OHIO: Issue 1 (Repub Gov. Taft's baby) went down tonight... interesting

[ShaneGR]

Issue 1, designed to benefit investment in science and technology at Ohio's Universities, went down HARD here in Ohio. I must admit, I don't understand why. I think it has something to do with Taft's lack of credibility in the state. Any other Ohio DU'ers want to comment?

http://election.sos.state.oh.us/default.aspx

[Starpass]

1. Well, I'm not from Ohio but

any god-fearing, good, right wing Christian would vote agains science, techology and public universities 'cause they don't cotton to no smart stuff, thinking and godless public education. Lived for 45 years in the midwest and unfortunately places that really were bastions of good education have fallen prey to these illiterate scum. You may have just had a hit by them---it's been showing up all over the place when voters are asked to invest in and improve education.

[ShaneGR]

3. Well, you must understand. that this was expected to win with 70%

There was no opposition to it. None. But it still lost. I'm not sure why, though I suspect this is an anti-Repug vote.

[cmd]

2. Taft has messed up everything he has touched

The issue as seen by voters was not investment in science and technology at universities but bankrolling private industry by insuring their investments.

[ShaneGR]

4. Good take on it....

That would bode well for 04.

[ThirdWheelLegend]

5. because it was a sham

to benefit the wealthy and tax the rest.

to be blunt...

It was based on GUARANTEED bonds up to 500 million dollars that would be paid for by taxpayers.

this is from the cleveland free times this week:

http://www.freetimes.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=484

"If you listen to the proponents of Issue One, including Governor Bob Taft, it sounds almost too good to be true. They say it will create 30,000 jobs across Ohio by generating new investment in Ohio's high-tech industry - such as biotechnology, fuel cells and advanced manufacturing - and it will accomplish this without any new taxes. What could possibly be bad about that? Plenty.

First of all, this amendment to the Ohio Constitution would allow for up to $500 million in bonds to be issued, which would be guaranteed by the state of Ohio - meaning they would have to be repaid with general revenue funds, possibly at the expense of state funds needed for more critical services.

Second, a three-person committee, whose members are unknown, would be responsible for selecting which projects would be funded, thereby overriding current constitutional protections against state and local governments investing public tax dollars in private companies.

Finally, since legislation governing the rules of this bond plan hasn't yet been passed, the Ohio legislature would be given broad authority to establish whatever rules it wishes to implement it - after the election. Call it a new $500 million slush fund.

Issue One puts too many critical services at risk by taking too much public money and putting it into private (politically connected?) companies. It puts too much power in the hands of three appointees, and it allows the Ohio Legislature - dominated by downstate Republicans - to have too much say in how this project is implemented.

So vote "no" on Issue One It's too good to be true and could be very bad for Ohio."


I voted NO today.

TWL

[ShaneGR]

6. Cool, now I understand

thanks for the synopsis link. Appreciate it.

[cmd]

7. Thank you, I was looking for that link

I also voted no.

[lovedems]

8. There are apparently some very smart voters in Ohio!

They read between the rethuglican lines and got the truth! Now, if we could get the 50% who think this pResident is doing a fine job to follow your lead, we would kick ass!

[rexcat]

9. Simply put it was another tax in disguise

for Ohioans. Big business paid out a lot of money to support this issue. That made me suspicious of the issue. Why would these companies want the issue to pass other than getting cheap loans from the taxpayers of the State. On top of that any high tech company who came to Ohio could get the money on the cheap and when they failed the taxpayers would be stuck with the tab. I am all for high tech companies but not at the expense of the taxpayers. Why should we subsidize businesses any more than we do (considering the big tax abatements they already get).

[Lady President]

10. So much miscommunication

The commercials for Issue 1 were impossible to believe. They made it sound as if technical jobs and training would be available at no cost to the people. People in both parties knew that this couldn't be true, but there was no consensus on how funding would really work. Some Reps. vote against it because they thought it was a welfare type of program. Dems. thought it nothing but an additional tax with no promise of creating jobs.

Even Taft admitted that "the uncertain economy led to its defeat."

http://www.10tv.com/news/archive/110403local6380.php?story=110403local6380

[rexcat]

12. All of the money spent on this issue was from the pro-issue side

the groups who did not support the issue spent $0.00 for ads. It just shows what a bad idea this was.

[VolcanoJen]

11. I am SO encouraged that Issue 1 failed!!

Aren't we glad we voted today???? :D :D :D

Here's the Cincinnati Enquirer's wrap-up article:

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2003/11/04/loc_issue1final.html

It was a strange issue argument. I didn't see a single opposition ad, yet local Dems AND Repugs were outspoken against it. The thought of the state of Ohio risking our tax dollars (in deferred interest, never brought up in the "pro" ads) by owning and investing in companies directly made me shudder.

In my opinion, though, the Enquirer sums up the best reason as to its failure:

Issue 1 opponents, including a handful of conservative GOP lawmakers, their allies, and groups representing farmers, argued that there was no reliable way to predict how many jobs the Third Frontier would create.

They also pointed out that while Issue 1 wouldn't raise tax rates, it would cost taxpayers at least $63 million in interest to pay off the $500 million in bonds.