NO-NO-NO-NO-NO on Ohio Issues 1,2,3,4,5: Great Synopsis of Why to Oppose Each One

Due to computer constraints, I was planning to hold a more detailed look at my opposition to these issues until next week.

But thanks to “WILL duRANT IV,” who forwarded the following e-mail, said to be from Diana Fessler, State Representative, 79th District, Ohio House of Representatives, there’s little left to say.

It’s that good:

State Representative Advocates Against Ballot Issues 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Voters are being asked to approve five draconian amendments to the Ohio Constitution. Much is at risk if the amendments pass: 1) the free market system; 2) voting integrity; 3) campaign finance, 4) district boundaries, and 5) supervision of elections.

Issue 1 is an expansion of Taft’s Third Frontier Initiative. Thus far, $325 million has been shelled out to just 64 companies that employ a total of only 454 people; that’s $5 million per company and over $700,000 per job. If the amendment passes, the state will borrow $2 billion to fund risky business ventures that the governor and two appointees choose to favor. Taxpayers must repay the $2 billion plus $1.8 billion in interest and debt service.

The proposed amendment also negates the current requirement that tax revenue be spent only for the purpose for which it was collected.

Proponents are hawking this amendment as a way to create jobs and fund public works projects. However, the existing money for such projects hasn’t been spent so adding more money isn’t necessary.

Issue 2 would make it convenient for people to vote by absentee or provisional ballot but opens a huge door for voter fraud. This amendment is unnecessary; the General Assembly recently passed a bill to make voting easier, but with ID, to reduce the opportunity for fraud.

Issue 3 is designed to limit individual campaign contributions. Yet, “small donor action committees,” primarily the offspring of labor unions, would be permitted to give unlimited amounts of union dues, from anywhere in the country, to favored candidates without identifying contributors.

Issue 4 seeks to change how voting districts are drawn. Districts would be drawn using a formula that could create a bizarre district stretching from Troy to Cleveland. The map that scores the highest, with minor deviations, must be accepted by the committee, regardless of logic or compactness – even if submitted by a non-Ohioan.

Issue 5 attempts to transfer duties of the secretary of state to an unelected nine-person board. A four-to-four vote would leave the ultimate decision in the hands of one appointee. Election duties have been competently handled by both Democrat and Republican secretaries of state and local boards of elections for generations, yet proponents of this amendment want to hand this important work to an appointed board.

Please join me in voting NO on these issues.

Diana Fessler
State Representative, 79th District
Ohio House of Representatives

This is a great dissection of these issues and why they should be opposed. It checks out against the research I have done. A copy of Ms. Fessler’s e-mail will be moved to the top of this blog on Monday and Tuesday of Election Week.

Pass it on.