Medina County Dem News

(Medina County Democratic Action Committee)MEDINA COUNTY DEM EVENTS

Mike Todd for State Senate Tailgate Party-October 28

The Todd for Ohio campaign is proud to announce the first of a series of "Todd Tailgates" has been scheduled for October 28th. The event will take place at Dirty Cowboys, on Medina Road in Medina Township, from 11 AM to 1 PM. Tickets are 25 dollars and include two free drinks (soft drinks or beer), with food, fun and entertainment. After the event, Mike Todd welcomes all attendees to stay to join him in watching the Cleveland Browns beat the St. Louis Rams.

The Todd Tailgates are a series of casual, fun events, which will serve to bring together people to have a good time and feel the excitement building behind Mike Todd's campaign for the Ohio State Senate. They will be taking place throughout the 22nd District in conjunction with major sporting events from now through the 2008 general election. These events bring together people from all walks of life, including those who don't normally attend "political" events, to enjoy a good social atmosphere and meet Mike Todd.

Tickets are available in advance by contacting the campaign.

SELECTED ITEMS FROM THE MCDAC BLOG

S-CHIP Veto Override Fails; Regula Votes to Override; Fight Goes On

The House failed today, October 18, 2007, to override Bubble-Boy's veto of the S-CHIP bill. Congressman Ralph Regula, R-OH13, voted to override, as did another retiring GOP House member Deborah Pryce, R-OH15. Although the override was not successful, the fight will continue.

This is from an article that appeared on the Washington Post's website shortly after the override attempt failed:

Having stood with Bush against a bill that had overwhelming public support, GOP leaders urged Democrats to come to the table with a scaled-down version. But Democratic leaders were leaning toward a new version that would give Republicans face-saving alterations but no substantive change.

Pelosi said she was determined to provide the resources to ensure that 10 million more children would be added to the rolls.

Democratic leaders suggested they could add legislative language to nullify Republican lines of attack. They would clarify that the program would not cover families with incomes over 300 percent of the federal poverty level, about $60,000 for a family of four. And they would tighten language to ensure the children of illegal immigrants could not receive benefits.

Republicans sent signals that the gambit just might work, if not with the president then with balking House members. Much of their protests on the bill focused on allegations that a loophole in the bill could allow 174,000 non-citizens to gain benefits.

Rep. Nathan Deal (R-Ga.) suggested adding an eligibility cap on families with at least $1 million of family assets, a move that would have virtually no impact on the bill's cost. Four moderate Republicans sent Pelosi a letter outlining what they thought could win passage, including a cap at 300 percent of the poverty level, a phasing out of eligibility for some adults and an expressed prohibition on illegal immigrants.

"The modifications needed are relatively modest," said Rep. Heather Wilson (R-N.M.).

And that is likely all the GOP will get. Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, pointed out that House Democrats had given up plenty already, scaling back their far more ambitious bill to meet the demands of Senate Republicans, such as Orrin Hatch (Utah) and Charles E. Grassley (Iowa), who virtually dictated the final bill's parameters.

"We have gone 50 percent of the way," Rangel said. "You have no idea of the pain that [House Energy and Commerce] Chairman [John] Dingell, and I and Speaker Pelosi had when we were persuaded that it was either the bipartisan agreement of the Senate, or we wouldn't be able to get a bill on the floor. It was painful, and we lost votes, and we were charged with selling out."

Republicans will not relish the next round of the fight. Swing-district GOP lawmakers have already weathered a barrage of advertisements from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and Democratic allies, accusing them of forsaking the nation's children while standing by the president's war in Iraq.

It will be interesting to see how many GOP members will continue to stick with their radical, right-wing leadership and Bush and how many will decide that compromise is the best of all virtues. Our predication is that by the end of the year a bill will be passed over Bush's veto that is much closer to the Democratic version than to the Bush version.

Different Attitudes About Illegal Immigration in the U.S.

CNN did a poll about American attitude toward illegal immigration and found out that there is a noticeable racial attitude toward illegal immigrants between blacks and whites. This is from a report on the poll:

Blacks and whites differed over whether the number of illegal immigrants should be increased, with 14 percent of African-Americans saying it should, versus 3 percent of whites.

Nineteen percent of blacks said they thought all illegal immigrants should be removed from the country; 35 percent of whites said that.

Blacks and whites overwhelmingly oppose state governments issuing driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, with 76 percent of blacks and 83 percent of whites taking that stance, the poll said.

The races differed more on whether state and local police should turn over illegal immigrants they encounter, even if the immigrants have broken no state or local laws. In such cases, 45 percent of blacks and 61 percent of whites said they believe police should turn over illegal immigrants.

Asked whether people who cannot read or write English should be allowed to vote, 54 percent of blacks said they should, versus 43 percent of whites.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 eliminated voting barriers such as a literacy test.

The only area in which there was close to agreement was on the issue of drivers' licenses being issued to illegal immigrants where the spread was seven percentage points.

What is also interesting about this poll were the answers to the question about whether there should be more or fewer illegal immigrants. Here is a quote from the poll:

Seven percent of those polled said they would like to see the number of illegal immigrants increase, 22 percent said they would like the number to remain the same, 16 percent want it decreased "a little" and 22 percent want it decreased "a lot," according to the poll of 1,212 adult Americans

Now, if you add up the above figures, you only get 67% expressing an opinion on the subject of whether they wanted a change in the number of illegal immigrants. That would apparently mean that about 33% had no opinion. Given all the media attention on the subject of illegal immigrants, that's suprising.

Ohioans Want Renewable Energy, Republican State Senator Gets Sarcastic

The Cleveland Plain Dealer ran an article dated October 13, 2007, on a poll that was taken for a group called Environment Ohio on whether Ohioans would support Ohio setting a requirement that energy suppliers get a certain percentage of their energy from renewable sources. According to the article, this was the result:

The support for renewable energy cut across political lines. For example, 71 percent of Republicans and 76 percent of Democrats said they would support a renewable standard.

Support for the standard was just as high in rural areas, 80 percent; small towns, 81 percent, as in large cities, 84 percent.

By a nine-to-one margin, those surveyed said their legislator's support of a renewable energy standard would be a positive in their vote decision.

More than 90 percent said they would be willing to pay more for green energy, with more than a third saying they would be willing to pay an extra $10 per month.

Not surprisingly, a Republican State Senator, Robert Spada of North Royalton, didn't like the result. Here is a quote from the article:

After a skeptical committee member Sen. Robert Spada, a North Royalton Republican, sarcastically asked whether the poll was a survey of "your members," Bowser told the committee that Public Opinion Strategies, "the largest Republican polling firm in the nation," conducted the telephone survey.

This is very typical of how a lot of Republicans react to information that they don't want to hear. Instead of debating the merits of renewable energy, the Republican response is to try and belittle the person bringing them the information. It doesn't matter whether the issue is the environment, the Iraq War, health insurance for children, just to name a few, the response is always the same: don't debate the issue on the merits, go after the person or organization supplying the information.

If you want to know why nothing gets done on the pressing issues facing our country, the answer lies in the fact that the leaders of one of the two major political parties that run our government is comprised on people who apparently can't handle or process information they don't like.

Republicans Unite Against Hillary

Instead of defining themselves by explaining to Republican voters why they should be elected, the Republican candidates have decided that they will attack Hillary Clinton. While this may be a great tactic to unite the approximately 30% of the public that calls themselves Republicans, it is a stupid tactic in the long run. It isn't enough to be against something, you have to be for something in order to be elected.

The problem that the Republican candidaes have is that most of the public doesn't want what they stand for, a radical, right-wing agenda that calls for endless war in the Middle East, more dependence on oil instead of renewable energy, reckless tax cuts that add to the national debt, and allowing health insurance companies to control the nation's healthcare.

Ultimately the election for president will boil down to one Democrat versus one Republican. When that happens things will be a lot different. It won't be enough to just appeal to the base of either party. If the Democratic nominee is Hillary Clinton, the attacks of her will be relentless. They may or may not work, but this is one thing we do know, Hillary Clinton will fight back.

More National Guard Units Going to Iraq

The Huffington Post has an article from the Associated Press that reports that more National Guard units are headed to either Iraq or Afghanistan. According to the article, there will be a total of eight units with seven going to Iraq and one going to Afghanistan. They are being deployed to reduce the strain on the regular Army units that are assigned to either Iraq or Afghanistan. Apparently none of these units will come from Ohio. This is from the article:

Specific brigades were not identified, but they will include units from North Carolina, Oklahoma, Illinois and Hawaii, according to officials. Some of those being alerted this week have done tours in the war zone already, and others would be going for the first time.

Bush & Right-Wing Radical Republicans Don't Want to Fund S-CHIP at Current Levels

The Washington Post ran an article that was dated Wednesday, October 17, 2007 that was in a question and answer format about the State Children's Health Insurance Program. This particular question and answer is very important:

Q: How much additional money, on top of the $5 billion-a-year baseline funding, is needed to preserve the same size program over the next five years?

A: Keeping the program at current levels would require expanding funding by about $13.4 billion over five years, for total funding of $38.4 billion between 2008 to 2012, according to a CBO report in May. Part of the reason is rising medical costs. President Bush has proposed a $5 billion expansion, for total program funding of $30 billion over the next five years. He has said he might be willing to go higher. The bill Bush vetoed would increase funding by $35 billion over the five years, for a program total of $60 billion. Ultimately, it would cover 10 million people.

In other words Bush and the heartless, right-wing radical Republicans who control the Republican Party aren't willing to even fund the program at current levels. Democrats need to stress this point. They also need to come back with a funding proposal for about 18 months that raises the funding by an amount necessary to keep the coverage the same. It would actually be a lower cost than what Bush is requesting, because it would only cover children to the end of the Bush Administration, and a veto of that bill would be very hard for Republicans to defend.

Bush Sinks to Record Low in Reuters/Zogby Poll

A new poll out by Reuters and the John Zogby polling firm shows that Bush is at an approval rate of only 24%, going below his previous low of 29%. That's the good news. The bad news is that the approval rate for the Democratic controlled Congress is at 11%, tying the record low of September. Here's how John Zogby puts it:

"There is a real question among Americans now about how relevant this government is to them," pollster John Zogby said. "They tell us they want action on health care, education, the war and immigration, but they don't believe they are going to get it."

The dismal assessment of the Republican president and the Democratic-controlled Congress follows another month of inconclusive political battles over a future path in Iraq and the recent Bush veto of an expansion of the program providing insurance for poor children.

The article quotes Zogby as saying that these record low numbers for both Congress and the President pose a problem for both parties. This is how he puts it:

Voter turnout could still be high next year, but the mood has turned against incumbents and into a 'throw the bums out' mindset," Zogby said.

While Zogby maybe overstating the impact on Democrats given that the President is far and away the most prominent political office in the country, he has a good point. Most Americans don't follow the ins and outs of political battles. They want government to work and their problems addressed. On the one hand, except possibly for immigration, the other issues he mentions favor Democrats and a progressive approach to government. On the other hand, Bush's obstructing of the Democrats' agenda could be paying benefits because it stops Democrats from getting anything done.

Democrats need to do a much better job of communicating to voters who is responsible for the gridlock in D.C. They should be running ads in newspapers on how Bush is vetoing the children's health insurance bill while seeking billions more for the Iraq War. Ads like those would make an impact and help set the record straight on which political party is refusing to address the real needs of ordinary Americans.

And This Guy Wants to be Speaker of the Ohio House?

Jill Miller Zimon of the blog Writes Like She Talks first brought this to our attention. Matt Dolan wants to be Speaker of the Ohio House. He is giving money to his Republican colleagues hoping that they will elect him Speaker over State Representative Bill Batchelder of Medina County.

Okay, so we will admit to a bias here. Our position is that if a Republican has to be Speaker of the Ohio House, we would like it to be Bill Batchelder. One reason is that while he is conservative, he is very competent. Batchelder wouldn't pull a stunt like this one by Dolan.

Last spring Dolan pushed for a bill that would allow consumers to buy out-of-state wine from wineries in places like Napa Valley and Sonoma. He was pushing this bill to comply with a ruling from the United States Supreme Court. Something happened, however, in the Senate. It was changed so that only wineries that produce under 63,000 cases of wine a year can ship directly to Ohio consumers. The more than 100 Ohio wineries fall under that threshold, but big out of state wineries do not.

How did this happen? Listen to the explanation from Dolan:

"It was not supposed to apply to consumers," Rep. Matthew Dolan, a Russell Township Republican and chairman of the House Finance Committee, said Tuesday. "When it came back from the Senate, I probably didn't read it as closely as I should have." The above quote is from an article in the Cleveland Plain Dealer dated September 25, 2007.

Look our point isn't that this is a bad bill from a policy standpoint or a philosophical standpoint. Our point is that if you want to be Speaker of the House, you ought to know what is going on with legislation you think is important. If you can't follow your own bills, how are you going to follow all the important pieces of legislation in the House?

Richest One Percent of Americans Getting Richer

Reuters news service ran an article dated Friday, October 12, 2007 about a Wall Street Journal report that "[T]he richest one percent of Americans earned a postwar record of 21.2 percent of all income in 2005, up from 19 percent a year earlier..." This is a post World War II high. Meanwhile f"ortunes of the bottom 50 percent of Americans are worsening, with that group earning 12.8 percent of all income in 2005, down from 13.4 percent the year before..." So after six complete years of the Bush Administration the top 1% of Americans have 8.4% more income than the bottom 50%. When asked about this gap Bush attributed the difference to a "skills gaps" among the various classes.

Well, how about the fact that we have an income tax system that taxes investment income at a much lower rate than income from labor? How about the fact that Social Security taxes are regressive and not progressive and stop at around $90,000 or so in income? How about the fact that George W. Bush and his allies have done everything they could do to make sure that government isn't available to help those who are at the bottom of the income scale and have everything they could to help those at the top? Gee, George, do you think that your policies could have something to do with the growing inequality in America?

Study Shows that More Access to Birth Control Means Fewer Abortions

A study has been released by the World Health Organization and the Guttmacher Institute that went from 1995 to 2003 finds that abortions are fewer in countries where they are legal and birth control is easily accessible. In Western Europe there are 12 abortions per 1000 live births, but in North America the rate is 21 per 1000. In countries where the procedure is outlawed, the abortion rate is higher, including 39 per 1000 in Eastern Africa and 33 per 1000 in South America.

This shows that the efforts of the Clinton Administration to make abortion "safe, legal, and rare" may be the best way to lower the number of abortions. Easy access to birth control is one way to make sure that there are fewer abortions.

The sad thing is, however, that too many "pro-life" groups don't want to make access to birth control easier, they want to make it harder. What motivates such groups is a belief that the power of the State should be used to discourage sex outside of marriage. In the real world, however, people don't seem to be having less sex outside of marriage. Therefore, what society should be doing is making it easier to access birth control and educating people about birth control so there will be a need for fewer and fewer abortions.

Bush and his Phony Vetoes

There is an article out on Saturday, October 13, 2007, by the Associated Press on how Bush wants a budget fight with Congress now that it is controlled by Democrats. When Congress was controlled by Republicans and they were running up deficits Bush couldn't bring himself to veto a spending bill. Now, however, that Democrats control the Congress he wants a veto fight to show that Republicans are really, despite their miserable record, fiscal conservatives.

This is really, like a lot of what Bush does, phony. If he and his Republicans cohorts were really interested in fiscal responsibility they wouldn't have pushed through his reckless tax cuts of 2001 and 2003. If he was really interested in holding down government spending, he would have vetoed bills that were passed by the Republican Congresses earlier in his tenure as president. The fact that he waits until he has a Congress that is controlled by Democrats to get fiscal religion is just one more example of the essential phoniness of George W. Bush. It goes along with his fake cowboy routine with his ranch down in Texas and his warlike rhetoric that hides his masculine insecurities.

Here are some items that Bush wants in the budget: Cuts in programs that provide job training, low-income housing and grants to community groups that help the poor, as well as grants to state and local governments.

Here are some things he wants in the budget: More money for the Pentagon, not counting the cost of the war in Iraq.

Where a person puts his or her money reveals a lot about their priorities in life. Bush wants more money for war and less money for people.

Other articles from the MCDAC blog can be read at http://www.mcdac.blogspot.com

The MCDAC Newsletter is published by the
Medina County Democratic Action Committee
Joyce V. Kimbler, Treasurer
P.O. Box 1213
Medina, OH 44258
Email: joycekimbler@medinacountydemocraticactioncommittee.org
On the World Wide Web at http://www.mcdac.org