|
LUTHER
HANGS ON; OCCPaC GOES 5-2 IN PRIMARIES
In
our Special Primary Election Recap issue of The Political Edge, we reported
that four of the seven candidates endorsed by the Ohio Chamber of Commerce
Political Action Committee prevailed while two lost. The outcome of
the race involving the remaining OCCPaC-endorsed candidate, Brant Luther
(R-Alliance), was still in doubt.
With just one precinct left to report early in the morning on Wednesday,
May 3, Luther trailed his opponent, Randy Pope, by 25 votes. When the
last precinct’s results finally came in, Luther won the precinct
by 35 votes, giving him a come from behind victory and earning him the
GOP nomination in the 61st Ohio House district by just ten votes. Or
so it appeared.
A few hours later it was learned that the ballots in one precinct had
not been counted at all. After these ballots were added, Luther’s
lead vanished, and he trailed Pope by a single vote. The next day, it
was determined that another precinct had been counted twice on election
night. Luther surged back into the lead by ten votes.
With a total of between 50-100 provisional ballots that the boards of
elections in each of the district’s four counties had to verify
and count, the saga was still not over. For nearly two weeks, the candidates
could do nothing but wait. On Tuesday, May 17, the provisional ballots
were added and results certified in two of the counties, temporarily
stretching Luther’s lead to 14 votes. It wasn’t until the
following week that the final county certified its results and Luther
was officially declared the winner by 13 votes.
That left one more obstacle: a recount. With just 13 votes separating
two candidates in a race that saw over 7,900 total ballots cast, an
automatic recount was required. Finally, on Friday, June 2 – a
full month after the primary – the recount was completed and, though
Luther’s margin shrunk by one vote, the race was officially over.
The final result was a 12-vote win for Luther, and a 5-2 record for
OCCPaC-endorsed candidates.
OCCPaC
ENDORSES CUPP, O’DONNELL
The Ohio Supreme Court races cannot be an afterthought in 2006. That’s
the approach the Ohio Chamber is taking to the races this fall for two
seats on the state’s highest court.
Earlier this week, OCCPaC endorsed the re-election of Justice Terrence
O’Donnell and the election of Judge Robert Cupp for the seat that
will be left open as a result of Justice Alice Resnick’s decision
to retire.
Justice O’Donnell is seeking re-election to his first full term,
and 2006 marks the third time in the past four election cycles that
he’ll appear on the ballot for the Supreme Court – and the
third time he’ll have OCCPaC support. He has been a member of the
state judiciary for more than 25 years, and the Ohio Chamber’s
endorsement recognizes this substantial experience as well as his commitment
to judicial restraint. His adherence to this philosophy was in evidence
in the dissents he wrote in two Supreme Court decisions, Modzelewski
v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc. and Schirmer v. Mt. Auburn Obstetrics
& Gynecological Assoc., Inc.
Judge Cupp, currently a member of the Third District Court of Appeals,
is the only candidate with judicial experience running for the open
seat. He has served on the Appeals Court since 2003, and also spent
ten years on the Senate Judiciary Committee while a member of the Ohio
Senate from 1985-2000. Like O’Donnell, Cupp is committed to providing
a system of justice that is stable, predictable, and fair – exactly
the kind of legal climate that Ohio needs in order to attract new investment
and businesses and create jobs.
O’Donnell’s race this year is a rematch of the 2004 campaign
between him and Appeals Court Judge William O’Neill, a race that
O’Donnell won comfortably by capturing 60% of the vote. Cupp faces
Columbus attorney and fellow General Assembly alumnus Ben Espy.
Because it involves two new candidates, the open seat contest pitting
Cupp vs. Espy will probably get more attention than the O’Donnell
vs. O’Neill rematch – a race that begins with O’Donnell
as the frontrunner. Nothing, however, can be taken for granted in a
judicial campaign. Several factors that are at play in 2006 should make
it clear that Ohio’s business community must remain actively involved
in Supreme Court politics this year:
1. Voters simply
don’t know who their Supreme Court justices, let alone candidates,
are. In many judicial campaigns, name recognition is often the best
asset a candidate can have, and O’Neill, though only having run
statewide once previously, possesses the intangible “good ballot
name.” As of today, he probably would have a slightly higher level
of name recognition than O’Donnell who, despite three recent statewide
campaigns, likely begins with name i.d. well below 50%. Statewide,
name i.d. for both Cupp and Espy is probably negligible.
2. O’Neill is accepting no campaign donations. And he’s not
a wealthy self-funder either. O’Neill accepted only $10 from individuals
and $1,000 from PACs in his 2004 race, running his race on a total
of just $70,000. This time around, he’s hoping that the novelty
of his “No Money from No Body” approach will earn him that
much or more in free “earned” media coverage. It may seem
counter-intuitive that a candidate without a substantial campaign budget
could build high enough name recognition in a state like Ohio, with
its eight million-plus voters and eight TV markets, to win a statewide
race. And no political consultant would recommend such a strategy.
But O’Neill did win the May primary without raising a dime, easily
defeating the party-endorsed candidate, 59%-41%.
3. Diminished media interest. Outside of the presidential contests,
there has been little else on the ballot in the previous three election
cycles, meaning the Supreme Court campaigns have gotten a higher degree
of media coverage than is normal. This is not expected to be case again
in ’06 – the Court campaigns will undoubtedly be relegated
to second-class status.
4. A crowded 2006 ballot. With competitive contests for governor and
U.S. Senate, several competitive congressional campaigns, a number
of potential ballot issues, and five first-time statewide candidates
among the eight running for Attorney General, Auditor, Secretary of
State, and Treasurer, the competition for TV advertising time will
be intense. Voters will be inundated, and it’ll be difficult for
individual candidates to cut through the clutter before many voters
simply tune out. For judicial races that, as we already established,
tend to be mostly name i.d. contests, this is particularly worrisome.
5. The competition for political dollars is intense. With so many competitive
races, many political donors are being solicited by multiple campaigns.
In this environment, can judicial candidates raise the money necessary
to fully fund their races? Two years ago, O’Donnell raised and
spent just under $1.5 million, while open seat candidate Judge Judy
Lanzinger spent just over $1.4 million. To date in 2006, Cupp’s
and O’Donnell’s fundraising lags behind where the ’04
candidates were at a similar juncture – and there were three Court
races two years ago, not just two.
6. Preventing an all-out battle for philosophical control of the Court
in 2008. It has taken a concerted effort by businesses across Ohio
to change the makeup of the Supreme Court, remaking it from a Court
controlled by an activist majority to one that is fair and balanced.
But if businesses do not engage in 2006 and both O’Donnell and
Cupp lose, philosophical control of the Court will absolutely be at
stake in two years. This is the year to solidify the new Court majority,
not the year to sit back and watch.
FREE
PASSES HARDER TO COME BY IN ‘06
Back in February, Guy Fogle (D-Dayton) filed petitions to oppose Speaker
of the House Jon Husted (R-Kettering) in the 37th House district, but
his petitions didn’t contain enough valid signatures and his name
was thus not on the May 2 primary ballot. Fogle subsequently filed a
declaration of intent to run as a write-in, but a challenge to his ability
to do so was filed by a voter in the district. A drawn-out battle over
Fogle’s status ensued.
Earlier this month, Secretary of State Ken Blackwell broke a deadlock
on the Montgomery County Board of Elections by voting to block Fogle
from the appearing on the General Election ballot. In his decision,
he cited a recent Ohio Supreme Court decision, State ex rel. Canales-Flores
v. Lucas Cty. Bd. of Elections, decided last October, that he says
stipulates that a candidate cannot run as a write-in in a primary after
his nominating petitions for that office were rejected.
Ultimately, the outcome means that Speaker Husted joins the ranks of
General Assembly candidates who face no General Election opposition
this year. He is one of nine candidates – six Republicans and three
Democrats – who are assured of victory in November. The lucky nine
candidates are:
House District
3
Maybe capturing 62%, 67%, and 66% of the vote his first three times
has something to do with the fact that Rep. Jim Carmichael (R-Wooster)
finds himself unopposed in his final re-election bid.
House District 8
Maybe there just aren’t any Republicans in the 8th district? Armond
Budish (D-Beachwood) doesn’t have one challenging him, nor did
the man he’s going to replace, Rep. Lance Mason (D-Cleveland)
in either of his two elections.
House District 11
An uncontested General Election is the reward Sandra Williams (D-Cleveland)
receives for winning a six-way open primary.
House District 30
Representing perhaps the most Republican House district in the state
may have something to do with the fact that Rep. Bill Seitz (R-Cincinnati)
is unopposed for a fourth and final term.
House District 37
Speaker Jon Husted (R-Kettering) had three General Election opponents
in 2000, so he’s still averaging more than one challenger per
year, despite this year’s free ride.
House District 55
In this heavily Republican district, Rep. Bill Coley (R-Middletown)
would have little to fear even if he was opposed.
House District 60
There was no shortage of Democrat challengers to Sen. Bob Hagan (D-Youngstown)
– he disposed of five in the primary – but the GOP couldn’t
find even one to oppose him in November in this open seat contest.
House District 82
Rep. Steve Reinhard (R-Bucyrus) initially had a Democrat opponent,
but trouble with the law forced him out and the party couldn’t
find a replacement.
House District 88
Rep. Danny Bubp (R-West Union) faced a significant challenge in the
GOP primary, but prevailed and now gets a clear path to a second term.
Overall, the total is down significantly from two years ago, when 21
candidates received a free pass (and three others were opposed only
by independent candidates), but only slightly below the recent historical
average:
This
year, not a single Senate candidate gets to skate to victory –
a result that occurs more often than not in Senate campaigns:
LATEST
VOTING RECORD SCORES UNCOVER PRO-BUSINESS MAJORITIES
Earlier this month, you received a copy of the latest P.a.C.E. Voting
Record for the 126th Ohio General Assembly and probably noticed that
the pro-business scores for individual legislators are all over the
place. (If you didn’t receive a copy, click here to review the
record of your lawmakers at OhioBusinessVotes.org.)
The reason for the wide disparity in scores resulted from the fact that
three of the eight Senate votes included in our analysis were 26-7 or
closer, and three of the seven House votes were 67-29 or closer.
Scores in the House range from a low of 20% – Rep. Shirley Smith
(D-Cleveland) has this dubious distinction – to a high of 100%.
54 lawmakers, including eight freshman legislators, posted perfect scores.
Also among this group are eight other representatives serving in their
second General Assembly who still boast lifetime pro-business scores
of 100%.
In the Senate, Sen. Bob Hagan (D-Youngstown) had the lowest score, at
just 33%, while four Senators – Jim Jordan (R-Urbana), Tom Niehaus
(R-New Richmond), Steve Stivers (R-Columbus), and Lynn Wachtmann (R-Napoleon)
– checked in at 100%.
The analysis shows clearly that, in both the House and the Senate, there
are solid pro-business majorities. And while the results of this year’s
election are unlikely to appreciably alter the pro-business majority
in the Senate, the same cannot be said for the House.
Currently, there are 62 legislators in the House with lifetime pro-business
voting records at or above 80%. But 18 of these 62 aren’t running
for re-election, and another half dozen or so are expected to face difficult
re-election battles in November; it’s not only the new Court majority
that the business community needs to prepare to protect this fall.
In late July, the Ohio Chamber PAC’s legislative endorsements will
be announced, along with our list of Chamber Choice candidates for 2006.
The purpose of the Chamber Choice list is to identify pro-business candidates
running in competitive races that need business help to get elected.
Given what’s at stake this year, we hope you’ll use our endorsements
to help guide how you allocate your PAC and other political dollars.
And, as always, if you’d like to discuss any individual candidates
or races in greater detail, please contact Keith Lake, director of political
and candidate education for the Ohio Chamber, at (614) 228-4201 or by
e-mail to klake@ohiochamber.com.
TRIBE
FANS: CHECK OUT THIS PROMOTION
If you’re a fan of the Cleveland Indians and want to check out
some of the organization’s future stars, you might want to consider
a trip this coming weekend to Altoona, Pennsylvania. On Sunday, June
2, the Indians’ Double A affiliate, the Akron Aeros, squares off
in the third game of a four game set against the Pittsburgh Pirates’
affiliate, the Altoona Curve.
Why are we recommending this particular game? Because it features a
hilariously creative promotion that will (unfortunately) resonate with
Ohio employers. According to the May 19 issue of the pegALERT, a publication
from our friends at the group Pennsylvanians for Effective Government:
“The Altoona Curve announced plans to hold “Salute to Frivolous
Lawsuit Night” for their game on July 2nd. The “promotion”
was sparked by a Los Angeles Angels fan who sued the team for discrimination
because he did not receive a pink nylon tote bag given to women 18 and
older as a Mother’s Day promotion. The Curve promotion includes:
pink tote bags to the first 137 adult males; “lukewarm coffee so
they will not burn themselves” to the first 137 adult females;
and “a beach ball with a warning not to ingest it” to the
first 137 kids. The club also plans to honor some of the “most
frivolous lawsuits” ever during the game.”
First pitch is scheduled for 6:05 p.m. By car from Cleveland, a trip
to Altoona should take about four hours; from Akron, three hours and
40 minutes; and from Columbus, five hours.
|
