State of the Union

Obama vs. Strickland

According the AP, President Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats wants to tax your income, your alcohol consumption, soda and sugary drink consumption as well as establish a national sales tax, entitled the “value-added tax.”

“House Democrats have lots of potential targets for higher taxes as they aim to expand health care coverage to reach the roughly 50 million that experts say are uninsured.

[…]

“[U]nder consideration are higher alcohol taxes, increases to the Medicare payroll tax and a value-added tax, a sort of national sales tax, of up to 1.5 percent or more.

[…]

“The tax options include:
• Increasing the price of soda and other sugary drinks by 10 cents a can.

• Applying a potential 2 percent income tax increase to single taxpayers earning more than $200,000 a year and households earning more than $250,000.

• A new employer payroll tax could target 3 percent of employers' health care expenditures.

• Taxing employer-provided health insurance benefits above certain levels — a less likely option but one that still is in the running.”

Meanwhile, back here in Ohio, Governor Ted Strickland speaks adamantly against a tax increase, saying repeatedly that it would be “counterproductive” in this economy.

“When asked whether that could include a tax increase, the governor replied, ‘A tax hike under these [economic] circumstances would be, in my judgment, counterproductive.’” [Columbus Dispatch, 11/12/08]

“Asked whether it was time to consider a tax increase, Strickland responded, ‘No. Because I think a tax hike, under these circumstances, could be counterproductive. And, so, I have maintained and continue to maintain that position.’” [Daily Record (Wooster), 12/2/08]

“Gov. Ted Strickland, a Democrat, said he did not put any tax increases into his budget proposal because they would make the economic recession worse. He did, however, put dozens of new fees and fee increases into the plan.” [Associated Press, 2/25/09]

“‘The governor does not believe a tax increase would be productive at a time that so many Ohioans are struggling,’ said Strickland spokeswoman Amanda Wurst.” [Associated Press, 2/25/09]

Strickland’s Fiscal Policy – Ask for forgiveness rather than permission

The Columbus Dispatch reported that Gov. Ted Strickland exercised his right to spend money that he doesn’t have, when he gave the OK for a law firm, working outside the realm of public records requests, to help develop his “top-secret” education plan. 

Strickland hired the law firm of Squire, Sanders & Dempsey (whose employees donated $29,525 to Strickland in ‘05 and ‘06) to serve as special counsel for the development of his evidence-based education plan.  The problem was that Strickland put the cart before the horse, and hired the firm BEFORE the Attorney General made the hiring official.

The Columbus law firm helping to develop Gov. Ted Strickland's school-funding proposal had already run up a bill of $49,275 before it received written authorization to do the job.

But, as they say in the infomercials, “wait there’s more…”.  The billing came just shy of the $50,000 threshold to trigger the public approval of the State Controlling Board.  Not to mention that $40,000 of the bill was billed late… after the December approval had been signed-off on.

Then-Attorney General Nancy H. Rogers signed the paperwork officially hiring Squire, Sanders & Dempsey as special counsel on the governor's proposal on Dec. 5 and 31, 2008. By then, the law firm's bills had almost reached the $50,000 threshold that would have required the Strickland administration to obtain approval from the State Controlling Board, a bipartisan legislative spending panel.

[…]

Gregory W. Stype, a lawyer with the firm who performed much of the work, said he recently became aware that the $40,142 bill for November had not been submitted for payment due to an "oversight."

A conspiracy theorist could, by these circumstances, surmise that in Strickland’s crusade to keep the lid on his education plan, he did whatever he could to reduce the paper trail.  Could it be that Strickland purposely kept the billing below the controlling board threshold so as to keep quiet about hiring an outside law firm?  Could it be that Strickland arranged with the law firm to wait until after the signed approval to submit their billing? 

Much like the quandary of the number of licks it takes to get to the tootsie roll center of a tootsie pop, “the world may never know.”

Strickland’s Experiment-ication

In what sounded like a metaphor for his own education proposal, Gov. Ted Strickland recently told a group of Miami University students of the importance of experimentation in education:

“[Using technology in the classroom is] so needed, but change is threatening,” Strickland said. “It’s safer to conform. It’s safer to not experiment, because you might fail. And you will fail. That idea of conformity ... is deadly to education.”

Surrounded by idealist college students, Strickland was of course able to soften his tone on education reform and utilize terms like “experiment.”  Curious though, how different Strickland’s tone was when addressing the Ohio General Assembly for the 2009 State of the State in which he unveiled his “top-secret” education plan.  Note his emphasis on assuredness in the “best research” and how Strickland sounds as if there are no flaws in his education plan:

I’ve met with parents, educators, researchers, business and community leaders.  I’ve looked at the best research available on what we should teach and how we should teach it.  And in the last few months I’ve benefited from the considerable experience and wisdom of Ohio’s new Superintendent of Public Instruction Deborah Delisle.

[…]

The plan is based on a very simple premise: we should design our education system around what works. I have embraced an evidence-based education approach that harnesses research results and applies those findings to Ohio’s specific circumstances.

Could it be that Strickland’s mask briefly came off and he admitted that his education plan is nothing more than an over-priced experiment?

The Cost of a New Home Just Got More Expensive… Thanks Ted Strickland

According to the Columbus Dispatch environmentalists have warned that Ohio could lose out on millions of federal stimulus dollars if we don’t adopt stricter environmental building codes set by the federal government. Gov. Strickland, all too gleefully, promised the feds that Ohio would adopt those standards.  So we can rest assured that we are getting more of our one-time handout. 

The catch, however, is that home builders estimate that these changes could add as much as $5,000 to the cost of a new home. 

So when Ohio is in the midst of Ohio’s “unprecedented economic challenges,” Ohioans will have to pay more for their homes.  When you purchase your next home and you seen those additional costs, thank Ted Strickland and his inability to tackle tough issues in the face of being handed short-term dollars and more bureaucracy from his pals in Washington.

The Sign Says It All

Strickland’s Office Banks on the Economy Going Backwards

In Sunday’s Columbus Dispatch, Strickland spokeswoman, Amanda Wurst, tried to rebut the astute analysis that Strickland’s education plan is not sustainable and his numbers are grossly miscalculated. So, her brilliant response: who knows what will happen to the economy down the road, “[w]e could very well see deflation in the next 10 years.”

Does this mean that the governor’s office is banking on a shrinking economy to reduce the costs of its education plan?  Wouldn’t deflation also mean that with the reduced costs of his education plan, there would be a relative reduction in the state’s budget?

The last time we checked, deflation, or a general reduction in the economy, is considered a bad thing.

This is just another example of Strickland’s people showing their lack of understanding for basic economics and accounting?

Bold Education Reform! (So long as it doesn’t anger my supporters)

Critics have pointed out Ted Strickland’s plan to hold an education rally with US Education Secretary Arne Duncan that was blatantly planned around the Ohio Education Association’s Columbus meeting:

“Some critics of Gov. Ted Strickland's education plan are accusing the governor of holding a rally Friday in support of his plan with U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan outside the Schottenstein Center at Ohio State because the Ohio Education Association also is holding an event there this week.

“The critics point out that the OEA, which supports the governor, is promoting the rally on its Web site and even is holding a recess from its Spring Representative Assembly for members to participate in the rally. The suggestion is that Strickland is trying ensure a big, friendly crowd.” [Columbus Dispatch’s The Daily Briefing Blog, 5/5/09]

Strickland’s latest political ploy to promote his education plan shouldn’t come as a surprise.  This is just another instance where Strickland bows to organized labor when making his “bold” decisions.  As Tom Suddes aptly pointed out in a recent editorial, Strickland’s education plan for change “doesn’t really rankle teachers’ unions.” 

“In fairness, Strickland's plan does offer some real change, but it'd be change that doesn't really rankle teachers' unions. That speaks volumes.” [Editorial by Thomas Suddes, 4/12/09]

Going back through the archives one easily finds more evidence of Strickland’s slobbering, bought-and-paid-for, love affair with the teachers unions.  Strickland once told the Ohio Education Association “there’s no way” we would have remained in Congress had it not been for them:

“Earlier yesterday, Mr. Strickland addressed the Ohio Education Association in Columbus at the organization's statewide representative assembly. Mr. Strickland, a former member of the organization, said the group was key in several of his congressional elections. ‘He said point blank: There's no way he would have been able to do it for 12 years in Congress had it not been for us,’ said Deidra Reese, the association's director of government services. ‘We helped him win, we put him over the top in several elections. He's very committed to us.’” [Toledo Blade, 5/6/06]

In his political, Strickland has received more than $162,000 through teachers unions.

Strickland Praises GOP on Education Funding

On Monday, Gov. Ted Strickland gave praise to the GOP who worked hard over the last several years to pragmatically correct Ohio’s school funding mess. 

In his remarks to the Columbus Metropolitan Club about his school funding plan, Strickland pointed out that education funding in Ohio had increased by 47 percent from 1999 – 2008 (years of a GOP-controlled legislature and governor’s office).  Strickland followed up his point by admitting that his plan won’t match that same funding-level increase – noting that his plan will only increase funding over the next decade by 45 percent.

“In fact, from 1999 to 2008, the state increased its investment in primary and secondary education by 47 percent. With the plan before the legislature now, we will build on those investments by making a commitment to increase funding by an additional 45 percent in the decade ahead.” (Remarks by Gov. Ted Strickland, Columbus Metropolitan Club, 5/4/09)

Who Really Cares About Future Budgets? Well, at One Point Strickland Did

If Doc Brown pulled up in front of the statehouse, driving his souped-up time-traveling DeLorean, and offered Ted Strickland a glimpse at Ohio’s budget future – would he take it?

Probably not. 

In this week’s Columbus Dispatch, Strickland said that we need to be focused on the here-and-now and wonders why there is “such incredible interest in the 2012-2013 budget.”

“‘I am puzzled that there is such incredible interest in the 2012-2013 budget when we ought to be focusing on trying to deal constructively with the problems that exist now,’ the governor said last week.”

This was not the case when Strickland offered up his first budget two years ago.  The, then curious, governor provided four year budget projections, which his budget director gloated about:

“Two years ago, state Budget Director J. Pari Sabety bragged to lawmakers that ‘for the first time in Ohio history, this executive budget has projected revenues and expenses for the next four years.’ Republicans have noticed that the four-year projection does not exist in this budget -- further fueling speculation that the budget can be sustained only for the next two years, just enough to carry Strickland through re-election in 2010.”

What's Another $622 Million in Spending...

The Associated Press reports that the House Dems' version of the budget adds $622 million in "new spending on top of the governor's plan."

"The changes pushed by Democrats amount to $91 million in additional spending from their first revision of Strickland's budget. In all, the changes would result in about $622 million in new spending on top of the governor's plan."

Looks like the mound of debt that the Dems are kicking down the road, just got bigger.