Thursday, November 10, 2011

Both parties lose in Ohio, Who will learn?

On Tuesday, Ohio had a few hotly contested referendum questions. The two big ones were issues 2 and 3. With regards to Issue 2, the voters rejected Senate Bill 5 61% to 39%. With regards to issue 3, Ohioans rejected HealthCare mandates by an even greater margin, 66% to 34% (with a majority in all 88 counties to boot.)
To an extent, yesterday’s results provided a contrast between and campaign run by the grass roots and a campaign run by the party hacks. On the Conservative side, Tea Partiers won big, but the establishment did not. While we did get help from Moderates, Conservative Democrats and Independents on Issue 3, both the campaign to put the question on the ballot and the campaign was managed and lead by grass roots Tea Partiers and Coffeeites. The victory almost speaks for itself.
To be sure, Issue 2was quite a challenge, the Unions gathered big bucks and damaged lawn of the Yes side. However, party head quarters should have know what they were dealing with. They should have excited Conservatives in order to gain volunteers and they should have given people in the various counties pamphlets and brochures to pass out to their neighbors way back in the summer time instead of waiting until the end of September or October.

Despite living in a Blue Union county, were Democrats out-number Republican, I helped organize a successful signature drive for my county and helped out a bit with a neighboring county for Issue 3. For Issue 2, despite the Yes side barely getting 30% in my county, the Yes side had more than 40% of the vote, beating the statewide average. My children and I also delivered pamphlets in a few other precincts. The Yes side had no problem clearing the 40% mark in those precincts as well. So the idea that I was too blame for the statewide loss (as pointed out by an anonymous poster) is laughable. As a grass roots person, I did my part. Hopefully next time we will get more help from the swells who run the show in our State capitol.

In fairness to our great governor, Mr. Kasich, he respected the will of the voters and he will look for other ways to help continue to balance the book and promote good service. Whether the rest of the leaders of the party get pull their pants up and get their act together for next time remains to be seen.

The Democrats have not learned from their defeat, they do not respect the will of the voters and they will go to court in order to force mandates on Ohioans. Hopefully, the Republicans will eventually learn from Tuesday’s results unlike the Democrats. The Party establishment constantly whines and complains about Tea Party candidates while failing to come up with better alternatives. After watching two campaigns unfold side by side in the same state, it now appears clear that the establishment is not any better at leading and organizing campaigns than grass roots are. Hopefully, the party elite will put aside their arrogance and co-operate with the people. This will help avoid losses in the future.

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Romney2012!!

Anonymous said...

the same as the previous one : Mitt Romney is the man for the job in these days. Go Mitt, Go !

Ohio JOE said...

So Romney fan do not want to sign in. Interesting.

Anonymous said...

OJ, I wonder who these people are? Grass roots activity is very important, but sometimes lacks direction. Good thing for your efforts. I hope the mandates Ohio won't allow include the mandate that everyone will pay for the healthcare of whoever happens to show up in the ER that day. Not being able to deny health care to people who have been irresponsible is a serious problem. Too many freeloaders break the camel's back. Not to mention encouraging illegal immigrants and others. Ask my neighbor, who is a paramedic in Mesa, how people work the system to get free healthcare. He said they will call an ambulance for a kid with an ear infection and fill their prescriptions through the hospital pharmacy so everything is "free."

AZ

Anonymous said...

Sorry, I was referring to the anonymous commenters when I said I wonder who they are.

AZ

Ohio JOE said...

Well AZ, you bring up an important point about freeloaders. There are two kind of freeloaders. Those who need help due to their current economic situation and those that essentially intentionally rip off the system. Not to be smart, but we have opportunities to be free-loaders almost everyday.

I could take paper clips and pens home from work so I do not have to buy any myself. I could pretend that my children are less fortunately and send them to the playground for a free lunch, I can ask Children's Services to give my children Christmas presents, I can hide some of my income and get food stamps (yes that would be dishonest and fraud,) I could go to a pot luck dinner and not bring food. I could sneak on a city bus without buying a ticket.

Now most of these examples sound silly relatively speaking and their are checks and balances in place to reduce fraud. Though unfortunately we will not reduce fraud completely. Frankly, most of us do not feedload on a serious level because we feel guilty and ashamed. However, I realize that there is a segment of society that has not guilt or shame.

Ohio JOE said...

Whether it be, OH, MA or AZ, we will be stuck with having to bail out those free-loaders who are down on their luck. What to do about the segment of society who take advantage of the system is a more serious question. It seems a no-brainer to me to mandate that people pay their rent, mortgages and other bills. However, forcing people to buy health insurance and Life insurance is more sticky. While we have the moral right to make people pay for goods and services that they request, we really do not have the moral right to force people to buy certain items or to patronize certain companies.

Yes, freeloading is a problem, but I for one am quite leery on a practical level to sacrifice my freedom and to receive cumbersome government regulations just to punish a few free-loaders. Yes, the segment of society cost us a lot of money, but government regulations will indirectly end up costing us at least as much money while costing us our freedoms as well.

Anonymous said...

OJ,

I agree with your assessment of freeloading and the divisions between them. Unfortunately, people say they can't afford health insurance but take a trip to Hawaii every year. Then they get diagnosed with cancer or have a pre-term baby or numerous other EXTREMELY expensive health problems, and I am required to pay for it. Now, I don't get the Hawaiian vacations, and I end up with someone else's expenses. Not only is it constricting my freedom, but it is completely wrong.

Mitt's original proposal was to have people post a bond if they had money but didn't want to purchase health insurance. I'm not really sure how this works, but I do believe there may be other alternatives to mandates to purchase insurance. However, we can't have the debate if too many segments of the population are putting their fingers in their ears and singing, "la, la, la" without paying attention to the problems and the real costs associated with guaranteeing medical care to everyone.

Your point about the expense of gov't regulation and enforcement is well taken. I will have to consider that in the future as I ponder this matter.

AZ