Twelve days ago, the U.S. Audit Bureau of Circulations reported that the latest count of average weekday circulation of 379 daily newspapers fell 10.6 percent from the same period in 2008. But the carnage was worse in Cincinnati, where the Enquirer’s average daily circulation from Monday through Friday fell 12.8 percent, to 168,511. Sunday circulation fell 5.5 percent to 257,857.

A year ago, the Enquirer was boasting weekday circulation of 193,343, a number padded by former Cincinnati/Kentucky Post subscribers who had nowhere else to go. That windfall is now gone, and the Enquirer is left to attract paying customers on its own merits. Based on the 24,832 subscribers who dropped the paper in the past year (or died or moved), those merits don’t appear to be worth paying for. Doubtless most people view the paper free on its Web site.

But even there, the Enquirer is a shadow of a news provider. Coping with the economic downturn of the past two years, the Enquirer and its corporate owner, Gannett Inc., chose the salvaging of profit margins over preservation of product quality. The resulting buyouts and firings of reporters and editors left the paper without an editorial page editor, a local columnist, an obituary writer, a cartoonist, its CinWeekly staff and any semblance of investigative reporting ability.

With fewer newsroom workers, the paper opened its doors to “stories” submitted by readers, an invitation taken up mainly by public relations types giddy about publishing their press releases without meddling by pesky editors. Other workers have quit on their own, most recently the ubiquitous Kentucky politics reporter, Pat Crowley, former Kentucky columnist and Cincymoms editor Karen Gutierrez, sports writer Dustin Dow and former medical writer Tim Bonfield.

Candidates in the recent City Council elections have noticed how the Enquirer has the feel of a struggling auto parts plant in Flint. One City Council candidate appearing before the paper’s editorial “board” said the only board members present were the paper’s two lone editorial writers. Neither publisher Margaret Buchanan nor top editor Tom Callinan bothered to show. Since the Enquirer issued endorsements in the Council race, it makes one wonder if the visit to 312 Elm even mattered.

Is it really “participatory democracy” when one guy keeps announcing potential petition drives before taking a vote of his organization?  Is it really “participatory democracy” when only one game in town monopolizes decisions about what issues get pursued?  Or, is the Cincinnati NAACP really turning into what its detractors have long claimed—a system by which Smitherman advances his own political career (perhaps to move up in the statewide organization).  Smitherman has proposed 4 referenda in the 3 days following the election.  If he keeps up at this pace, he is on track for 486 by the November 2010 election. The citations are hyperlinked below in the cited dates. 

“I really think that privatizing sanitation or charging a $250 tax to city residents is the wrong direction for Cincinnati. It looks like a great 2010 referendum issue,” Smitherman says. (11/6/09)

“But he’s confident that, with Winburn’s election, there will be at least five members on the new council who would oppose a tax on stock options “as a competitive job killer in the city.” The city hasn’t taxed stock options since 1998, but the idea has resurfaced in recent years as deficits rise. It was last proposed in 2004 by then-councilman Chris Smitherman. Now, as president of the Cincinnati NAACP, Smitherman has talked about floating a voter referendum on the issue. (11/6/09)

“If City Council and the Mayor even think about a $200 million Streetcar the Cincinnati NAACP will launch another petition drive,” Smitherman says. The Cincinnati NAACP gives special thanks to Legal Redress Chair of the Cincinnati NAACP, Attorney Chris Finney. (11/4/09)

The Cincinnati NAACP is confident that the organization will collect enough signatures to place the Mayor Recall Provision on the ballot in November 2010. Smitherman says. “The petition will be available for citizens to sign as early as the Black Family Reunion which is August 14-16, 2009.”  The Cincinnati NAACP will continue to excercise its constituional right to petition government. (8/5/09)

“As Congress works to resolve lingering concerns over abortion in healthcare legislation, we believe it is important not to lose sight of the fact that health care reform is a pro-life cause,” said Sr. Nancy Bramlage, a Sister of Charity from Cincinnati. “We are working hard to get healthcare coverage for everyone, including pregnant women and their families. As a pro-life Catholic, I believe access to pre- and post-natal care is an urgent moral priority.”

With a premature birth rate higher than the national average, about 17 percent, Cincinnati families are in particular need of reform that extends health care benefits to pregnant women.  Affordable health care for America means there will be fewer premature births, which in turn strengthens families and communities.

“The Catholic social tradition teaches that health care is a fundamental human right,” said Stephanie Beck Borden, a parishioner at St. Robert Bellarmine Chapel in Cincinnati. “We believe society has the responsibility to make sure everyone has a chance to make the most of their lives, especially those most in need. The current state of the economy means that more men and women are struggling to decide between putting food on the table and going to the doctor. America’s poor and working families need healthcare reform now, and they can’t afford to have it derailed.”

To see the ad visit: http://cincinnati.com/sponsors/centercommunitychange/proof.html

###

The Campaign for Community Change ensures that the needs of low-income people and communities of color are heard loud and clear in Washington, DC and is part of Health Care for American Now! http://www.campaignforcommunities.org.

Catholics United is a non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to promoting the message of justice and the common good found at the heart of the Catholic Social Tradition. This is accomplished through online advocacy and educational activities. For more information, visit http://www.catholics-united.org.

Peter Bronson certainly turned up the hate after the recent school board elections.  In an election round-up blog post, he puts me on full blast—so viciously one must wonder what I’ve ever done to him.  Perhaps it relates to the national exposure I brought to his total lack of professionalism after he published a doctored photo and presented it as real.  Read more about that situation here.  You can see our coverage was quickly picked up by national media watchdogs, too.

From Bronson’s blog (please note the irony in his posting of a personal attack, while claiming I post personal attacks):

Finally: I don’t hate anyone. I don’t wish misfortunte on anyone. But I was not even slightly disappointed to see that Jason Haap finished almost dead last in the race for school board. The Enquirer’s editorial that complimented Haap was one of the most irresponsible, clueless things I have seen in that paper and I have seen a lot. Everyone in the blogging community knows Haap is has delusions of media grandeur. In this campaign, he apparently tried to take credit for another candidate’s proposals. Typical. And if this unendorsement sounds too harsh, it is just a hair on the back of Haap’s vicious attack-dog blogs and hateful personal attacks.

Thinking back on the situation where Bronson published a doctored photo as if it were real, I must say it was one of the most irresponsible, clueless things I’ve seen—and I have seen a lot.  Everyone in the media community knows Bronson suffers delusions of media grandeur (even vanity-publishing his own books from the self-owned “Chili Dog Press”).  And if these statements sound too harsh, they are just a hair on the back of Bronson’s irresponsible media attacks, where he would spread lies about Sen. Al Franken on the basis of a fake photo.  Talk about vicious attack-dog blogs and hateful personal attacks!

In reaction to the sit-in in Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office, the Weiner Amendment for single payer health care is back on the agenda. It is likely that we will have the historic first-ever vote for single payer health care on the House Floor tomorrow. Contact Congressman Steve Driehaus and tell him to support Medicare-for-all (everybody in, nobody out).

According to this study, 7 of 10 Ohioans believe a public option would benefit the healthcare system and 1 in 3 Ohioans go without needed care. Not surprisingly 4 of 5 of Driehaus’ biggest individual contributors are CEOs or lobbyist in the healthcare industry.

Driehaus is still deciding if he supports a public option and he has the nerve to say he’s “pro-life”. He’s obviously very confused and needs for people that believe that every American deserves health care to explain to him that he can either save lives or he can continue to allow his corporate campaign contributors to say Pay or Die!

Please contact Congressman Steve Driehaus and tell him to support the Weiner Amendment for Single Payer and cover all Americans in a fiscally responsible way. 

Washington, D.C. Website: http://driehaus.house.gov/

Washington, D.C. Webmail: https://forms.house.gov/driehaus/webforms/issue_subscribe.htm

Washington, D.C. Address
408 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-2216
Fax: 202-225-3012

District Address
441 Vine Street
Suite 3003
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Phone: 513-684-2723
Fax: 513-421-8722

If you are interested in participating in a sit-in please contact me at 513-929-9220

You can watch today’s sit-in in Sen. Joe Lieberman’s office.

This luncheon forum takes place at 12 noon on Thursday November 12th, Christ Church Cathedral Undercroft, 318 East Fourth Street.

Although the federal law of 1990 laid the groundwork for a society that is more user friendly for people with disabilities, numerous barriers still exist. The lack of employment opportunities remains a huge problem, and people with disabilities confront a 70 percent plus jobless rate. Housing and transportation still loom as major barriers, and a lack of inclusion still is evident in many social activities including worship. Harris and Eamoe will lead other panel members and the Forum attendees in a dialogue aimed at creating a local agenda for progress in this area. 

Come join us for this Forum, and do bring a friend. Lunch can be purchased for $5.00, or you can bring a brown bag. In terms of parking, the razing of the old garage eliminates the free parking voucher. People can park at the 303 Broadway Building (Third Street and Broadway) for a reduced hourly rate between 11:00a.m. and 2:00p.m. You can only use the Broadway entrance.

Two specific points that I have heard from these groups is that the U.S should implement “common sense reforms” including allowing insurance companies to sell coverage across state lines and passing tort reform. You can hear these points discussed at the recent “We Surround You” event that I covered on Fountain Square here in Downtown Cincinnati.

Yesterday, House Republicans had their health care reform bill (which contained many of these so-called “common sense reforms”) scored by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and it wasn’t a pretty story.

From an LA Times report:

...the CBO analysis also concluded that under the GOP plan, 52 million nonelderly Americans would have no insurance in 2019—even more than the 50 million in 2010. By comparison, the House Democratic bill would reduce the number of nonelderly Americans without coverage to around 18 million over the next decade.

The GOP bill is an amalgam of market-oriented measures that would limit medical malpractice lawsuits, expand the use of tax-sheltered medical savings accounts, let people shop for insurance outside of their own states, and make it easier for small businesses and hard-to-insure people to get coverage. The ideas reflect conservatives’ suspicion of sweeping new programs, federal spending and additional regulation.

Unlike the Democratic plan, it does not include subsidies or other provisions that would make coverage more affordable to people of modest means.

“What we’ve learned over many, many years is that the reason people don’t have insurance is that they can’t afford it,” said Drew Altman, president of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, an nonpartisan health policy research group. “You can’t make much progress toward helping the uninsured unless you help them buy it.”

Ezra Klein helps to break down what this means:

The Democratic bill, in other words, covers 12 times as many people and saves $36 billion more than the Republican plan. And amazingly, the Democratic bill has already been through three committees and a merger process. It’s already been shown to interest groups and advocacy organizations and industry stakeholders. It’s already made its compromises with reality. It’s already been through the legislative sausage grinder. And yet it saves more money and covers more people than the blank-slate alternative proposed by John Boehner and the House Republicans. The Democrats, constrained by reality, produced a far better plan than Boehner, who was constrained solely by his political imagination and legislative skill.

This is a major embarrassment for the Republicans. It’s one thing to keep your cards close to your chest. Republicans are in the minority, after all, and their plan stands no chance of passage. It’s another to lay them out on the table and show everyone that you have no hand, and aren’t even totally sure how to play the game. The Democratic plan isn’t perfect, but in comparison, it’s looking astonishingly good.

This is cross posted here.

The statement went on to offer kind words for the author of Issue 9’s convoluted language:  “The Cincinnati NAACP gives special thanks to Legal Redress Chair of the Cincinnati NAACP, Attorney Chris Finney.”

What’s unclear is the degree to which streetcar opponents will once again wish to team with Smitherman/Finney.  Doing so might poison public perception about any new drive as just a vindictive attempt to stymie City development from two sore losers.

Then again, Smitherman’s ability to get his membership to collect tons of signatures for free might prove too tempting for any group seeking to place something on the ballot.  These days, the local NAACP is the only game in town when it comes to that kind of grassroots footwork.

Word on the street has it that anti-streetcar advocates are already gearing up for the next phase of their opposition.  And without a clear message paired with the defeat of Issue 9, the pro-streetcar crowd might not have the momentum they thought they had with regards to growing support for that particular project.

Will the anti-streetcar side mount another petition drive?  If so, would that prevent the City, again, from moving forward until the results of another election came through?  Further, can activists derail city projects simply from mounting petition drives?  In other words, at what point does the city move forward, despite a petition drive, as it’s possible to always be working on a petition drive?

If they haven’t already, it might be time for the pro-streetcar side to regroup and rethink a cohesive message that stays on point.  But this is even more true for their opponents, whose convoluted ballot language contributed to the convoluted public discussions that led to Issue 9’s defeat.

Join the Intercommunity Justice and Peace Center, Sigma Gamma Rho Sorority and the XU Peace Studies Committee on November 9th from 6-8pm at the Kelley Auditorium in Alter Hall at Xavier. (Middle Eastern food will be served beginning at 5:30pm.

For more information, contact IJPC at 513-579-8547.

Their Mural image is also featured in the latest edition of Streetvibes. Please pick up a copy and stay informed.

Guest post by Brad Thomas.

1. Deception — proponents of Issue 9 want Cincinnatians to believe that we’re voting on the Streetcar. Not true.  We’re voting a Charter Amendment that, if passed, would prevent our City from expending any monies for right-of-way acquisition or construction improvements for any form of passenger rail without first holding an election for each and every expenditure regardless of dollar amount.  The proponents won’t tell you that this Amendment would negatively impact Union Terminal (Amtrak train is passenger rail), the Cincinnati Zoo (Safari Train is passenger rail), and would require that Cincinnati hold an election before we could participate in the State of Ohio’s High Speed Rail project connecting Cleveland-Columbus-Cincinnati.

2. Anti-Commerce, Economically Uncompetitive — if passed, Cincinnati will be the ONLY City in America (sad, but true) that amended its version of the Constitution with this restrictive language.  At a time when the Federal and State governments are pursuing major passenger rail projects and allocating dollars that can only be used for transportation, Cincinnati will be an uncompetitive position.  Do we really think the Feds and State will wait for Cincinnati to hold an election?  OKI recently expressed their concern relative to delays and the impact on timely funding applications.

3. Massive, Broad Based Support for ‘No on 9′ — when is the last time all business groups (Chambers, 3CDC, Cincinnati Business Committee), Unions (AFL-CIO, Pipefitters, etc), good governance (League of Women Voters, Cincinnatus), Republicans (Sen. Seitz, Council Member Ghiz, Former Sen.’s Aronoff & Finan, Bill Cunningham, etc), Democrats (Governor Strickland, Mayor Mallory, Sen. Eric Kearney), Charterites (Council Members Bortz & Qualls), Judges (Mark Painter, Nathaniel Jones)…all were in agreement?  No on 9.

It’s important that voters understand the truth about the issue 9.

Guest article by Councilmember Greg Harris.

I was appalled when I read recently of the US Chamber of Commerce basic denial of global warming.  In June 2009, the Chamber submitted a challenge to an EPA report that concluded carbon dioxide is a hazard to human health. In its response, the US Chamber insists that there exists “profound and wide-ranging scientific uncertainties” about climate change and its impacts on human health is “vehemently controverted among scientists and technicians of numerous stripes.”

Some US Chamber conclusions are startling in their stupidity, including their claim that global warming is not as harmful as some would think because humans have more access to air-conditioning.  In the US Chamber’s words:  “Humans have become less susceptible to the effects of heat due to a combination of adaptations, particularly air conditioning.  The availability of air conditioning is expected to continue to increase.”

Fortunately, many corporations objected to the US Chamber’s arachaic views.  The country’s largest electric utility, Exelon, quit the Chamber, as did California’s largest utility PG&E and New Mexico utility PNM.  Nike resigned from the Chamber Board of Directors, issuing the statement:  “Nike believes US businesses must advocate for aggressive climate change legislation and that the United States needs to move rapidly into a sustainable economy to remain competitive and ensure continued economic growth. As we’ve stated, we fundamentally disagree with the US Chamber of Commerce on the issue of climate change and their recent action challenging the EPA is inconsistent with our view that climate change is an issue in need of urgent action.”

So what does this have to do with Cincinnati?

Unfortunately, like its mother ship, the Greater Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce is taking an aggressive, anti-environmental posture.  In its March 24th newsletter, Currents, the Cincinnati Chamber warns about President Obama’s cap-and-trade legislation designed to reduce carbon emissions:  “Businesses will soon confront new and different environmental challenges …. ‘Carbon reduction’ will be written into all aspects of public policy - from agriculture to transportation to power generation to appliances.”  The Cincinnati Chamber then announces that opostion to cap-and-trade will define its federal advocacy, while oppostion to Cincinnati’s “Environmental Justice” legislation would define its local advocacy.

As such, the Chamber announced that “as part of the effort to work with City Council on an EJ Ordinance that promotes cleaner air and doesn’t impair the business community, the Government Affairs staff has been meeting with Council members individually to express the Chamber’s concerns.”  The Chamber’s advocacy team—led by a recently departed City employee who immediately turned around to lobby the city on behalf of her new employer—waged an intensive lobbying campaign to oppose the Environmental Justice (EJ) Ordinance.  The EJ Ordinance also dominated many Chamber City Council candidate interviews, including mine, where I was grilled for over an hour for my support of the EJ Ordinance.  The Chamber also made support of the EJ Ordinance a primary condition of its ranking of City Council candidates in its scorecard.  In my efforts to raise funds for my campaign, I’ve since been told repeatedly by business people that I would not get contributions due to my support for EJ.  Ironically, few of these businesses would be impacted at all by EJ.

Two councilmembers who received the Chamber’s top rating often brag about this on the campaign trail.  Well, this isn’t something I’d brag too much about when considering Cincinnati’s air quality is very poor.  The Amercian Lung Association rates our air 7th dirtiest in the country.  Extra dirty air requires extra protection.  Now that EJ has passed, specific types of industries that are disporportionate polluters will require extra scrutiny if they are to do business in our city.   

EJ is limited in scope.  In fact, most categories of businesses and construction are exempt from the environmental justice review, including office buildings, residential developments and most commercial projects. Reviews only apply to those neighborhoods with disproportionate air quality problems, defined as “environmental justice communities,” and a one-mile radius around them. This includes neighborhoods like Winton Terrace and Spring Grove, surrounded by a county landfill and nearly 40 chemical factories and industrial manufacturers. Lower Price Hill is another “EJ community,” with over 20 industrial neighbors, a municipal sewer district, a company that cleans industrial waste barrels, and a federal Superfund site. These communities suffer from disproportionate cancer and asthma rates, upper respiratory ailments, seizures in adults and children, learning disabilities, lead poisoning, ear problems related to sinus infections, and spontaneous abortions.

I am not asking Duke Energy to do locally what three energy companies did nationally and resign from the Greater Cincinnati Chamber in principled opposition to its anti-environemtnal stands.  But I am asking these kinds of companies to understand that when they talk to me, they need to balance their bottom line mentality with a broader udnerstanding of public health and environmental quality.

Most Chamber members do not live in the City of Cincinnati, and I don’t know if any live in Winton Terrace or Lower Price Hill.  But I suspect if the Chamber had taken a good faith look into the facts and conditions surrounding these neighborhoods, then perhaps its perspective might find balance.  The neighborhoods that have borne a disproportionate burden from polluting industries are also disproportionately poor and voiceless in the political process.  I am one public servant who will refuse to allow neighborhoods like these to continue to be bullied.

I believe the Chamber is a critical stakeholder in Cincinnati.  But it is not the stakeholder.  I think the Greater Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce need also consider how being a clean, green city might bode well for Cincinnati.  The talent class we want to attract to our city will be more inclined to reside here because of our significant environmental progress. Cincinnati is currently expanding its network of bike trails and parks.  We are leading the nation in LEED certified architecture.  Our Office of Environmental Quality (the favorite whipping boy of the Chamber’s top rated rated councilmembers) is paying for itself many times over through its energy efficiency programs and the grants it is bringing to our community to create a Green Cincinnati.  The EJ Ordinance, combined with these efforts, is helping Cincinnati to emerge globally as a city that gets it on the environment.

I am proud to have voted for the EJ Ordinance.  I will work diligently to ensure it is executed intelligently.  In my part of town (Price Hill), we have kids with 30% higher asthma rates.  CSX runs its Chlorine tankers right through populated areas because it would cost them a little more to re-route.  You the taxpayer foot the bill for the public health costs of dirty air and environemtnal calamity.  You won’t read about environmental degradation and public health in the Chamber’s newsletter.  But you will read about these matters in my newsletter.  Questioning scientific consensus in order to serve short-term bottom line profit motives is a regressive posture that is antithetical to the need for Cincinati to emerge as a progressive city.  I firmly believe that we can have a healthy economy and healthy citizens.  I am proud to have voted for the EJ Ordinance.  I will work diligently to ensure it is executed intelligently. 

The great Roman Senator Cicero once said, “Freedom is participation in power”. Ask yourself how free are you by that measuring stick?

Every 4th of July you’ll hear that we have the greatest democracy in the world and those great American words of how Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth. But we also have opponents of democracy argue that this “a representative government” and if you don’t like the policies those in power have chosen for us simply elect other candidates that represent your views.

This argument is deeply flawed on many levels because by the time of the next election, the bad decisions have usually already been enacted and it ignores the huge advantages of incumbency and support from wealthy campaign contributors-a small percentage of which give the majority of campaign donations in every election cycle.

For instance, in 2007 Hamilton County Commissioners Todd Portune and David Pepper imposed a regressive sales tax to build a new jail one year after voters had voted down a smaller tax to build a jail. Did “we the people” stutter?

In 2009 Commissioner Pepper still isn’t up for election and he is now seeking a higher office. Commissioner Portune was up for reelection and won. Not only did he have the power of incumbency and plenty of corporate cash, but the Democrats and Republicans made a backroom deal where the two Commission seats wouldn’t be challenged by endorsed candidates. This isn’t uncommon.

During the 2007 jail debate voters were told that dangerous criminals would be let out on the street and that the buildings were falling down. Voters were skeptical of such claims and rejected the regressive tax. It turns out that violent criminals weren’t released and the walls of buildings are not falling down. (The sky didn’t fall either).

I would argue that increasingly we are seeing how Will Rogers got it right back in the 1930’s when he said, “We have the best Congress money can buy”. The only difference is that the price has gone through the roof and the same can be said for our politicians at the local level.

Direct democracy can be traced back to ancient Greece and has a rich history in Switzerland, many countries in Europe and the good old US of A. (In in this country it continues to be practiced successfully in some places such as New England.)

Here’s what some of our founders said,

“Each generation has a right to choose for itself the form of government it believes most promotive of its happiness.”-Thomas Jefferson

And,

“The People were, in fact, the fountain of all power, and by resorting to them, all difficulties were got over. They could alter constitutions as they pleased.”-James Madison

Here’s how direct democracy makes Switzerland a better place. According to this article from the UK Telegraph, “Most laws are made and decided by parliament. The important difference, however, between the Swiss system and the “indirect” democracy of Britain is that citizens are entitled to put almost every law decided by their representatives to a general vote - if they want.”

“For this to happen, members of the public need to gather 50,000 signatures (approximately one per cent of the electorate) within 100 days of the publication of a new law. In 96 out of 100 cases, no such referendum is triggered, because the parliamentary process enjoys a very high level of legitimacy. That is because the elected lawmakers know that their work will be seriously checked by the public, so do a very good job indeed.”

Switzerland boasts that According to the World Competitiveness Yearbook of 2008 they lead in all comparisons of in matters of security, private prosperity, social coherence and political stability which isn’t impaired by different language groups and cultural regions. They have a high degree of personal freedom and arguably the world’s most competitive economy.

The inconvenient truth is that our representatives in the US have largely failed to represent the people here in the US at every level and our politicians aren’t necessarily held in high regard. But in Switzerland their politicians are very popular.

To support direct democracy doesn’t mean that you will vote in support of every ballot initiative or referendum that is placed on the ballot. It simply means that you support the idea that government’s sole purpose is to represent the people and when they fail in that basic responsibility the people have the right and civic duty to petition their elected representatives and overturn or stop their bad decisions.

President Theodore Roosevelt, in his “Charter of Democracy” speech to the 1912 Ohio constitutional convention, stated “I believe in the Initiative and Referendum, which should be used not to destroy representative government, but to correct it whenever it becomes misrepresentative.”

Increasingly in real democracies in Europe they are moving towards more direct democracy. For instance this poll shows 77% of Germans want a vote on the Lisbon treaty.

Open Europe Director Lorraine Mullally said:

“This poll clearly shows that it is not only the Irish who want to be consulted on the Lisbon Treaty. This Treaty transfers significant powers from the national to the EU level, and German voters want to be given a say.”

“Politicians claim they want to see more debate about the EU at national level, and yet they have conspired to deny voters a say on the Lisbon Treaty. Research shows that referendums on European issues significantly improve the public’s interest in and knowledge of the EU - so referendums should be encouraged, not avoided at all costs.”

“If politicians want people to connect with the EU, they should give them a say on the big issues like Treaty change. The public are crying out to be consulted - it is time to stop pretending that politicians know best, and inject some democracy into EU politics.”

While Switzerland isn’t dysfunctional or going broke and isn’t chaotic or ruled by a “mobocracy”. I’m not sure we can say the same thing about the US. The two corporate parties have colluded to create many barriers to democracy.

For instance, even at the local level an Independent running for County Commissioner has to collect over 2,500 valid signatures (in reality that means more like 5,000 signatures) compared to the corporate parties which only need to collect 50 signatures a piece. (I won’t even get into all the shenanigans at the Presidential level!)

And incumbents campaign around the city using very vague terms and rarely discuss specific policy positions. Even local elections are won mostly based on name recognition or party affiliation.

In fact the US would be barred from joining the EU based on their criteria for free and fair elections (I’m not saying the US should have a desire to join the EU). And in this conversation with former President Jimmy Carter among many other topics he discusses why the United States doesn’t meet the Carter Centers requirements to oversee elections. He lists http://www.cartercenter.org/news/multimedia/Conversations/ConversationWithCarters-091509.html” title=“several reasons why”>several reasons why. 

When money plays such a dominate role in our elections and a significant number of voters are simply voting based on name recognition instead of policy positions then you do not have a real democracy or a real “Representative Government”, you have a Plutocracy or government of, for and by the rich political donor class. And they have plundered the public’s treasuries at every level for far too long.

When citizens are shut out of government by undemocratic barriers and big money they have a duty to shift the power from the few to the many. That is where we are now!

I’ve recently heard people who I respect say that we shouldn’t interfere with how things work because the people can be fooled by special interest and propaganda. I would argue that our politicians are owned by the special interests and that they spew all kinds of propaganda. I have heard too much of it here locally all over the airwaves.

If the people aren’t responsible enough to decide on important issues then how are the responsible enough to elect good representation? Their sentiment is undemocratic and they provide no real solutions to the problems these politicians have created.

Referendums allow people to participate in power. It increases participation and people do become more educated about important issues. Switzerland shows that democracy doesn’t destroy government; it serves to improve and legitimatize it. The Swiss embrace direct democracy and still remain a representative government. They read newspapers too! (Of course theirs are much, much better than ours. And that is why this country is a mess)

In the final analysis everyone has the freedom to vote on the issues before us tomorrow. You may not like one ballot initiative or another and you have every right to express your opinions on those issues. But to trash democracy is to trash the rights of people in our community to seek self-determination and to surrender to the favored few that constantly work to deter democracy so they can continue to gorge themselves at the public trough.

I say, give me liberty or give me death and all power to the people!

It is widely believed that being tased can lead to an “Excited Delirium Death”—a controversial phenomenon which some say is a medical condition and others say is legal cover for potentially fatal torture. Not only could the City of Cincinnati and CPS’ current policies lead to a costly law suit, but there is overwhelming evidence that serious injuries and deaths can eventually occur.

While it has been a few years since a local public school child got tased, Haap says we should not wait until the worst happens to consider the safety of our kids.  “A few weeks ago, everyone started talking about tasers again after Councilmember Cecil Thomas’ daughter was tased unnecessarily.  Research shows tasers can cause brain damage, in addition to the risk of death.  Why are we letting these weapons in our schools?”

Communities as near as Oxford, Ohio have already banned taser use by police, and as reported locally the discussion is about whether officers should be allowed to use them on the street—not about whether kids should be tased in the schools!

A common wall socket contains 120 volts.  “Should we punish kids by forcing them to stick a fork in a wall outlet?” asked Haap.  “Such a proposition is absurd.  So, too, is it absurd to think we should ever jolt a kid with 50,000 volts from a taser.”

Haap wants school board and City Hall leaders to establish a temporary ban on tasers inside school buildings until new policies and training procedures can be implemented by the police to protect our children from potential abuse.

—
Paid for by Haap on Board | Josh Krekeler, Treasurer | 3027 Beaver Avenue | Cincinnati, Ohio 45213

This weekend, The Cincinnati Beacon sat down with its very own Dean of Cincinnati, asking some questions about the race for School Board.  As a result of this interview (provided below), The Dean has decided to endorse Jason Haap for Cincinnati School Board.  The Dean says this is the most important endorsement he’s ever granted in a local election.

The Beacon:  Who are you voting for in the school board race?

The Dean:  I will be voting for [Jason Haap.]  I think [Jason Haap] has the most detailed public platform in this race, with common sense solutions to uncommon problems.

The Beacon:  What makes you think Jason Haap has enough experience?

The Dean:  [Jason Haap] has been a high school teacher for 13 years, at parochial, charter, and public schools.  This gives [him] a versatile set of experiences to bring to the table.  Additionally, [Jason Haap’s] media activism gives him useful insights on the local political structure.

The Beacon:  What has Jason Haap brought to the race?

The Dean:  In addition to experience, [Jason Haap] has brought specificity to this race.  Lots of candidates talk about the need for fiscal responsibility, but so few say anything about their policy concepts.  [Jason Haap] has proposed “Proportional Cuts”—saying anytime high paid central office administrators levy cuts that take services away from kids, those cuts should be reflected proportionally in their own budgets, so whenever they take away from students they take away from themselves.

The Beacon:  Do you think Jason haap has a vision and if so what is that vision?

The Dean:  [Jason Haap] definitely has a vision—one where our public school administration learns how to create policies that put children first.  I suggest anyone interested learn more about [Jason Haap’s] vision by visiting [his] web page: http://www.jasonhaap.com/

A few days ago, The Cincinnati Blog posted this informative item, showcasing the extreme anti-choice views of Charterite Kevin Flynn—who many thought had positioned himself as somewhat liberal in an attempt to earn votes from mostly Democratic Cincinnati.  But there is more to the story of the Cincinnati Right to Life PAC candidate surveys than just the answers penned by Kevin Flynn.  In this post, we take a closer look at some of the overlooked material from what people submitted to that organization.

Firstly, for reference, here are their endorsed local candidates:

City of Cincinnati - Mayor

Dr. Brad Wenstrup

Cincinnati City Council

Kevin Flynn
Leslie Ghiz
Chris Monzel
Cecil Thomas
LaMarque Ward
Charlie Winburn

Only one other council candidate submitted a survey and did not get an endorsement:  George Zamary.  He provided mostly only “Yes” answers to all their questions, with no comments, save arguing for an exception for abortion bans when the mother’s life is in danger, or in cases of rape or incest.  (Read all the surveys here.)

Cecil Thomas also answered “Yes” to all their questions, adding only the following handwritten comment:  “My Bible say’s He Knew me even before I was in my mother’s womb. (End of story)”.

So it seems the substantive difference between Zamary and the other candidates is wishing to create an exception for abortions when the mother is the victim of rape and incest.  Kevin Flynn was the only other candidate to mark an exception, and he said only if the mother’s life were in danger, and in such a case it should be the mother’s decision.  (He likened this circumstance to falling on a grenade to save another’s life.)

A message for anyone else seeking to gain a Right-to-Life endorsement in the future:  no exceptions for rape and incest (which would even include incestuous rape!).

Cincinnati Right-to-Life decided not to issue endorsements for school board, though some school board candidates submitted surveys.  Perhaps the biggest surprise is long-time board member and Democrat Catherine Ingram’s responses, which take an anti-choice angle (though not quite hard-lined enough to earn her an endorsement based on how Council candidates were apparently chosen).

COASTer John Banner also gave a hard-lined survey—though he seems to have misread question number three, providing a “No” where he meant to provide a “Yes.”  He did, however, make Zamary’s mistake of excepting rape victims from his ideology, though at the bottom of his handwritten form he directly asks for the group’s endorsement.

And, complete with his spring-loaded signature, Republican Christopher McDowell gave all the anti-choice answers—at least according to the apparent City Council rubric.  Apparently, CRTLPAC doesn’t endorse for Cincinnati School Board.

Naturally, I also gave the group my own answers—knowing full well it would not be possible to get their endorsement.  And, if you are so inclined, you can read my responses here.

NOTE: I am a candidate for Cincinnati School Board.  If this counts as campaigning, then it has been paid for by Haap on Board | Josh Krekeler, Treasurer | 3027 Beaver Avenue | Cincinnati, Ohio 45213

According to Common Dreams Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) made the following statement about the latest House health care plan on the Floor of the House of Representatives:

“Is this the best we can do? Forcing people to buy private health insurance, guaranteeing at least $50 billion in new business for the insurance companies?

“Is this the best we can do? Government negotiates rates which will drive up insurance costs, but the government won’t negotiate with the pharmaceutical companies which will drive up pharmaceutical costs.

“Is this the best we can do? Only 3% of Americans will go to a new public plan, while currently 33% of Americans are either uninsured or underinsured?

“Is this the best we can do? Eliminating the state single payer option, while forcing most people to buy private insurance.

“If this is the best we can do, then our best isn’t good enough and we have to ask some hard questions about our political system: such as Health Care or Insurance Care? Government of the people or a government of the corporations.”

This forum was sponsored by Cincinnati Progressive Action, the Single Payer Action Network, the Intercommunity Justice and Peace Center, and The Cincinnati Beacon. (and though this may seem obvious: in full disclosure, I am a regular contributor to the Cincinnati Beacon).

From Dr. Fisk’s website:

Milton Fisk was born and raised in Lexington, Kentucky. Following the example of both of his parents, he became an academic. He received a BS in chemistry from Notre Dame and a PhD in philosophy from Yale. Prior to coming to Indiana University in Bloomington, he held faculty positions at Notre Dame and at Yale. He is the author of a number of books, including Nature and Necessity (1973), Ethics and Society (1980), The State and Justice (1989), and Toward a Healthy Society (2000).

Early in his career, he concentrated on a realist interpretation of physical science, which led him to develop a theory of causality based on a notion of natural necessity. An engagement with movements for social change led to his writing on issues in social philosophy and in political morality. In this work, one of his constant themes is that social divisions place a burden of proof on moralists who advocate universalism in ethics that they have not met. His recent study of health care reform led him to appreciate the important role public goods should play in political morality.

He served as a board member of the American Philosophical Association-Central Division, and is serving on the steering committee of the Radical Philosophy Association. He was a member of the Indiana Health Care Campaign and was active with Jobs with Justice, serving as a director of its Workers Rights Board for south-central Indiana. He is currently working on a living wage campaign in Bloomington.
At present, he is Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at Indiana University. His favorite activity is mountain walking, and his most difficult task is remembering the birthdays of his eight grandchildren.

Below are the full comments of Dr. Fisk as well as a Question and Answer session with members of the audience. I encourage you to watch this forum in full:

This piece is cross posted here.