Congratulations Ohio!!

@ParaTed2k (22940)
Sheboygan, Wisconsin
November 9, 2011 2:17am CST
Since you insist on doing things the same way they're doing it in Illinois, what are you going to do to avoid becoming just as broke? Don't blame your coming debt crises, mass lay offs and skyrocketing taxes on anyone but yourselves... not even Obama.
2 people like this
7 responses
• United States
9 Nov 11
Ted, me and my fellow Ohioans DON'T want to be told by elitist in Columbus, what are rights are, and aren't. This bill had NOTHING to do with employees paying more for benefits, and pay freezes (that the elitist EXEMPTED themselves from). It had to do with republicans going to far with their political motives, and the people seeing right through them. I was NOT a good day to be a republican yesterday, and I am sure a year from now it will be the same way. The mandate that republicans THOUGHT they had last year isn't there today, and the American people are NOT going to allow them to push their form of larger government on them. The true motives of the right came out yesterday, and the voters didn't like what they saw.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
10 Nov 11
The left said that we would see the error of Walker's ways a year later too... a year later some of the cities and school districts that rushed contracts through (so they wouldn't be subject to Act 10) are now begging the unions for contract concessions. I like the Governor's response though. The people of Ohio have spoken. So, as I asked in the OP.. what are the people of Ohio going to do to avoid becoming like Illinois?
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
10 Nov 11
No matter how much good there may have been in the law though, you're right, the legislature and Gov. exempting themselves from any cuts could have been a poison pill.
• United States
10 Nov 11
Many people want to call public employees avoiding paying more for benefits, and fighting wage control. It really only had to do with the collective bargaining. Without collective bargaining firefighters, police officers, and all public workers would be forced to take what ever was given to them, with no course of action to oppose it. If they strike, they could be arrested, or fired on the spot. What happened in Wisconsin is different than here in Ohio, but I wouldn't be surprised to see it come up for vote there. You are correct that exempting people from the bill upset many here in Ohio, and may have swung the vote.
1 person likes this
@peavey (16936)
• United States
9 Nov 11
I suspect the biggest problem with this is that when they do go broke, they won't blame it on this. Something about cause and effect escapes a lot of people.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
9 Nov 11
They'll mindlessly and wrongfully blame Bush :~D
1 person likes this
@peavey (16936)
• United States
9 Nov 11
Yep, you're right. They will.
1 person likes this
• United States
10 Nov 11
that's exactly what I was thinking.. they'll blame it on prez Bush and those evil republicans..
@flowerchilde (12529)
• United States
10 Nov 11
Another huge smear campaign.. and scare tactics to boot!
1 person likes this
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
9 Nov 11
The Governor should develop a budget and show the people just what their vote will cost. Point out the fact that the Unions spent $30 million to defeat this and that the Union Dues paid for this and the tax payers are paying those dues. People have to wake up and educate themselves. Just like Social Security the young employees will be planning on a system that will not be there when they retire.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
10 Nov 11
Debater, I don't think the people really need to ask why any of the Republicans want to end collective bargaining and effectively bust the unions; the unions give more campaign contributions to Democrats than to their side! They'll argue that, as Willard M. Romney said, "Corporations are people!" but do everything they can to take the power away from the unions who actually ARE, in many ways, "the people". That's not to say all unions are perfect but the right certainly forgets that if it weren't for organized labor we'd ALL be working for far less in pay and benefits and under much worse conditions. Well, "ALL" except those who, like Mr. Romney, were born into huge wealth. Annie
1 person likes this
• United States
9 Nov 11
Bob, that would be great if he did, then people would ask why the governor EXEMPTED himself, the entire legislature, and all of this appointed crones of these same wage freezes. They would also have to explain why it is that his staff makes A LOT more money than the previous administration. He would also have to example why he wanted to end collective bargaining, which is why this bill failed. Thus, this will NEVER happen!!!!
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
12 Nov 11
Since you can't name any private collective bargaining contracts threatened by Gov. Walker, I'm interested to hear how you back your statement, Annie.
@dragon54u (31636)
• United States
9 Nov 11
There was such a massive scare campaign here that I'm not surprised at the voting results. There was even a commercial that depicted a guy calling about a home invasion and the 911 operator telling him it'll be at least 20 minutes because they only had 2 deputies and they were clear across the county. They trotted out the firemen with their fire trucks, in full gear, that told the public their houses would burn and nurses that told us all we could die because there would not be as many nurses on duty if we took away labor rights. Playing on fear is a very effective tool and they used it with skill. The forces opposing Issue 2, those that wanted a "yes" vote to defeat it, used reason and facts. But we did accept a constitutional amendment exempting Ohio from Obamacare. I guess that's something. The people will soon be clamoring for the governor to do something about rising prices and an increasingly bad economy. They won't connect it with empowering unions or the way they voted. It's all about "rights". Like the right to force the taxpayers to pay people in the public sector twice as much as the taxpayers make.
@dragon54u (31636)
• United States
10 Nov 11
Gov't doesn't create jobs, they create bureaucracies that need to employ people paid by the gov't--and that's us, our tax dollars. It's a house of cards, like a pyramid scheme, that will soon run out of money if too many people are employed by the gov't.
@dragon54u (31636)
• United States
10 Nov 11
I don't support any that organization, I do my own thinking. When you think about the numbers it makes sense. Less gov't=less taxes and more money to spend on building business and hiring people. More taxes to support a growing public work force means less money in the private sector to hire people or expand. So yes on 2 would theoretically help create jobs in Ohio or any other state that requires public sector workers to take more financial responsibility for their health insurance and pensions.
• United States
12 Nov 11
"When you think about the numbers it makes sense. Less gov't=less taxes and more money to spend on building business and hiring people." Then please explain to me why it is that we have cut taxes over the last 10 years on every person with a job, and cut the top tax rate, and yet the economy is still not growing? What people don't understand is that no economy has EVERY grown when it continued to cut taxes without any increases. It is a FACT, look it up if you don't beleive me. You can cut all of the taxes you want, but it doesn't mean the economy will grow. Every economic boom came from raises in tax rates, followed by calculated cuts in taxes. It worked for both Reagan, and Clinton. The main reason why this issue got shot down was the one sided cuts that were proposed. If King Kasich would have proposed cuts to the legislature, and himself and his cabinet maybe the people would have approved it. But, when you have elitist in Columbus who only want to protect their wages, and bonuses than this is what you get.
@Fatcat44 (1141)
• United States
9 Nov 11
I was a little surprised at ths out come. I read it in the New York Times, and it still did not make sense of Ohio's doing this. Everyone else pays part of health insurance, so why can the employees to the state of Ohio pay some of their own. I think this might be a sign of the unions power getting into this, and shows a sigh of what we have to prepart against in Nov 2012. We have to get conservatives out to vote. This is key!
• United States
9 Nov 11
Actually it was a revolt against intrusive government. Republicans thought that they could put the anti-Obamacare bill up with this anti-union bill, and it would be a huge victory because of their make-believe mandate. The problem was that people saw this for what it was: A political move that had nothing to do with money. This is a political dream of the right wingers who want to dominate elections, and destroy everyone in their path. People are fine with paying more money for benefits, and wage freezes (even though King Kasich and his public official crones are exempt from this issue), but they didn't like the governor acting like a dictator ending collective bargaining. If you look at the facts of this bill you will see it was more about ending collective bargaining than wages and benefits. Right wingers would like you to think it was only greedy public employees, but it is really republicans trying to make political points in Washington, and a governor who's goal is to become president if the people want him or not!!
1 person likes this
• United States
10 Nov 11
The real decision (as I understood it) was whether or not the public employees could have rreal collective bargaining. Mybe those who bargain for the state and local governments will "give away the store" and offer benefits taht are later found to be too generous - - but that is up to them and their work in debating what is in the future contracts. Before we write the eulogy for the state of Ohio or its smaller communities remember that the vote Tuesday was for the right to true collective bargaining... how it will effect taxes and spending is up to the future negotiations.
1 person likes this
@Fatcat44 (1141)
• United States
10 Nov 11
Fine, thegreatdebater. It is you that is paying the taxed to support these union state employed. Its your money that is going to this. You guys made your decision to pay them more than most everyone else makes and support them. This is your right to do it. Thank you for paying the taxes to support them.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
28 Nov 11
Whatever happened to the demands from the tea party conservatives that the elected officials do what the people want them to do? The voters have spoken and they obviously believed Governor Kasich has greatly overreached with his attacks on teachers, firefighters, nurses and police officers. Annie
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
28 Nov 11
Yes, and that is exactly how the governor responded to this. It's also why I asked the question I asked in the OP... a question few even bothered trying to answer.