1729 Ohio should vote
NO on Tuesday there's a bunch of incomprehensible issues on the ballot--called 2,3,4,and 5. They address absentee voting rules (Issue 2), campaign finance laws (Issue 3), the drawing of legislative boundaries (Issue 4) and replacing the Ohio secretary of state with an appointed board (Issue 5). The liberal organizations are supporting this wholeheartedly. They are still mad that Bush won Ohio by 180,000 votes last November. Still think he stole the election. The voice over ads on TV and radio say absolutely nothing, on both sides. Here's how Richard Finan sees it: • Issue 2 would allow more people to vote before the election but contains not one provision to assure voters that those votes are protected from fraud. In fact, in combination, Issues 2 and 5 obliterate Supreme Court rulings, Ohio attorneys general opinions and secretary of state policies that have protected the integrity of the vote in Ohio for generations.
• Issue 3 would limit the dollar amount people could give to candidates but would allow special interests never-before-imagined opportunities to stuff secondhand money into campaigns. For example, while it would prohibit Ohio’s employers from making political contributions, it would allow millionaires, such as Jerry Springer, the 2004 Democratic man of the year, to spend his own money unchecked for his promised campaign.
• Issue 4 would snatch the vote out of the hands of Ohioans while replacing that vote with a board of bureaucrats sealed off from the public. Ohioans have in every decade since 1970 thrown the rascals out, when they wearied of a party or its leaders. It is hard to believe that Ohio voters do not relish this power or that, as some reformers have said, are too easily tricked into misusing it.
Then comes Issue 5, which would remove the secretary of state as Ohio’s chief elections officer. That job, performed by dozens of different Democratic and Republican elected officials for generations, would be handed over to another appointed board. The board would mean more full-time state jobs and benefits for bureaucrats. The bureaucrats would set their own salaries, vacations and staffing needs, and taxpayers would get the bill."
• Issue 3 would limit the dollar amount people could give to candidates but would allow special interests never-before-imagined opportunities to stuff secondhand money into campaigns. For example, while it would prohibit Ohio’s employers from making political contributions, it would allow millionaires, such as Jerry Springer, the 2004 Democratic man of the year, to spend his own money unchecked for his promised campaign.
• Issue 4 would snatch the vote out of the hands of Ohioans while replacing that vote with a board of bureaucrats sealed off from the public. Ohioans have in every decade since 1970 thrown the rascals out, when they wearied of a party or its leaders. It is hard to believe that Ohio voters do not relish this power or that, as some reformers have said, are too easily tricked into misusing it.
Then comes Issue 5, which would remove the secretary of state as Ohio’s chief elections officer. That job, performed by dozens of different Democratic and Republican elected officials for generations, would be handed over to another appointed board. The board would mean more full-time state jobs and benefits for bureaucrats. The bureaucrats would set their own salaries, vacations and staffing needs, and taxpayers would get the bill."
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment