "historic" health care reform.

Biden, who names former DNC chairman Howard Dean as one of the bill's critics, says he wanted a public option and is the first to admit the legislation isn't perfect.

"Those in our own party who would scuttle this bill because of what it doesn't do seem not to appreciate the magnitude of what it has the potential to accomplish," he wrote, adding: "But if the bill dies this week, there is no second chance to vote yes."

Another key line from Biden's submission: "While it does not contain every measure President Obama and I wanted, I would vote yes for this bill certain that it includes the fundamental, essential change that opponents of reform have resisted for generations."

Coupled with Vicki Kennedy's Washington Post op-ed yesterday about what her late husband would have wanted, the White House is making sure their message about the good things in the bill is heard loud and clear in the coming days.

Why the Senate Should Vote Yes on Health Care
By Vice President Joe Biden

If I were still a United States senator, I would not only vote yes on the current health care reform bill, I would do so with the sure knowledge that I was casting one of the most historic votes of my 36 years in the Senate. I would vote yes knowing that the bill represents the culmination of a struggle begun by Theodore Roosevelt nearly a century ago to make health care reform a reality. And while it does not contain every measure President Obama and I wanted, I would vote yes for this bill certain that it includes the fundamental, essential change that opponents of reform have resisted for generations.

We have been here before. In the past, as the moment of decision drew nearer, criticism from both the left and the right grew louder. Compromises were derided. The perfect became the enemy of the good.

Most recently, in 1993, Democrats had a chance to forge a compromise with Senator John Chafee, Republican of Rhode Island, on a health care reform bill. Congress’s failure to pass health care reform that year led to 16 years of inaction — and 16 years of exploding health care costs and rising numbers of uninsured Americans.

We can’t let that happen again. While it is not perfect, the bill pending in the Senate today is not just good enough — it is very good. Insurance companies will no longer be able to deny coverage to those with pre-existing conditions or drop coverage when people get sick. Charging exorbitant premiums based on sex, age or health status will be outlawed. Annual and lifetime caps on benefits will be history. Those who already have insurance will be able to keep it, and will gain peace of mind knowing they won’t be priced out of the market by skyrocketing premiums. And more than 30 million uninsured Americans will gain access to affordable health care coverage.

That is not all. President Obama and I know we have to put our fiscal house in order. This is why those who claim they oppose reform because they fear for our country’s fiscal stability should finally acknowledge what the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office makes crystal clear: not only is the Senate bill paid for, it is this country’s single largest deficit-reduction measure in a dozen years.

I share the frustration of other progressives that the Senate bill does not include a public option. But I’ve been around a long time, and I know that in Washington big changes never emerge in perfect form.

Read The Full Piece at The NEw York Times

Vicki Kennedy Pens WaPo OpEd Endorsing 'Imperfect' Health Care Bill

There was a point, about four months ago, when it seemed possible that Ted Kennedy's death might spur support for health care reform. While his absence was felt throughout the year, his passing stood to provide "the final moral impetus to accomplish one of the primary causes to which he dedicated his life."

One observer went so far as to argue that "it would be suicidal for the GOP to filibuster the culmination of the last Kennedy brother's lifelong crusade.... I suspect the coverage of Kennedy's death would silence healthcare reform critics and boost proponents in a way that netted at least a couple of wavering moderates."

We now know, of course, that as the weeks elapsed, the political relevance of Kennedy's passing faded. The talk of renaming the bill after the legendary senator, and getting this bill done to honor his legacy, was quickly drowned out by attacks against the initiative and prolonged threats of obstructionism.

To that end, Victoria Reggie Kennedy, Ted Kennedy's widow, has a poignant op-ed in today's Washington Post, urging her late husband's colleagues not to back away from his life-long dream.

The moment Ted Kennedy would not want to lose

My late husband, Ted Kennedy, was passionate about health-care reform. It was the cause of his life. He believed that health care for all our citizens was a fundamental right, not a privilege, and that this year the stars -- and competing interests -- were finally aligned to allow our nation to move forward with fundamental reform. He believed that health-care reform was essential to the financial stability of our nation's working families and of our economy as a whole.

Still, Ted knew that accomplishing reform would be difficult. If it were easy, he told me, it would have been done a long time ago. He predicted that as the Senate got closer to a vote, compromises would be necessary, coalitions would falter and many ardent supporters of reform would want to walk away. He hoped that they wouldn't do so. He knew from experience, he told me, that this kind of opportunity to enact health-care reform wouldn't arise again for a generation.

In the early 1970s, Ted worked with the Nixon administration to find consensus on health-care reform. Those efforts broke down in part because the compromise wasn't ideologically pure enough for some constituency groups. More than 20 years passed before there was another real opportunity for reform, years during which human suffering only increased. Even with the committed leadership of then-President Bill Clinton and his wife, reform was thwarted in the 1990s. As Ted wrote in his memoir, he was deeply disappointed that the Clinton health-care bill did not come to a vote in the full Senate. He believed that senators should have gone on the record, up or down.

Ted often said that we can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. He also said that it was better to get half a loaf than no loaf at all, especially with so many lives at stake. That's why, even as he never stopped fighting for comprehensive health-care reform, he also championed incremental but effective reforms such as a Patients' Bill of Rights, the Children's Health Insurance Program and COBRA continuation of health coverage.

Read The Full Piece By Victoria Kennedy  At The Washington Post

A message to progressives: By all means, hang Senator Joe Lieberman in effigy. Declare that you’re disappointed in and/or disgusted with President Obama. Demand a change in Senate rules that, combined with the Republican strategy of total obstructionism, are in the process of making America ungovernable.

But meanwhile, pass the health care bill.

Yes, the filibuster-imposed need to get votes from “centrist” senators has led to a bill that falls a long way short of ideal. Worse, some of those senators seem motivated largely by a desire to protect the interests of insurance companies — with the possible exception of Mr. Lieberman, who seems motivated by sheer spite.

But let’s all take a deep breath, and consider just how much good this bill would do, if passed — and how much better it would be than anything that seemed possible just a few years ago. With all its flaws, the Senate health bill would be the biggest expansion of the social safety net since Medicare, greatly improving the lives of millions. Getting this bill would be much, much better than watching health care reform fail.

Read Paul Krugman's Full Piece at The New York Times

Obama's "Unconstitutional" Nobel Prize

If you were worrying that the Right might be running out of subjects from which it could gin up phony controversies, rest assured that they are always hard at work coming up with new, innovative, and ridiculous scandals ... like the idea that in accepting the Nobel Peace Prize, President Obama violated the Constitution:

Last Thursday, Barack Obama accepted the Nobel Peace Prize Oslo, Norway. He is the third sitting president, after Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt, to win the award. While controversy swirled around the award being granted to a wartime president, Matthew Spalding with The Heritage Foundation is concerned about the constitutionality of Obama's acceptance of the Nobel Prize. 

A clause in Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution states: "No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office or Trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign state." That raises a question: Is the Nobel Peace Prize an "Emolument" -- a gift arising from one's office which includes some sort of monetary award with it?

Spalding, director of the B. Kenneth Simon Center for American Studies at The Heritage Foundation, says since the award is technically the property of the United States, Obama has under 60 days to turn the award over to the appropriate authorities for proper disposal.

"The Commission, the group that gives out the Nobel Prize, is actually appointed by the Parliament of Norway, which is [to] say that it's connected with a foreign state. This makes it very interesting," the Heritage scholar notes. "In 1993, President Clinton's own Office of Legal Counsel said that it didn't have to be a foreign state acting in a formal way, but could be, rather, indirect. [This] seems to be a perfect example of what the Nobel Prize is -- and the Founders put this clause in the Constitution precisely to make sure that foreign states didn't unwarrantedly influence American domestic politics."

Spalding believes the Nobel Prize Commission intended to give the award to a president who had not yet accomplished anything, in hopes of encouraging him to do certain things in the future.

And for the record, "emolument" means "salary, wages and benefits paid for employment or an office held," not "gift"

In lieu of another “War on Christmas” panic, it seems that the conservative culture war of December 2009 will be over James Cameron’s much-hyped, almost-as-much-anticipated blockbuster “Avatar.”

John Nolte, the editor of Andrew Breitbart’s influential “Big Hollywood” site, was first out of the gate with a review that accuses Cameron of making an anti-war screed, a sci-fi version of Operation Iraqi Freedom with evil earthlings killing aliens for their energy resources.

Think of “Avatar” as “Death Wish 5” for leftists. A simplistic, revisionist revenge fantasy where if you freakin’ hate the bad guys (America), you’re able to forgive the by-the-numbers predictability of it all and still get off watching them get what they got coming.

Watch It:

"Good, solid B-plus," the president said.

Explaining, he said, "we have inherited the biggest set of challenges of any president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

"We stabilized the economy, and prevented possibilities of a Great Depression or a significant financial meltdown. The economy is growing again.

"We are on our way out of Iraq. I think we've got the best possible plan for Afghanistan.

"We have reset our image around the world.

"We have achieved an international consensus around the need for Iran and North Korea to disable their nuclear weapons.

"And I think that we're going to pass the most significant piece of social legislation since Social Security,and that's health insurance for every American," he concluded.

Pressed by Oprah as to why only a B-plus, the president said, "B-plus because of the things that are undone. Health care is not yet signed. If I get health care passed we tip into A-minus."

What grade would you give him and why?

Republican Rob Portman has managed to pull away somewhat from Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner but still finds himself in a highly competitive race with Democratic Lieutenant Governor Lee Fisher in potential 2010 U.S. Senate match-ups in Ohio.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state shows Portman now leading Brunner 40% to 33% after holding a two-point advantage in September. Just seven percent (7%) would choose another candidate, but 20% are undecided at this point.

Portman continues to run nearly even with Fisher 38% to 36%. In their match-up, 18% of Ohio voters are undecided, while another eight percent (8%) prefer another candidate. The two were virtually tied in September as well, with Portman just ahead 41% to 40%.

The Republican runs slightly stronger among voters who already have health insurance, while both Democrats hold double-digit leads over Portman among those without health insurance.

The three candidates are vying for the seat being vacated by retiring Republican Senator George Voinovich. Portman, the favored GOP candidate, is a former congressman who served as the director of the Office of Management and Budget and the U.S. Trade Representative during the Bush presidency. Both parties will select their Senate nominees in May 4 primaries.

Fisher does slightly better than Brunner among both Democratic voters and voters not affiliated with either party. However, Portman leads both Democrats by over 20 points among unaffiliateds.

Just 10% of Ohio voters share a very favorable view of Portman, down three points from September. Five percent (5%) view Portman very unfavorably, but another 31% are not sure what they think of him.

For Fisher, very favorables total 10% while 11% view him unfavorably. Another 28% are undecided.

Fourteen percent (14%) give Brunner a very favorable rating, but 17% view her very unfavorably. Twenty-nine percent (29%) have no opinion of her.

Note: The poll is of only 500 "likely voters".  Crosstabs are only available to paid members and the margin of error is not provided.  Evaluate the potential accuracy of this poll with due caution.

A new Rasmussen Reports survey in Ohio shows John Kasich (R) leadings Gov. Ted Strickland (D), 48% to 39%, with 11% still not sure who they would vote for.

Strickland currently wins support from just 69% of the state’s Democratic voters and trails by 25 percentage points among voters not affiliated with either major party.

Adding to Strickland’s woes is a very public disagreement with the Ohio Legislative Black Caucus.

Currently, the governor attracts only 71% of the black vote. Thirteen percent (13%) of African-American voters say they will vote against the governor, and 15% are undecided. It is likely that the Democratic candidate will eventually win much better support from the black community statewide.

Forty-eight percent (48%) of all voters in the state still approve of the way Strickland is handling his job, while 50% disapprove. Those figures include 11% who Strongly Approve and 24% who Strongly Disapprove.

Those numbers are a bit better than President Obama’s. The president earns approval from 46% of the state’s voters. Opinions are much stronger about the president than they are about the governor. Thirty-one percent (31%) Strongly Approve of the president’s performance, and 41% Strongly Disapprove.

On a personal basis, Strickland is viewed favorably by 46%, Kasich by 45%. Forty-six percent (46%) have an unfavorable view of the governor, while just 24% give negative reviews of Kasich.

Together Against Climate Change

THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM: A party both united and divided

The Republican rank and file is largely in sync with GOP lawmakers in their staunch opposition to efforts by President Obama and Democrats to enact major health-care legislation, but a new Washington Post poll also reveals deep dissatisfaction among GOP voters with the party's leadership as well as ideological and generational differences that may prove big obstacles to the party's plans for reclaiming power.

Republicans and GOP-leaning independents are overwhelmingly negative about Obama and the Democratic Party more broadly, with nearly all dissatisfied with the administration's policies and almost half saying they are "angry" about them. About three-quarters have a more basic complaint, saying Obama does not stand for "traditional American values." More than eight in 10 say there is no chance they would support his reelection.

But for all the talk among Republican elected officials about a nascent comeback after gubernatorial victories in Virginia and New Jersey this month, there is also broad frustration among Republican voters about the party's direction, detachment from its congressional representatives and a schism over its priorities.

Fewer than half of the Republicans and Republican-leaners surveyed by The Washington Post see the party's leadership as taking the GOP in the "right direction," down sharply from this time four years ago. About four in 10 are dissatisfied with the policy proposals being offered by congressional Republicans, and similar numbers see the current crop of GOP legislators as out of touch with their problems and personal values. Nearly a third say the Republicans in Congress are not standing up for the party's core values.

Read The Full Story at The Washington Post

Read this.

Just in case your GOP relatives want to lecture you about the socialist politics of the "DumocRATS" and the failure of our Marxist Messiah Obama over the Thanksgiving Holiday.

The Maryland Millionaire Count, Tax Scams, and Train Wrecks

In a capitalist system, investors make money not despite hiring workers, but because they hire workers who, if they are adequately managed, create value in excess of the wages and benefits they are paid. This value is called "profit," and the business' owner gets to keep that, after paying taxes.

In a properly functioning capitalist economy, rich people don't "create jobs" for workers; workers, upon having jobs, create rich people.

That's how the system works, in theory.

But the reality is different from the theory. In today's marketplace, the super-rich have become richer in large part by destroying jobs. They amass staggering wealth by gambling, and fraud, and they depend very dearly on government policies (especially very low taxes on so-called "capital gains") to protect what they have and allow them to grab more. In "capitalism" as it is actually practiced today, jobs really are a kind of charity, often superfluous to the amassing of multibillion dollar fortunes.

Today's millionaires and billionaires make their money by creating contracts—and a lot of those are, at their core, tax dodges. Consider the "lease-back" scam that gained popularity in the late 1990s.

In a lease back, a government entity—typically a town, county, or utility cooperative—agrees to lease its physical asset to a for-profit corporation (usually a bank or insurance company), and then pay them to "lease back" the asset. In this way, municipal sewers, power plants, subway trains, and fleets of garbage trucks have found their way onto the books of financial services companies that have no use for them, except as tax write-offs. They share this windfall with the government entities to entice them into the deal, leaving as the only losers the rest of the tax-paying citizens. Brokers in these deals typically receive a huge chunk of the expected proceeds up front—tens of millions of dollars—for arranging the contracts.

The deals were always fraud, and now some of them are coming back to bite the municipalities and non-profits that made them, while leaving the bankers unscathed.

“I don’t want the government making my healthcare decisions.

I do want the government making a woman's healthcare decisions.”

I am Ohio Secretary of State and a candidate for the United State Senate. I have been an outspoken proponent of health care reform with a strong public option. However, the last-minute Stupak-Pitts anti-choice amendment to the House health care reform bill, adopted late Saturday by a vote of 240-194, is an insult to women and an assault on the right to privacy. While passage of the health care reform bill is on balance a positive step, it is critically important that America not allow the anti-choice forces to achieve through Congressional legislation what the courts have repeatedly refused - the practical elimination of a woman's right to choose a legal medical procedure.

The right to choose is not negotiable. I strongly urge the Senate to protect a woman's right to choose by rejecting this unacceptable change to health care reform.

The Stupak-Pitts amendment makes it virtually impossible for private insurance companies that participate in the new system to offer abortion coverage to women, even if they pay for such coverage with their own funds. The amendment disallows any coverage of abortion in the public option and disallows anyone receiving a federal subsidy from purchasing a health insurance plan that includes abortion.  Under the amendment, private health insurance plans are forbidden from offering through the planned insurance exchange a plan that includes abortion coverage to both subsidized and unsubsidized individuals purchasing through the exchange.

The Stupak-Pitts amendment would leave women worse off than they are today in obtaining reproductive health services by denying them the right to use their own money to purchase an insurance plan with abortion coverage. This restriction is far more onerous than the Hyde Amendment, which has prohibited public funding of abortions since 1977. Presently, more than 85 percent of private-insurance plans cover abortion services.

By voting late Saturday to block women from essential reproductive health care services, the anti-choice obstructionists in Congress have abandoned women and would render a woman's constitutional right to choose ineffective at best. The final health care bill must not only guarantee each American woman’s right to the health care she needs when she needs it, it also must also provide access to reproductive health services for all, regardless of income level and regardless of whether or not they receive government subsidized care.

Read The Full Post From Jennifer Brunner at Daily Kos

Must Read Before Voting Today!  Vote No On Issue 2!

Bob Cesca: We Can't Reform Health Care without Reforming Food

Corporate agribusiness has invested nearly $1.2 billion (and growing) on lobbyists -- more money than even the defense lobby. Naturally, much of this lobbying has been aimed at deregulating how food is processed and manufactured, as well as how corporate agribusinesses raise and process livestock. It's an industry that's entangled in everything from Big Tobacco to human trafficking and illegal immigration.

Most recently, and speaking of poisoned filth, you may have watched as Rick Berman was eviscerated by Rachel Maddow on MSNBC a few weeks ago. In case you missed it, Berman's Center for Consumer Freedom is financed by corporate agribusiness, among others, and tasked with deceiving the public about everything from high fructose corn syrup to transfat, mercury levels in fish, obesity issues, food labels, and tobacco laws. CCF is all about confusing the public by muddying scientific fact and skewing the debate onto ridiculous tangents to the point where it's difficult to tell the difference between what's healthy and what's crap. It's Glenn Beck's rodeo clown strategy applied to food.

The consequence for you and me, of course, is that the food is becoming increasingly toxic, both in terms of what goes into our bodies, and in terms of how deregulation and deception is hurting the economy. What good is health care reform if we're still being fed poison? What good is an economic recovery if big business is still gaming the system?

Here's a perfect example of what they're getting away with. In Ohio next week, voters will be deciding on a ballot measure known as Issue 2.

As I'm sure you're aware -- and I'll spare you the gruesome videos -- corporate farms maximize profit by packing as many animals into ridiculously tight spaces. Imagine being forced to live out your life in the equivalent of a high school gym locker. While confined and unable to move, the animals are injected with a variety of hormones, antibiotics and other medications. Medications designed for animals, not humans. They're force-fed grains laced with pesticides and other chemicals. And when they're not eating chemically-tainted grain, they're often fed the remains of other animals -- old or sick animals that aren't shoved through the system and turned into food for humans (we often share food with, you know, our food). The list of atrocities is lengthy, but the end result is that a variety of unhealthy, possibly deadly toxins and diseases wind up, unannounced, on our mouths.

The Humane Society:

...the American Journal of Epidemiology reported that people who eat eggs from hens confined in cages are 250% more likely to contract Salmonella. The extreme confinement of animals is also a major factor in the emergence of diseases like H5N1 and H1N1 (bird and swine flu).

And that's with the Department of Agriculture, along with public participation in oversight, keeping an eye on things.

Issue 2, however, would for all intents and purposes replace federal regulation with something called the Livestock Care Standards Board. The thirteen member board would be appointed by the governor and would include members who have skin in the game. The stated goal of the board would be to regulate how animals are kept. So it sounds like it's a good thing. They're going to protect Babe and his cute barnyard friends!

But that's not how it'll work.

Naturally, the board will be susceptible to intense lobbying and coercion from the usual corporate villains. Imagine Rick Berman types unleashing their evil fury of confused logic and lie-mongering on a small 13 member state board, as opposed to the massive and monolithic federal government. The end result will be conditions that are far, far worse than they are today -- producing food that's even more dangerous, and all of it overriding the authority of the federal government.

While sounding wholesome on the surface, Issue 2, to paraphrase Grover Norquist, is designed to shrink regulatory oversight so it's small enough to be drowned in a bathtub. Corporate agribusiness will be able to run the show and maximize industry profits by continuing the very practices that Issue 2 claims to repair. And it'll all be codified into the Ohio Constitution. Ultimately, any attempts to reverse course will have to clear much larger hurdles.

And here's the really scary news.

"We've tried to model this in a way that other states can look at it," said Jack Fisher, executive vice president of the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation. "This involves farmers, ranchers, everyone in the food chain."

Oh good. So instead of spending large sums of cash lobbying Congress and the federal government, Big Food and corporate agribusinesses will be able to focus their efforts on small states and their quaint little livestock boards -- crushing them and reprocessing the remains into liquid form and dumping them into the factory feeding troughs. Not literally, of course. I hope.

So while this may seem like a small issue about animal welfare in one state, it's actually step one in a process that will make an already deadly national crisis even worse.

Much like we've witnessed with the health insurance cartel and Wall Street, without a strong regulatory body keeping an eye on even the smallest details, we all end up screwed in the process. Opponents will suggest that regulation only makes everything more expensive. But I would rather pay a little more for a pound of beef than to suffer through Stephanie Smith's ordeal with E. Coli:

Then her diarrhea turned bloody. Her kidneys shut down. Seizures knocked her unconscious. The convulsions grew so relentless that doctors had to put her in a coma for nine weeks. When she emerged, she could no longer walk. The affliction had ravaged her nervous system and left her paralyzed.

Corporate profits and cheap food to put on your families -- or bloody diarrhea, a nine week coma and paralysis. Hmm. That's a tough call. Let's have a small, vulnerable livestock panel decide!

Sorry, no.

If Issue 2 is written into the Ohio Constitution next week, it'll be that much more difficult for Americans to remain healthy, with or without reforming the health care system. Help us out, Ohio, and vote against this thing.

Learn More

He’s an Ohio dairy farmer and small business owner.

He knows what could happen to small family farms if Issue 2 passes.

He knows why the other side has spent $4 million trying to rewrite Ohio’s constitution.

Before you vote this Tuesday, watch this short video. Find out the real reason to vote No on Issue 2.

Watch It:

Stop The Corporate Power Grab In Ohio!
Vote No On Issue 2!

By: Elizabeth Warren

From 1792 through the Great Depression, booms and busts followed each other like day follows night. But President Roosevelt and the New Dealers had an innovative idea: regulation might tame the boom-and-bust cycle. So they created a new Securities and Exchange Commission to bring some discipline to the financial markets, established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to make it safe to put money in banks, and passed the Glass-Steagall Act to separate ordinary banking from high-risk financial speculation.

America was protected from another financial crisis for almost 50 years. But in the late 1970s, we began to pull the threads from our regulatory fabric, overturning laws and cutting enforcement. The results were the S&L crisis, Long Term Capital Management, Enron, and now, the subprime mortgage meltdown.

There are signs that we may have learned our lesson. Last week, the House Financial Services Committee voted for a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency that would consolidate scattered and ineffective consumer credit regulations and establish a home in Washington for policymakers dedicated to rebuilding the middle class. Other reforms are also starting to move.

The banking lobby is as powerful and deeply entrenched as ever, but it was powerful in the 1930s, too.

Nonetheless, the New Dealers learned the Great Lesson: Powerful insiders cannot be permitted to write the rules, and prosperity and security depend on a playing field that supports a vibrant middle class.

Today, we face a similar set of questions as we faced then. Will the institutions that created the crisis continue calling the shots and writing the rules, or will Washington take the side of families?

Have we learned the Great Lesson?

Elizabeth Warren is chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel created to oversee the banking bailouts and first proposed a new federal agency for consumer financial products in 2007.

 Ohio, don't be a loser

Issue 3 represents false hope. The state can do better than further enrich the very few

Whatever your stance on gambling, be sure to take a careful look at Issue 3 before entering the voting booth on Tuesday. It is a losing proposition. The out-of-state backers of casino gambling are hoping Ohio's desperate economic conditions finally will lure voters to approve a constitutional amendment tilted heavily in their favor.

The amendment, a fundamental change in the state's basic governing document, would give these already wealthy interests monopoly rights to build casinos at four sites, one each in Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus and Toledo.

For a lock on the market, which could be altered only by another amendment approved by the voters, Penn National Gaming, headquartered in Wyomissing, Pa., and interests headed by Dan Gilbert, the Michigan-based businessman and majority owner of the Cleveland Cavaliers, would pay a one-time fee of $50 million per casino.

After that, a 33 percent tax on gross receipts would be levied, most going to local governments and school districts, not the state. Both the fee and the tax rate are ridiculously low given the protection against in-state competition the amendment would grant.

While Penn National and Gilbert rake in their 67 percent share, casino gambling would not stimulate Ohio's weak economy. In fact, just the opposite would happen. Yes, there would be construction jobs and service jobs in casinos, but those economic benefits would be offset, even outweighed eventually, by the hit taken by local bars, restaurants, theaters and other entertainment venues.

The new casinos in Ohio would attract a home-town crowd, not high-rollers from out of state. The trouble is, 90 percent of gambling revenues can be attributed to just 10 percent of the gamblers. In Ohio, an addiction to gambling would be a localized affliction, falling heavily on those of modest means. At first, the gambling tax would be a regressive tax. Then, as time passed, the social costs would mount as gambling addictions triggered crime, bankruptcies, broken families and suicides.

So far, pro-Issue 3 forces have spent $32 million in an all-out campaign, saturating the airwaves with disinformation. Estimates are that their spending could top $50 million. The reason Penn National and Gilbert are willing to spend so much is simple. If Issue 3 passes, they will quickly get their money back, then make a pile more.

Ohio voters should instead note the Art Schlichter interview recorded by ProgressOhio, a liberal advocacy group. On YouTube, Schlichter and his mother tell the story of how the star quarterback for Ohio State lost his family, his NFL career and 10 years of his life in prison to a gambling addiction. In the end, the gaming industry, as it likes to be called, isn't really an industry at all. Gambling doesn't create wealth; it just redistributes wealth, mostly to the people who own the house. What does get spread around is misery and misfortune for Ohio families.

Public Policy Polling notes President Obama's approval rating with people who didn't vote for him is 14% and his disapproval rating with people who voted for him is 6%.

It's amazing to me that Republicans and Tea Baggers don't realize how badly they're losing.  They really believe that because they've got their own TV Network pandering to them that everyone thinks like they do. 

With the self identification with the Republican party now at 20% of the population, it is mathematically  Republians are losing and losing badly.

According to Americans the United States does not have the best health care in the world.

Most see our health care as average (32%) or below average (27%) when compared with health care in other industrialized countries.

Only 15% support the often-used political talking point that America has the best health care in the world; 23% say it is above average. Republicans (28%) are far more likely than Democrats (9%) or independents (12%) to say American health care is the best in the world, and conservative Republicans are even more pro American health care (66% say it is the best in the world or above average).

More wealthy Americans are also more supportive of American health care. While 50% of those earning an income of $100,000 or more say American health care is above average or the best in the world, more than six-in-ten in the three income groups earning less than $75,000 say it is average or below average.

Read More

The Toledo Blade posted an editorial this morning titled, "Low point for high court".

There has never been any doubt that the senator spends almost no time in the Kettering house he calls home for voting purposes. Equally sure was the prospect that the seven Republicans justices on Ohio's high court would find a way to back Mr. Husted's claim. In fact, they found two.

First, they said, the local election board didn't follow proper procedure for canceling Mr. Husted's voter registration. True or not, using a procedural technicality to skirt the main issue was a weasel's way out.

That "procedural technicality" in fact was a statement by the Supreme Court making it very clear from here on that existing Ohio voting laws and the procedures for canceling a voter's registration must be stringently followed and applied equally to all legally registered voters.

To grasp the significance of the 7-0 ruling of the Ohio Supreme Court one needs to read closely Secretary of State Brunner's statement which we published in full Tuesday night.

"The most important issue here is, "What does the law require of an individual to be eligible to vote from a location they claim to be their residence?" This is not just a question for Senator Husted but for students, campaign workers, incarcerated youth and homeless persons. This is never a decision to be taken lightly because of the importance of the right at stake.

I will follow the court’s guidance on this issue and advise the state's boards of elections accordingly. My decision was based on an appellate case involving a strikingly similar fact pattern to the Husted case. The outcome in the case I relied on was to strip an elected official of his right to vote. That this court has overturned the results of that decision will have an impact not for just elected officials but for many other Ohio individuals who have been denied voting rights or prosecuted for attempting to exercise them. To the extent that it took this kind of challenge to the law to change it, that is a good thing."

The Supreme Court's decision may have been a "win" for John Husted in his individual matter, but it's a phyrric victory at best as it strikes a serious blow to many of the ongoing Republican efforts to disenfranchise voters.

The Supreme Court ruling established in the Husted case, that the only way to challenge and ultimately cancel a voter's registration is by strict adherence to following these specific statutes:

The election statutes address the cancellation of a voter’s registration with specificity. R.C. 3503.21(C) provides that “[t]he registration of a registered elector shall not be canceled except as provided in this section, division (Q) of section 3501.05 of the Revised Code, division (C)(2) of section 3503.19 of the Revised Code, or division (C) of section 3503.24 of the Revised Code.”

First, this means no more intimidation of registered voters causing them to voluntarily give up their statutory right to vote in Ohio by prosecutors  as occurred in 2008 to the Vote From Home Group  by Franklin County Prosecutor Ron O'Brien spured on by Fox News.

Harassment of students by law enforcement as occurred in 2008 when Greene County Sheriff, Gene Fischer, tried to investigate and disenfranchise student voters should now end because again with the Husted ruling the Supreme Court has clearly stated that there is only one way to go about challenging a voter's registration in Ohio and that is by a Board of Elections and under a rather complex specific procedure to do so which is heavily weighted in favor of the voter's rights.

As the Secretary of State indicated in her statement, the rights of homeless people and incarcerated youth are no longer subject to different interpretations of the law as occurred across the state in 2008 and in addition to the strict procedures that must be followed in any proceeding to cancel a voters registration the Court established the precedent across the state that as to all residency based challenges the "voter's intent" holds the greatest weight in any determination. 

From the Court's decision:

Consequently, when the applicability of multiple sections leads to conflicting results, it cannot be shown by the heightened standard of clear and convincing evidence that the person is not a resident of that county and great weight must be accorded to the person’s claimed voting residence.

Again, this is a clear victory over potential challenges against, in particular students and the homeless (as well as for example those who have been foreclosed upon). 

The implications of the Husted decision will have impact on other "voter caging" strategies and  other potential methods of voter disenfranchisement. 

Republicans who desired in 2008 to remove voters from the rolls due to mismatches between BMV data and voter registration data are now instructed by the Supreme Court that no blanket disenfranchisement tactic can be applied in this state. 

From Husted on, any attempt to remove a voter from the rolls must go through and individual hearing at the appropriate County Board of Elections and when Republicans claim that a returned mailing is reason to remove a voter they will be thwarted by the specific statues that say no, this does not and cannot occur under the law in Ohio.

So thank you Ohio Supreme Court!  The implications of what some call a "partisan decision" in the Husted matter will have far reaching and positive implications for upholding the rights of all Ohio voters and for equal enforement of Ohio Voting laws for years to come which was the very reason ProgressOhio made our original complaint to the Montgomery County Board of Elections regarding Jon Husted.

• Voters disapprove 64% to 25% of the way Republicans in Congress are doing their job, with even 42% of Republican voters disapproving
• Only 29% think Republicans on Capitol Hill are acting in good faith
• Voters trust Obama more than Republicans 47% to 31% to handle health care
• By a 53% to 25% margin, voters have an unfavorable opinion of the Republican Party

Protect the constitution

THE Ohio Constitution describes the basic structure of state government. It was not intended to be used to give any business an exclusive right to operate. For that reason alone, voters should reject Issue 3 on Nov. 3.

Two firms, Pennsylvania-based Penn National Gaming and Rock Ventures LLC — owned by Michigan-based Dan Gilbert — are hoping that Ohio voters have been sufficiently frightened by the state’s continuing economic problems and double-digit unemployment rate to set aside their good sense by voting to give them the exclusive right to open casinos in Toledo, Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati. They also want to fix their own license fee and taxes, which would be lower than in some states that have allowed casino gambling, and set those in stone in the state constitution as well.

Of course, even if the tax rate were set at 100 percent, enshrining special favors for specific businesses in the Ohio Constitution would be a terrible idea. Not only is it foolish to clutter the document in this manner, it also makes no business sense to write a constitutional mandate to give any private company a monopoly to do business in the state. It would be like making it unconstitutional for any fast-food restaurant other than Burger King to serve french fries in Ohio.

Voters should also remember that the reason it is difficult to amend the state constitution is to avoid having short-term concerns or passions result in wholesale changes that harm the state in the long run. What is given away in haste, such as control over gambling, may be regretted at leisure.

Read The Full Editorial From The Toledo Blade

Healthcare reform is currently in the spotlight as a top issue as Congress begins debating various healthcare reform proposals. The 2009 Ohio Health Issues Poll asked Ohio adults their opinions about healthcare reform and elements that are likely to be part of various proposed healthcare reform plans.

Healthcare Reform is Important to Most Ohio Adults

In general, Ohio adults think that healthcare reform is important: 7 in 10 Ohio adults identified healthcare reform as a top priority (31%) or very important (39%) for the President and Congress to deal with in the next 12 months.

Larger percentages of young adults ages 18-29, African Americans, and Ohioans living below 100% of the federal poverty guidelines (FPG)1 than other demographic groups stated that healthcare reform is important in the next year.

Ohioans Consistently State that a Public Option Would Improve System

Some healthcare reform proposals include a public health insurance option, or an insurance plan offered by the federal government rather than a private insurance company.

Almost 7 in 10 Ohio adults (69%) stated in September that the option of an affordable public health plan that any American can opt into would improve our
current system. This is consistent with the June results, when just over 7 in 10 (73%) Ohioans thought a public plan would improve the system.

Even larger majorities of Ohioans who are African American (92%), uninsured (88%), ages 18-29 (85%), and living below 200% FPG1 (80%) thought that a public health plan would improve our current healthcare system.

1 in 3 Ohioans Go without Care

Twenty-nine percent (29%) of Ohioans reported that, in the last year, they or a member of their household delayed or went without needed medical care, 34% delayed or went without needed dental care, and 31% delayed filling or did not fill a needed prescription. In general in Ohio, as education and income increased, the percentage of respondents reporting that they went without care because of cost decreased.

These results are comparable to results from a national poll1 in which 31% of Americans reported that they or a member of their household put off getting needed health care, 35% skipped dental care or checkups, and 26% did not fill a prescription.

Today's Columbus Dispatch reports:

GOP warns of retaliation
Democrats told to be ready to defend own residency

It also appears unlikely that Brunner's ruling would affect Husted's mileage reimbursement. Payments are made once a week to legislators who live outside Franklin County.

Since 2005, Husted has claimed $13,236 worth of mileage, including more than $3,900 in 2008 at 50.5 cents per mile, for the 164-mile round trip between his Kettering house and the Statehouse.

The Upper Arlington house owned by Husted's wife is about 12 miles from the Statehouse.

"I go back and forth all the time," Husted said of travel to his district and his Kettering house. "It's the only house I own."

Asked about the mileage situation, Harris said each member has to be accountable for his or her own situation. "It's something we expect members to be straightforward and honest about."

The issue has never been looked at by the Joint Legislative Ethics Committee, which reviews allegations of improper use of state resources, said Legislative Inspector General Tony Bledsoe.

Ohio Legislators mileage reimbursements are codified under ORC 101.27 Compensation of members

(2) Each member shall receive a travel reimbursement per mile each way, at the same mileage rate allowed for the reimbursement of travel expenses of state agents as provided by rule of the director of budget and management pursuant to division (B) of section 126.31 of the Revised Code, for mileage not more than once a week during the session for travel incurred by a member from and to the member’s place of residence, by the most direct highway route of public travel to and from the seat of government, to be paid quarterly on the last day of March, June, September, and December of each year.

It's seems clear that this is set-up as a way to funnel additional income to the legislators without them having to readily account for it based on an assumption that they will be returning to their home districts every week the legislature is in session.

The House and Senate approve the new reimbursement each year, each  legislator says what his round-trip mileage is, they enter it into the record and bingo the payments come based on the mileage given, No mileage expense reports for each trip or any other documentation required.

No one could legally challenge a members rights to receive this extra income whether he or she ever returned to their residence in their district or not. 

But as it relates to the Husted residency matter, it's what Senate President Harris stated that's most interesting:

Asked about the mileage situation, Harris said each member has to be accountable for his or her own situation. "It's something we expect members to be straightforward and honest about."

I guess President Harris hasn't had the opportunity to review the utility records obtained by Secretary Brunner  which make it clear to even a casual observer that Jon Husted likely did not travel back and forth to his Kettering home once a week for extended periods of time in 2008.

Election 2010: Ohio Senate Race

Next year’s U.S. Senate race in Ohio is a neck-and-neck battle for Republican Rob Portman no matter which Democratic candidate he faces, according to the first Rasmussen Reports Election 2010 survey in the state.

Portman is in a virtual tie with Lieutenant Governor Lee Fisher 41% to 40%. Six percent (6%) of Ohio voters favor some other candidate, and 14% are undecided.

The former GOP congressman is also essentially even with Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, leading by a similarly insignificant 40% to 38% margin. Five percent (5%) prefer another candidate. Eighteen percent (18%) are not sure how they will vote in this race.

Read More of Rassmussen Reports Latest Poll

A CBS/New York Times poll released today shows widespread support for reforming the health insurance system – including an overwhelming number of people who favor a public health insurance option and other components included in the America’s Affordable Health Choices Act:

The poll also found that 56 percent are concerned that they will be without health insurance at some point in the future if the government does not provide a system of ensuring coverage for all Americans.

In addition, the poll released today found 64 percent of Americans believe Republicans are putting politics over policy and standing in the way of health care reform for political reasons.

The New York Times points out:

But the poll suggests that Mr. Obama is in a decidedly more commanding position than Republicans on this issue as Congressional negotiations move into final stages. Most Americans trust Mr. Obama more than Republicans to make the right decisions on the issue; 76 percent said Republicans had not even laid out a clear health care plan. And by a lopsided margin, respondents said that Mr. Obama and not Republicans had made an effort to cross party lines and strike a deal that has the support of both parties.

HT: The Gavel

There are some certainties about recent Ohio autumns.

Ohio’s budget is in peril. Jim Tressel loses to USC and USC then loses to a lesser opponent the next week. The Browns have a meaningless quarterback battle and the Bengals struggle to mute “Ochocinco.”

And like corporate Sumo wrestlers bent on spending consultant money, Ohio has another casino issue on the ballot.

In the past, ProgressOhio’s Board has stood on the sidelines, content to watch the behemoth corporate giants flail away at each other, like runaway Macy’s Thanksgiving Day balloons, banging up against New York streetlights.

But, for our Board, this year’s annual “sumo-walletfest” is different.

There are many reasons to vote “no” on Issue 3, a plan to allow full-blown casinos in four Ohio cities.

Here are three of the bigger ones:

1. In its first three years of legalized casino gambling, Atlantic City went from 50th in the country in per capita crime to first. Casinos bring more crime, which requires more police, which costs the taxpayers more money.
2. Today, the going rate for a casino license in America is between $300 million and $500 million – but Issue 3 would give away these lucrative Ohio monopolies for just $50 million. If casinos are going to increase our costs, shouldn’t they at least pay their own way?
3. Even if Issue 3 does bring some of the promised jobs and economic development, its fatal flaws include a loophole that would allow casinos to pay no taxes on wagers made in cash and another loophole that could ban charities from hosting “casino nights.’’