Ohio sales-tax boost touted by analyst

Among ideas for Ohio government survival until the recession ends, there is one that seems to me worth considering. It was put forth not by a government official, but by newspaper columnist.

Thomas Suddes, op-ed columnist for the Columbus Dispatch and a former legislative reporter for the Cleveland Plain Dealer, argues convincingly for a small, temporary sales-tax boost at this link.

Let's help Strickland during next election

Ohio governor Strickland's budget does not raise taxes but.. my God, check this out:

Ohioans will pay more to farm, drive, enjoy the outdoors, keep the environment clean and do business under Gov. Ted Strickland's proposed budget released Monday.

Strickland plans to balance his two-year $55 billion spending plan with help from increases in 120 state fees.

This guy needs help. Let's all give it to him next election.

Ending property tax cap would be dangerous

Property owners in Ohio may get rear-ended by a sneak attack from the state legislature. Apparently there is pressure coming from schools to lift the 1976 cap that keeps property taxes from rising when house prices rise.

Why this is dangerous and dumb is the subject of a column by Thomas Suddes in today's Dispatch - Democrats could be in for a shock if they touch property-tax cap

Suddes is, by the way, the most refreshing and intelligent of Dispatch columnists. Maybe that's because he isn't a staffer, but writes from Ohio University. To find his essay on the Dispatch web site you have to enter his name in the search box.

Anyway, his essay today exposes the seriousness of those protecting property from more tax by Big Brother: "Democrats like to claim that Social Security is the third rail in national politics: touch it, and you die. They might find out, and soon, that Ohio politics might have a third rail, too: property-tax caps."

We should test drivers for impairment, not for birthdays

An older driver went into the wall of McDonald's last week and it was her age, not her impairment (if any) that came under attack. Commentators to the Advocate report chirped about the need to remove older folks from the roadways.

As a 73-year-old driver with my first McDonald's wall - or anything else - yet to be hit with my car in 57 years behind the wheel, I'm pretty sure I can drive at least as well as any of those commenters. I have the added advantage, most of the time, of a 69-year-old wife yelling in my ear about approaching hazards, many of them thousands of feet away and most of them imaginary.

Old age itself does, I admit, eventually become an impairment and whenever I get penalized by age I fully intend to arrange for transportation by others. It will be a sad day, and I hope it will be many years from now, but I promise to peacefully submit my keys.

In the meantime I don't want to hear anymore crap about taking the keys of, or requiring special tests for, folks unfortunate enough to grow older.

What I do want to hear is about sensible laws in Ohio that identify and penalize impaired driving - by people of all ages.

Start with the definition of - and reliable tests for - driving while "impaired." Such a definition would include not what is in one's bloodstream, urine, or breath but instead a computerized measure of the driver's ability to think, control his body, react to emergencies, and read both speedometer and distant traffic signals.

As mentioned here yesterday, the present law measures only chemicals deemed to be "controlled substances" found in body fluids and breath. It ignores effects of medicine - prescription and otherwise - which slow you down, make you light-headed, make you pass out and even, fer God's sake, cause weird things such as "anal leakage." Having anal leakage while driving would surely impair anyone's ability concentrate or to steer in a straight line.

Meantime, there is a Nintendo gamester thing called Wii Fit, described by Business Week as "a sturdy board slightly larger than a bathroom scale, about an inch high, that communicates with the Wii console wirelessly. Players step onto the board, which senses their movements, balance, and center of gravity. Included software features dozens of activities based on strength training, aerobics, and yoga..."

Seems to me that if Nintendo can mass-produce a "game" that can do all that, Ohio lawmen can do better than make suspects blow into a tube or pee in a cup - poor excuses for tests that will get dangerous drivers off the road.

Textbook boondoggle in Columbus should be a warning for Newark

A bill introduced to Ohio legislature by Newark's own Jay Hottinger would wipe Ohio's anti-tobacco foundation off the map and liquidate its $270-million endowment from lawsuits against tobacco companies.

Thus would that money be available to Hottinger, Strickland and the rest of them to give away to businesses in what is being billed as a sure way to get "new jobs" for Ohio.

Here's how this move was described in part by "gentlben" in one of the reader comment sections: Ohio "joined a class action suit against the tobacco companies with other states because of the expense sick smokers were causing the state treasury. Part of the argument, which earned them all a nice annual cash settlement, was that if they win the suit, they would spend the cash award to reduce the impact of smoking in Ohio, thus reducing the amount of debt the state incurs becasue of it. So they win their suit, and millions of dollars yearly and what do they do with it? Throw it in the general fund, and now they will abolish the agency responsible for spending it as it was intended to be spent. Hm! Sounds like the same scam they pulled on us when they said lottery money would go to education."

If Ohio's governor and legislators are ballsie enough to pull this switcheroo on citizens they serve, what might one suppose Newark is going to do with the auto tag tax money being pushed by Mayor Diebold, Council Member Irene Kennedy, and some others to benefit street repairs?

Same boondoggle will be involved here, except the tag tax profits will not be nearly as easily traced as the state tobacco fund. The city purse on auto tags will eventually be folded over into the treasure chest that provides for more and bigger government. Diebold and Kennedy will fade away, but the tag tax will be ours to keep forever.

Hottinger: Take money from taxpayers, give it to businesses

State Representative Jay Hottinger has countered Governor Stickland's call to sell bonds "for new jobs" by urging, instead, more tax credits for business. His plan for sticking taxpayers again is written with a straight face in a column on the WCLT web site.

(I wrote about Strickland's plan 2/7/08 "Magic Nanny Strickland should cut government slop, not sell bonds")

Increasing tax credits for business is the same as raising taxes on citizens because state income is going to come from someone. Strickland's plan would borrow money today and let our grandchildren worry about how to pay it back.

Hottinger has problems with that because, well, it would take too long to get voter approval, get the bonds sold, get the spending party started. His plan would get the hogs to the trough quickly and wouldn't require that pesky voter approval.

Also - get this - Hottinger warns that "Given the cyclical nature of the economy, our state could have exited any recession we might find ourselves in by the time this (Strickland's) stimulus package goes into action."

In other words, if we don't stick taxpayers for more money quickly, we may not need it.

Our state representative would serve voters better by coming up with a plan to save money, not just another slight-of-hand to encourage political donations.

Ohio's governor did the responsible thing

Congratulations to Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland for cutting state spending to accommodate reduced income, and congratulations to the Cleveland Plain Dealer for its concise explanation of the forces at work.

The governor's reaction to lowered income should be instructive to politicians in Licking County and elsewhere: When you don't have the money to spend, you cut services and government employees. You do not further burden the already-over-burdened taxpayer by raising taxes. And you don't whine about it and send up balloons; you just do it because that's the responsible thing to do.

Senator Schaffer talks about his voting record

It has been observed among these observations that our state senator from Lancaster is virtually invisible in Newark. Since then, he's done a bit of self-revelation but nothing very informative.

A few days ago, however, Tim Schaffer provided the WCLT web site a column that tells of his voting activities, and for that he is to be commended.

Usually whenever we hear about the votes of our representatives to the state capitol, it has to do with only the feel-good bills.

Local media can't or won't report on anybody's votes outside the county unless its hand-fed to them as Tim did in his column. A crumb of knowledge about state government, but better than what we've been getting. Here's the link.

Unelected appointees spending tax money

Sending our tax money this way and that on questionable and/or wasteful projects is handled in this state, in large part, by unelected political appointees.

Dan Dodd, state representative from the 91st District, has written an essay about the folly of these practices, and you can read it at WCLT's web site.

Take a look at what you've done to public education

Nowhere is there a finer showcase for the depths to which public education has fallen than the Granville-Schools/Newark-Schools/Kraner-development argument about profits.

Money drives it. Who profits by how much is the point at issue.

There was a time - and I was fortunate enough to be a student back then - when teachers taught because they didn't mind being underpaid since they believed in the nobility of their mission. School administrators were judged on how well they could pinch pennies, not on the skill with which they milk taxpayers.

That today's schools would deal in students as though they are cattle going to market - as though they have price stickers attached to them - is simply incredible.

Educators - teachers, administrators, boards of education, state bureaucrats, legislators, college presidents and boards of trustees - should step back and observe the depths to which they've drug public education by focusing on its profitability.

Take a good look, and be ashamed.

Ohio must limit school spending

The Advocate yesterday wrote in the editorial column about a plan by an Ohio legislator in ensure increased spending on education.

Senator Schuring of Stark County would use fixed percentages from certain revenue sources. As these revenues increase, so would the amount of money going to schools. The Advocate likes the idea, as do I.

But the Advocate implies that this plan will relieve the property tax burden and the need for schools to sell their levies to voters.

I guarantee it will not. School administrator mentality doesn't work that way. When schools, like government itself, get more money they will spend it and want even more. More money coming from the state won't stop nor slow levies, not until there is a mandate to do so: a law that sets forth spending restrictions and caps on property taxes.

Such a mandate should become part of any new tax plan benefiting schools. Otherwise, nothing will change; just more and more from taxpayers to schools.

Ohio government at work: Probing ticket prices

If you care to read about a state legislator who is both shallow and impudent, read this piece in the Columbus Dispatch about Sen. Kearney from Cincinnati taking official action against high ticket prices for entertainment.

How insensitive can government become? Why not price gouging at the gas pump? Price gouging at the pharmacy? Price gouging at the hospital? Price gouging at the insurance agency? Price gouging at the doctor's office? Price gouging at the tax office? Just a few categories of price gouging for which government employees and policies are to blame. These are examples of price gouging for which people have no defense and no hope of help unless it comes from government.

This buffoon picks out price gouging on entertainment tickets - which nobody needs - about which to call for an investigation.

The more one learns about Ohio government the more cynical and disheartened one becomes. Maybe we in Licking County are lucky that Gannett all but ignores it.

On the other hand, if they didn't ignore it, maybe we'd have fewer buffoons.

Shall we buy another false sense of security?

The most certain way to riches is to invent something that plays on fear, then get the government to make people use it.

Such a maneuver is in the works by a company in Chargrin Falls which manufactures a device "that would warn people when a sex offender is approaching," according to an article in the Cincinnati Post.

Convicted sex offenders would be locked into a monitoring ankle bracelet equipped to set off vibrations in small devices to be carried by folks who want to be alerted when a predator approaches.

Fear of sexual predators creates a ready market. The idea is being pushed by Ohio Senator Tim Grendell, who chairs the state Judiciary Committee on Criminal Justice. He wants a law requiring the existing GPS ankle bracelets to be modified for this purpose.

But even a spokesman for the Cleveland Rape Crisis Center says it won't help because nine in 10 sex crime victims are assaulted by a person they know or trust. "This just plays on the great myths out there, such as the stranger danger myth that's not true," the newspaper quoted her as saying. "It's sending the wrong message and setting people up with a false sense of security."

She's right. Protection from predators should be provided by other family members, mostly moms and dads or guardians. Knowing where kids are and what they are doing and with whom would virtually wipe out this awful problem that has resulted from the breakdown of the family and the refusal of parents and relatives to be responsible.

I don't think legislators can remedy stupid and irresponsible parents; I'm also pretty sure these electronic gimmicks will do no more than make yet another company rich by giving it my tax money.

NRA's balls are outgrowing its musket

As a member of the National Rifle Association for many many years, I've spent many many dollars in defense of this country's Second Amendment. When you think about it, that is incredibly wasteful thing to have to do, considering the stupidity of anyone who questions The Second Amendment or tries to circumvent it.

It has been - and still is - necessary because there are multitudes of morons who don't "believe in it," many of whom are ensconced as journalists; morons who will destroy it if guys like me don't shell out to protect it. That's how stupid this country has become.

Likely the Second Amendment's existence depends on the NRA and it owes practically nothing to journalists. But that's no excuse for the NRA's attack on the First Amendment.

At issue is the absurd NRA-backed law passed by the Ohio legislature that gives concealed-carry licensees an exemption to the open records requirement based in the constitution.

Why these people are ashamed of their status as being licensed to carry a gun is totally beyond me. If they are that ashamed of it, then why don't they give it up? I hope to become qualified for one of these permits and I don't care who knows it. Even if I did understand their concern, it wouldn't matter to the case in point.

As explained in a recent Advocate editorial, the Ohio law allows only journalists, not just any citizen, the right to look at records of concealed-carry permits.

As the Advocate said, "when a journalist inspects the record of a concealed-carry permit holder, he can look at the information but not touch his pen, or press the 'record' button, to take notes." He has to memorize whatever he's after in those records, which would open the way for inaccuracies and little taste for publication of those memorized facts.

The Advocate says this law is unconstitutional and that's dead-on correct.

The NRA over-stepped its purpose and its scope in this matter and the legislature passed a law that is unconstitutional. It was totally unnecessary in protecting anything in the Second Amendment, and it's time for the Ohio legislators to put it right.

If they don't, the Advocate should put its money where its mouth is and force the issue in court.

Strickland's school-funding box

Among the things that appealed to voters about Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland were his promises to fix school funding. But, as the Columbus Dispatch made clear in a page-one article Sunday, he has not done squat, nor does he intend to.

"I'm not going to sit down and write out a plan," he said. "This is something that has to be developed, and it has to evolve and it has to be a result of consensus and building support for it."

The article makes mention of a "box" in which the Governor finds himself, but strangely never mentions what box or what the hang-up is.

Let me guess. The box is the certain knowledge that Ohioans are not going to approve yet another tax for government to spend on schools. This means that if there's a fix for school funding the state is going to have to make cuts in its bureaucracy and other non-essentials. That's the box, and so distasteful is it that Strickland can't even approach it.

But that's exactly what plagues school funding. It just isn't important enough, when measured beside the needs of bureaucracy.

Dogs may become Ohio's newest cash cow

Channel 10 reported 10/26/07 about a bill in the Ohio House that changes the definition of vicious dogs. It removes the mention of pit bulls from the Code. It also is the beginning of yet another tax on, and intrusion into the affairs of, dog owners. Here's the link.

What apparently went right by the media, so far, is this section:

"(B) Upon the transfer of ownership of any dog, the seller of the dog shall give the buyer a transfer of ownership certificate that shall be signed by the seller. The certificate shall contain the registration number of the dog, the name of the seller, and a brief description of the dog. Blank forms of the certificate may be obtained from the county auditor. A transfer of ownership shall be recorded by the auditor upon presentation of a transfer of ownership certificate that is signed by the former owner of a dog and that is accompanied by a fee of twenty-five cents."

The bill, which was introduced Thursday by Rep. Shawn Webster, R-Hamilton, can be read at this link.

Once adopted as an Ohio law, dogs will become just like cars. They will have registration numbers and the state will take a cut every time there is a transfer of ownership of a dog. At the beginning this "service" will cost 25 cents, and a great deal of time and effort. It will also require more layers of bureaucrats on your payroll to take care of all this make-work. And that means Ohio bureaucrats will ramp up the fee to feed the bureaucrats and turn dogs into yet another of the state's cash cows.

Ohio ranks No. 1 in air pollution, thanks to Ohio legislators

The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency is merely a disguise for Ohio polluters and it's time for the state legislature to step in and give it a new purpose: protecting the environment rather than protecting the polluters.

The shake-out of AEP's recent loss of a lawsuit over the company's air-pollution practices, filed in 1999, revealed that OEPA never got involved because it was supposedly too busy with other matters. Eight other states brought - and recently won - the suit against the nation's Number One polluting state, namely ours.

The astonishing facts were reported a few days ago by the Cincinnati Post. However, the article is no longer available at the Post web site, so I have archived it here.

Business as usual in Ohio, and so far there has been no major reaction, no demands to clean up the OEPA, no grandstanding politicians jumping all over this incredible breakdown in government fulfilling its purpose for being.

Apparently, AEP and other polluters are major shareholders in Ohio government. Until state legislators get off the "take" there will be no challenge by OEPA to our Number One rank for toxic air emissions.

Another screwing by Ohio law makers

A state law was designed in cahoots with benefactors and passed quietly that favors Ohio wineries in competition with out-of-state businesses - to the disadvantage of Ohio consumers. This is typical of how government screws the people it's supposed to protect. Not that it will change anything, but the legislators were - for a change - caught by the Columbus Dispatch. Read it here.

Ohio's Anti-First-Amendment Law

Ohio lawmakers have scored another big minus by creating a law that allows journalists to see certain public records, but not copy them.

Way to go, you legal sharpies at the state capitol.

The records in question are those with names of concealed-carry permit holders. The Dispatch published an article on it today. Here's the link.

The records are public records, not journalists' records, not NRA records.

And anyway, who cares that some of these people don't want to be identified as having state permission to carry a loaded gun? Who cares what the NRA wants, when it comes to stomping on the First Amendment, rather than the Second?

I fully intend to get one of these permits soon, and also maintain my NRA membership. I don't care who knows it and I don't see why anyone would.

This is another hypocritical Ohio law. Why aren't media raising hell? Where's Jay Hottinger when we need him?

For legal hypocrisy, Ohio is a winner

For proof of the rampant hypocrisy in the laws of Ohio, consider the 55-mph truck speed limit. It makes no sense and is never enforced. What IS that about anyway?

Notice how lawmakers have cornered the gambling-profits market. No games of chance for the private profiteer, only the government profiteers, thank you.

And booze. "State minimum prices" is the biggest laugh ever. What business has government to organize all booze merchants into legalized price-fixing? And then dictate what hours they may serve, just in case a few merchants don't get a profit advantage by working longer hours?

State government's prize cash cow is its confiscation of the market for hard booze, so that only government may grow really fat and silly on the profits therefrom.

Funny that these hypocrisies are never discussed, never come up for re-consideration. They just are, and apparently always will be.