Tag Archives: Ohio

Government Accountability, Gun Rights, Opinion, Police Accountability

ABOUR: Why Didn’t Open Carry Apply To Tamir Rice?

Leave a comment

Ohio is one of the 30 states that allows open carry without a permit throughout the state. When a state has an open carry policy, it allows its citizens to carry guns in public without fear of being arrested, let alone killed.

So why did the open carry rule not apply to Tamir Rice, a 12-year-old who was in possession of a toy gun at a park? Within two seconds at the scene, Cleveland Police officer Timothy Loehmann shot and killed Rice. Many through social media have argued that because Rice was a minor, the open carry rule does not apply to children because they shouldn’t be in possession of guns. However, Loehmann told the dispatcher that Rice looked “maybe 20.” With that presumption, why didn’t Loehmann respect the open carry law in Ohio? Was it because Rice was a black male? Rice was never even given an opportunity to show the officers that it was a toy gun. He was executed before given a chance to explain.

Whereas earlier this week, a 66-year-old white woman in Connecticut stood outside a police station pointing a BB gun at officers shouting “Boom boom boom” and “Shoot me!” is alive and unharmed.

The woman, Elaine Rothenberg, pointed the gun at civilians asking if they were police. She also blocked an employee-only doorway where police enter and exit to get to their police cruisers and stood with the gun raised in a shooting stance attempting instigate the officers. Rothenberg eventually threw the gun and was arrested. Why was she given due process and Rice was not? Connecticut is also an open carry state, but has even stricter gun laws than Ohio. Why was Loehmann able to shoot and kill a 12 year old right on the spot while Rothenberg was given her due process?

Never mind that Loehmann resigned from a previous police department just as he was about to be fired for incompetence with firearms and repeatedly displaying emotional disturbances.

As Truth in Media previously reported:

A memorandum, written by Independence Deputy Chief Jim Polak, expressed concern over Loehmann’s emotional issues during his poor performance at a state range qualification course for handgun training. Polak wrote that he was notified of Loehmann’s emotional issues by Independence Police Sgt. Greg Tinnirello:

“I was notified by FTO Sgt. Tinnirello of the following circumstances related to our recruit, Ptl. Loehmann. A written statement was included. On this date, during a state range qualification course Ptl. Loehmann was distracted and weepy. He could not follow simple directions, could not communicate clear thoughts nor recollections, and his handgun performance was dismal. Sgt. Tinnirello tried to work through this with Ptl. Loehmann by giving him some time. But, after some talking it was clear to Sgt. Tinnirello that the recruit was just not mentally prepared to be doing firearm training.”

Polak concluded that “due to this dangerous loss of composure during live range training and his inability to manage this personal stress, I do not believe Ptl. Loehmann shows the maturity needed to work in our employment. Unfortunately in law enforcement there are times when instructions need be followed to the letter, and I am under the impression Ptl. Loehmann, under certain circumstances, will not react in the way instructed. Ptl. Loehmann’s lack of commitment for his future here at Independence is disconcerting.” Polak recommended that Loehmann be released from the department and wrote that neither “time, nor training, will be able to change or correct these deficiencies.”

In that case, why on Earth did the Cleveland Police Department hire him?  Lt. Gail Bindel and Sgt. Edwin Santiago, the two officers in charge of hiring Loehmann, failed to perform a thorough background check on him. They were later suspended and reprimanded for it. Not only are the militarization tactics of police a major issue, but now we also have to worry about improperly evaluated cops and the open carry laws that are supposed to protect us. So who does open carry really serve to protect?

Featured, Marijuana Prohibition, Videos

Pot Advocacy Group Alleges Death Threats Issued by Drug Cartel

Video Leave a comment

The marijuana legalization advocacy group ResponsibleOhio has been reportedly threatened, stalked, and victimized by thefts and cyber attacks at the hands of a local drug cartel.

According to Fox 19, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Secret Service have investigated the threats and are taking them seriously. One suspect, who allegedly stole $200,000 from the organization’s bank account before being caught by law enforcement attempting to steal an additional $300,000, is in custody.

ResponsibleOhio executive director Ian James said, “Law enforcement was pretty clear that this was a pretty heavy duty drug dealer. The fact that he was also an arms dealer gave them great pause and indicated that we should be concerned.” Officers reportedly found a photograph of Ian James’ husband standing outside a building in Cleveland on the suspect.

[RELATED: Ohio Recreational Pot Legalization Initiative Qualifies for Nov. 2015 Ballot]

In the above-embedded WCPO video, sports agent and ResponsibleOhio co-founder James Gould describes chilling recorded death threats that he allegedly received via “burner” cell phones from members of a drug cartel.

“Why are you doing this? We’re going to f*** you up,” said the recorded voice on three different occasions over three weeks, according to Gould. He says that the group was also targeted by a cyber attack at a crucial point in its signature gathering process.

WCPO notes that according to campaign finance records, ResponsibleOhio subsequently spent $165,368 hiring the private security firm Carrol & Associates LLC to provide protection and investigate the threats.

“It was scary,” said Gould.

[RELATED: Truth In Media Accelerates National Cannabis Discussion]

ResponsibleOhio’s marijuana legalization ballot measure Issue 3 will appear on Ohio’s general election ballot on November 3. The measure would create a framework for a legal recreational and medical marijuana industry in the state. Critics say the measure would establish a marijuana cultivation oligopoly, as it would constitutionally restrict pot production to 10 farms owned by ResponsibleOhio investors.

Drug War

Ohio Marijuana Convicts Could Have Their Records Purged

Leave a comment

By Guy Bentley – Ohioans with marijuana convictions could have their records purged if the campaign group pushing for marijuana legalization gets its way.

ResponsibleOhio is pushing the move and is also the main campaign group backing a proposed constitutional amendment — Issue 3 — that would legalize both recreational and medical marijuana in the state, reported the Dayton Daily News.

The ballot initiative would permit Ohioans to grow small amounts of marijuana in their homes, while commercial growing would be limited to 10 sites. The vote will be held Nov. 3rd.

ResponsibleOhio claims to have collected 236,759 signatures in support of the Fresh Start Act, which would allow people with convictions made legal by Issue 3 to file a petition to the courts to expunge their criminal records.

The act would give some people “a second chance,” ResponsibleOhio’s executive director, Ian James, told the Dayton Daily News. “This allows people that have been convicted of offenses that are no longer illegal an ability to move forward, an ability to get expungement and sentencing review,” he said.

The Fresh Start Act would go before the Ohio Assembly in January 2016, and lawmakers would have four months to pass the bill. If the proposal is thrown out, however, or the wording is changed, another 92,000 signatures would need to be collected before the reform could be put to the voters.

The Fresh Start Act would not apply to federal marijuana offenses or offenses that would remain illegal under Issue 3. It has received strong support from pastors and the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio.

“We fully support this, and we fully support giving people further opportunities to rehabilitate themselves and get out from underneath the thumb of oppressive laws and policies that … affect their employment, affect their housing, affect their education,” Gary Daniels, attorney and chief lobbyist for the Ohio ACLU, said in a press conference reported by The Alliance Review.

The United Food and Commercial Workers have also been active in organizing industry workers to support Issue 3. (RELATED: Union Sets Its Sights On Ohio Marijuana Growers)

Follow Guy on Twitter

 

 

 

 

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
Marijuana Prohibition, States Rights

ResponsibleOhio to File Suit over “Biased” Wording of Pot Legalization Ballot Measure

Video Leave a comment

ResponsibleOhio, the group behind Ohio’s recently-qualified ballot measure aimed at letting the state’s voters decide whether to legalize marijuana for personal use, has announced that it will challenge the Ohio Ballot Board’s chosen legal wording of the group’s proposed constitutional amendment. The group plans to take the matter to the Ohio Supreme Court.

The above-embedded video, published by OhioCapitalBlog, contains comments by ResponsibleOhio spokesperson Jennifer Redman and attorney Don McTigue on the group’s planned legal challenge against what it called “biased” wording meant to discourage voters from supporting the amendment.

The Ohio Ballot Board, which is chaired by Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted, features 5 members including 3 Republicans and 2 Democrats. According to The Plain Dealer, the wording of ResponsibleOhio’s proposed constitutional amendment passed the board by a party-line vote of 3-2.

State Rep. Kathleen Clyde (D-Kent), a board member who voted against the wording, told WLWT-TV that the board’s choice to characterize the type of marijuana use that would be legalized by the ballot measure as “recreational” rather than “personal” “crosses into editorializing about the amendment.”

The board’s wording has also been criticized as giving the impression that it would allow Ohioans to possess and transfer over a half-pound of marijuana, despite the fact that the proposed amendment would only allow possession of up to 1 ounce. However, licensed home growers would be allowed to cultivate up to 8 ounces for personal use.

The Ohio Ballot Board also chose the order of the ballot measures on the upcoming November 3, 2015 general election ballot and opted to place the pro-pot issue question in the third position out of three, following an anti-monopoly-and-oligopoly amendment meant to counter and draw attention to a controversial aspect of the Ohio pro-pot ballot measure — that it only allows marijuana to be cultivated on 10 farms owned by ResponsibleOhio investors, potentially creating a marijuana production oligopoly.

Former Ohio Supreme Court Justice and ResponsibleOhio attorney Andy Douglas said in a statement, “When the Ballot Board prescribes language to ballot initiatives, it is meant to be a neutral, fair representation of the proposal at hand. The ballot language assigned to the Marijuana Legalization Amendment, Issue 3, is clearly biased and gives preference to the arguments of marijuana reform opponents. The language is inaccurate and strategically worded as to misguide voters.”

ResponsibleOhio claims that opponents of the measure on the board chose the word “recreational,” which tests poorly in opinion polls, rather than the phrase “personal use” in the amendment in an effort to discourage voters from supporting it.

“You buy alcohol you’re going to personally consume it, it’s not recreational, you buy toothpaste, you’re going to personally use it, you’re not using it for recreation, the same applies to marijuana,” said ResponsibleOhio executive director Ian James.

Sec. of State Husted, who claims that “recreational” was the correct word choice because it clarifies that the measure goes beyond just legalizing medical marijuana, said, “In the end, I think the voters in Ohio are going to clearly know what they’re voting for. They are either going to vote to legalize a marijuana monopoly in this state or they’re going to vote to reject it.”

In the below-embedded video by OhioCapitalBlog, Husted reacts to ResponsibleOhio’s complaints about the issue question’s wording.

If both the anti-monopoly ballot measure and ResponsibleOhio’s ballot measure were to pass by a majority vote, thus contradicting each other, the amendment that obtains the highest total of votes would take priority over the other. However, the anti-monopoly measure is set to kick in 30 days prior to the pro-pot measure, which Sec. of State Husted said could prove to be a legal roadblock to the marijuana legalization amendment’s enactment.

In September of last year, Ben Swann released a Truth in Media episode exposing the federal government’s mixed messages about medical marijuana. Watch it in the below-embedded video player.

https://youtu.be/zuX9y0hiqWE

Editor’s Pick, Featured, Marijuana Prohibition, States Rights

Ohio Recreational Pot Legalization Initiative Qualifies for Nov. 2015 Ballot

Video Leave a comment

Ohio voters will decide on this November’s ballot whether the state will legalize marijuana for recreational and medical uses.

According to The Cincinnati Enquirer, Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted confirmed on Wednesday that the pro-pot group ResponsibleOhio has successfully obtained 320,267 valid signatures of voters in a petition drive qualifying a marijuana legalization ballot initiative for the state’s November 3, 2015 general election.

“It’s time for marijuana legalization in Ohio, and voters will have the opportunity to make it happen this November — we couldn’t be more excited. Drug dealers don’t care about doing what’s best for our state and its citizens. By reforming marijuana laws in November, we’ll provide compassionate care to sick Ohioans, bring money back to our local communities and establish a new industry with limitless economic development opportunities,” read a statement by ResponsibleOhio executive director Ian James. The group reportedly spent over $2 million since March of this year promoting its signature gathering campaign and still has over $20 million in its war chest to spend on promoting November’s initiative.

If the amendment were to pass, it would legalize the recreational use and possession of up to one ounce of pot for individuals of 21 years of age or older. Medical marijuana would become available to patients with a doctor’s prescription. Additionally, those who obtain a cultivation license would be able to grow up to four marijuana plants at home for their own personal use. Marijuana production would be taxed at 15 percent and sales to consumers at 5 percent. 15 percent of tax revenues would go to fund a new regulatory authority called the Marijuana Control Commission. Remaining revenues would be split by Ohio towns, cities, and counties.

The amendment would create criminal laws cracking down on marijuana sales to minors, the employment of minors at marijuana businesses, pot-intoxicated drivers, and public cannabis consumption.

Though the amendment would not impact existing marijuana convictions, if it passes, ResponsibleOhio plans to push for a 2016 ballot initiative called the Fresh Start Act that would create a process for expunging thus-outdated pot convictions.

The Plain Dealer notes that the amendment would constitutionally restrict commercial cultivation to 10 specific farms owned by ResponsibleOhio investors, which critics have said creates a “monopoly.” Those who stand to profit on those farms include former 98 Degrees performer Nick Lachey, fashion designer Nanette Lapore, Arizona Cardinals defensive end Frostee Rucker, and Woody and Dudley Taft Jr., both of whom are descendants of former President William Howard Taft.

In June, the Ohio Legislature placed an initiative on the November 2015 ballot that would ban the creation of a “monopoly, oligopoly, or cartel” from the Ohio Constitution. Sec. Husted said that he believes that the anti-monopoly amendment would override the marijuana legalization amendment if both were to pass, a legal theory which ResponsibleOhio representatives contest. If that were to be the outcome of the election, a court battle would likely ensue.

Former Cincinnati Police Chief Tom Streicher, a ResponsibleOhio supporter, said, “When I served as the Chief of Police for Ohio’s third-largest city, I saw first-hand the destructive impact of Ohio’s marijuana laws. Our state spends over $120 million per year to enforce marijuana prohibition, even though we all know these laws do not work. Law enforcement should instead be able to spend their time and their resources cracking down on the real criminals. ResponsibleOhio’s amendment will do just that, paving the way for a better, safer future for our children and grandchildren.”

Republican State Representative Niraj Antani, an opponent of the pot legalization amendment, told WDTN-TV, “Even if you do favor it, this is a bad deal. This is ten or fifteen individuals all investing into a scheme to make a lot of money. This isn’t how we should create industries in Ohio. It’s going to be put into the constitution which should be done very carefully. I think it’s a bad deal for all Ohioans.”

Ohio Governor and 2016 presidential candidate John Kasich opposes the measure.

A July Quinnipiac University poll found that 52 percent of Ohioans supported marijuana legalization and 44 percent expressed their opposition.

In September of last year, Ben Swann released a Truth in Media episode exposing the federal government’s mixed messages about medical marijuana. Watch it in the below-embedded video player.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuX9y0hiqWE

Activism, Police Accountability

Black Lives Matter, Anonymous, and Open Carry Activists Unite for John Crawford Rally

6 Comments

On Wednesday, August 5th, activists in Ohio marked the one year anniversary of the shooting of John Crawford III. The 22-year old was shot by a Beavercreek police officer after being seen holding a BB gun inside the Wal-Mart near Dayton, Ohio. A grand jury would later find that the officer innocent of murder. Federal authorities are still reviewing the case.

The activists came from a range of groups including Greene County Black Lives Matter, Anonymous #OpJohnCrawford, Beavercreek CopBlock and Ohio Open Carry. The Greene County BLM had planned a protest and “die-in” outside the Wal-Mart where Crawford was shot. The group carried a black coffin through the parking lot to the front door of the Wal-Mart. The planned protests prompted the store managers to close down for the evening.

Ohio Open Carry stated that their demonstration was part of an effort to “remind the nation that open carry is legal and that police are not above our most basic human rights.”

However, not all of the activists involved appreciated the open carry groups’ message. According to Counter Current News:

“Many of the participants in Greene County Black Lives Matter did not like the idea of having firearms at a protest, and some controversy arose when they delineated “rules of conduct” that included “no firearms.”

The other activist groups noted that they had long planned their protests and had been a regular presence at the location, with the continued blessing of John’s mother Tressa.

Just two days before the protest, at the request of a handful of activists and John’s mother, representatives from local Anonymous groups, Beavercreek CopBlock, Black Lives Matter and Ohio Open Carry sat down and hashed things out like grown ups.”

The protest went on without major conflict between the activist groups, and with no arrests reported.

Following the protest at Wal-Mart, John Crawford III’s parents gathered with the activists and spoke to a large crowd about the importance of taking action against violent police officers.

At one point John Crawford Sr. told the crowd, “How many people right now are bearing arms? If everyone out here would have held their hand up we wouldn’t have to worry about any problems.”

John Crawford Sr. went on to tell the crowd that, “You can’t reason with a bully. You have to eventually fight that bully. You have to let him know that win, lose or draw, I’m gonna fight you every day.”

The elder Crawford reminded the crowd that their numbers were greater than the police, stating, “You have a right to defend yourself. You have a right defend your family. You have that right – a Godly right and a Constitutional right.”

Despite the powerful words, John Crawford Sr. expressed that he was not promoting the use of violence against police, but rather the of self-defense.

“I’m not advocating death. I’m simply saying, inevitably it may go down that way. If it continues to go like its going now it will go down that way cause you can only push people for so long before they’re going to strike back!”

Election, Politics, Polls, US

Poll: Rand Paul Leads Hillary Clinton in Key Swing State of Ohio

4 Comments

The outcomes of votes in swing states like Ohio, where no party enjoys a clear advantage in obtaining electoral college votes, often decide presidential elections. High general election polling numbers in these battleground states are often cited as evidence of a candidate’s electability.

A new Public Policy Polling presidential preference survey of 859 Ohio voters, taken between June 4 and June 7, found that Ohio Republican Governor John Kasich enjoys home-field advantage in the 2016 GOP presidential primary. However, it also found that, in theoretical 2016 general election match-ups, Governor Kasich leads Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton 47 to 40 and US Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) leads Clinton 44 to 41.

Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) tied Clinton 44-44 in the poll. “[Clinton] has small advantages over the rest of the GOP field- it’s 44/43 over Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, and Scott Walker, 45/43 over Jeb Bush, 44/41 over Chris Christie, and 45/42 over Mike Huckabee,” read a summary of the poll by Public Policy Polling.

The poll also found that Clinton dramatically leads in the 2016 Democratic primary, “On the Democratic side Clinton still dominates the field with 61% of the primary vote, followed by Bernie Sanders at 13%, Michael Bloomberg at 7%, Lincoln Chafee and Martin O’Malley at 2%, and Jim Webb at 1%. 13% of Democratic voters are still undecided.”

Governor Kasich’s home field advantage and high approval numbers put him on top of the Republican primary portion of the poll. Public Policy Polling’s summary notes, “Kasich polls at 19% to 13% for Ben Carson and Scott Walker, 12% for Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio, 9% for Rand Paul, 6% for Mike Huckabee, 5% for Ted Cruz, and 4% for Chris Christie.”

Marco Rubio leads the GOP side in favorability, whereas the poll found that New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is “outwardly disliked by GOP voters” in the state.

According to The Washington Post, Ohio Governor Kasich, who has not yet announced a 2016 presidential bid, is considering doing so and is likely to launch his campaign “sometime after June 30.”

Senator Rand Paul’s team touted the poll’s results as another win for his campaign. “This poll, like others, shows that Sen. Rand Paul is the best Republican to beat Hillary Clinton in 2016. Ohio is one of the most important swing states in the pathway to the White House, and no Republican has won it since 2004. In the primary, Sen. Paul is tied for first nationally and in New Hampshire and he is tied for second in Iowa. In the general election, he is leading the field against Hillary Clinton and ahead of her in Ohio and other key states including Arizona, Iowa, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania,” said Paul campaign spokesman Sergio Gor according to the Washington Examiner.

For more 2016 election coverage, click here.

US

Bartender indicted for threatening to kill Speaker Boehner

6 Comments

A former bartender in Ohio has been indicted on the charge of threatening to kill House Speaker John Boehner.

Michael Hoyt, 44, worked as the bartender of the Wetherington Country Club in West Chester, Ohio, but he was fired in October. It was while working at this country club Hoyt had served drinks to Boehner for five years, according to WCPO Cincinnati.

Hoyt called police on Oct. 29, a week after being fired, and told the 911 dispatcher he blamed Boehner for his termination from the position.

When officers responded to Hoyt’s home, according to NBC News, Hoyt told the officers he believed he was Jesus Christ and that he also blamed Boehner for the Ebola outbreak. Court documents also show Hoyt claimed to hear voices coming from the speakers in his car and his home radio which told him Boehner was evil.

After being taken into custody, Hoyt was ordered by a judge to undergo a psychiatric evaluation at a facility run by the U.S. Bureau of Prisons. According to FOX News, the FBI and U.S. Capitol Police believe Hoyt, “poses a current and ongoing credible threat” to Boehner.

Reuters also reports Hoyt had sent messages to Boehner’s wife, Debbie, which showed his anger at being fired from his position as the country club’s bartender. In the messages, Hoyt also said he could have easily killed Boehner previously by poisoning his drinks.

Michael Steel, a spokesman for Boehner, said Boehner  is “aware of the situation and sincerely thanks the FBI, the Capitol Police and the local authorities in Ohio for their efforts.”

It remains unclear as to why officials waited so long to indict Hoyt given the incident occurred on Oct. 29 and the complaint was filed on Nov. 6, while the indictment is dated Jan. 7.

Civil Liberties, US

An Ohio homeowner has been told to remove his unconventional Nativity scene

6 Comments

A man in Sycamore, Ohio, a suburb of Cincinnati, has been told to remove his zombie-themed Nativity scene from his front yard after complaints were filed against him.

Jasen Dixon is the owner of the zombie Nativity scene as well as a haunted house, called 13 Rooms of Doom, in Indiana.  Rather than go out and buy a whole new Nativity scene, Dixon told FOX 19 he wanted to work with what he had available.  The end result is a manger complete with a pale baby Jesus and skeletal Mary, Joseph, and wise men.

After receiving the complaints, Dixon was told by the local town administration office he is facing a $1,000 fine if he does not remove the Nativity scene by Friday.  However, the office has said the content of the Nativity scene is not what the fine is for, rather how much space the scene occupies is in violation of township zoning codes.

Greg Bickford, who works for the Sycamore Township Administration Office, said, according to Talking Points Memo, the office does “regulate displays for content.”

Dixon told Reuters though that many people seem to approve of his homemade nativity scene after seeing people take selfies with the nativity scene.  A Facebook page has also been erected for the nativity scene which has attracted about 200 likes.

“On the average we probably get 30 or 40 cars stop and taking pictures, getting out with their camera,” said Dixon according to the Raw Story.  “I know if it was a real pretty Nativity scene they wouldn’t be saying anything.”

Dixon has said he is still unsure how he is going to respond to the fine.

Police State, Politics, US

Amid Protests, Sheriff Ends Participation in “No Refusal” Blood-Draw Checkpoints

43 Comments

An article posted last week on BenSwann.com noted that police in Clark County, OH were planning to and, on Friday, eventually did conduct “no refusal” checkpoints at which drivers suspected of driving under the influence could be forced to submit to a blood test against their will if they refused to consent to a breathalyzer test. According to WHIO-TV, Clark County Sheriff Gene Kelly recently announced that his office would no longer be participating in future “no refusal” checkpoints after Friday’s program drew protesters from across Ohio. Sheriff Kelly, responding to a volley of complaints that he received via social media and email, said, “If this is not a positive event then we need to find another way to do our job and create an environment of public safety, and I’m intending to do that.”

WHIO-TV NewsCenter 7‘s video coverage of the controversy credited a blog published on Infowars with inspiring state-wide activists to gather at the checkpoints in protest, waving signs with slogans like, “Vampire cops ahead, they will take your blood! Turn now!” Though 464 drivers passed through last Friday’s checkpoint, no search warrants were issued for involuntary blood extractions.

Protesters complained that the “no refusal” checkpoints violate Fourth Amendment privacy protections found in the Bill of Rights to the Constitution, as the program targets drivers for investigation on the basis of their geographical location, rather than their driving, and because many feel that forced blood extractions are an unreasonable type of search.

Springfield Police Division Lieutenant Tom Zawata told WHIO-TV that he is uncertain whether or not more “no refusal” checkpoints will be conducted this year. “We chose to use it at this checkpoint as a way to make the public aware there is an opportunity and existing ability to obtain a search warrant,” said Zawata, implying that the checkpoints were intended as a promotional and educational event, rather than a serious effort to apprehend known drunk drivers. Since the Clark County Operating a Vehicle Impaired Task Force is made up of officers from several police agencies, the fact that Sheriff Gene Kelly’s office is not participating in the program in the future does not necessarily mean that there will be no more “no refusal” checkpoints in the county.

Behind the scenes, the federal government recently decreased its financial contributions to Clark County’s OVI checkpoints program, leading police to conduct fewer of them this year than in previous years.

 

Politics

Appeals court wants execution drug details before lethal injection

2 Comments

An execution in Arizona has been put on hold by a federal appeals court after the court said the man sentenced to death has a right to know what drugs will be used in the cocktail used to carryout his execution.

Joseph Wood was convicted of the 1989 shooting and deaths of his ex-girlfriend, Debra Dietz, as well as her father Eugene.  Wood was sentenced to death in 1991 and was scheduled to be put to death this Wednesday, but a three-judge panel in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this past Saturday Wood was entitled to more information regarding the drugs which would put him to death.

The ruling states, according to the Washington Post, “Information concerning execution protocol is not only of general interest to the public, it is important for consideration by the courts. … We, and the public, cannot meaningfully evaluate execution protocol cloaked in secrecy.”

“Today the court has made a well-reasoned ruling,” said Wood’s lawyer Dale Baich, according to the BBC, after hearing the verdict, “affirming the core First Amendment principles regarding the public’s right to know, which aid all parts of our democratic government.”

This ruling was brought about after Wood, along with five other death row inmates, sued the state of Arizona for not providing adequate information on the drug cocktail to be used in their executions.  The secrecy surrounding the drugs used in botched Ohio and Oklahoma executions is the central issue at hand, and the six inmates say the secrecy surrounding the drugs violates their constitutional rights.

Dissenting judge on the appeals court, Judge Jay S. Bybee, said in a statement according to the NY Times, the court had expanded the right of access under the First Amendment in order to “bar the state from lawfully imposing the death penalty.”

Politics, US

Ohio Libertarian Candidate For Congress Has GOP Worried

19 Comments

The 19th District of Ohio’s House of Representatives is being shaken up this year by a Libertarian Candidate, who is running in what the Columbus Dispatch calls, “the most well-funded challenge an Ohio legislative incumbent has ever faced from a Libertarian.”

Chad Monnin is a businessman from New Albany, Ohio. He is a former Republican, running as a Libertarian, against Michael Johnston, a former Libertarian who is running as a Democrat, and Anne Gonzales, the incumbent Republican who has served two terms.

“I’m under no illusion. It’s going to be extremely difficult,” said Monnin, regarding running as a Libertarian. This race is his first attempt at running for the Ohio House, and while he is new to the Libertarian party, he is investing in it with confidence. “I believe anything worth doing is worth overdoing,” said Monnin, who has already spent $100,000 of the $250,000 of his own money that he plans to spend on his campaign.

“On 95 percent of Republican issues, I line up fairly well,” Monnin said. In addition to being involved in Ohio’s Republican Party as a deputy finance director for the 2004 campaign, and as a member of Newt Gingrich’s 2012 presidential campaign, Monnin also has experience in the U.S. Army’s Special Forces.

“The 19th District is a big ATM machine for the Republican Party,” said Monnin, whose transition into the Libertarian party is best explained by the fact that he thinks current Republicans aren’t living up to their promises. “There should be a party out there that represents individual liberty, lower taxes and smaller government.”

“The Republican Party left me,” Monnin claimed. “I really do not believe the Republican Party represents Republican values any longer, and I don’t feel represented by Anne Gonzales.”

According to Monnin, he met Gonzales for the first time at a New Albany Chamber of Commerce breakfast, two weeks ago. “She says to me she really wants the job and likes the job and wants to continue, but if I’m in the race, that could be problematic,” said Monnin.

Monnin’s financial standpoint has the GOP concerned, and he told the Columbus Dispatch that he has been pressured by “prominent people,” and has resisted pressure from GOP leaders to drop out of the race.

However, despite any criticism, Monnin says, “I’m in it to win it.”

Opinion, Politics, US

LOTFI: Libertarians wrong on federal lawsuit for ballot access

38 Comments
 

NASHVILLE, March 10, 2014– Many Libertarians repudiate the idea of being linked to the GOP. Their dissent does not change the fact that the Libertarian wing of the GOP does exist and is currently battling the establishment for control of the Republican Party. Meanwhile, those who are not battling for control of the GOP are battling for control over GOP voters.

Nowhere in the country was this battle more evident than in Ohio last week. The Ohio Libertarian Party is currently locked inside a battle of historic proportions with the Ohio Republican Party.

Libertarians often refer to themselves as strict constitutionalists and champion the restoration of the American republic. They often hold themselves in a state of moral superiority over their Republican counterparts, which is a perch they have earned, more often than not.

Journalist Ben Swann interviewed Ohio Libertarian Party gubernatorial candidate Charlie Earl (pictured above) over the weekend. “They see us as a threat and a challenge [to Governor John Kasich], we are coming from a Constitutional perspective.  We are on his right” says Earl, who served for a number of years as a Republican State Rep in Ohio.

Earl drives the point that he and Attorney General candidate Steven Linnabary were both kicked off the ballot for holding the Constitution in higher regard than the Ohio GOP establishment.

However, the move to file a federal lawsuit on behalf of the two Libertarian Party candidates is an acute deviation from the Constitution and foundation of the American republic. In fact, this move contradicts the very idea that the two candidates are holding the Constitution in high regards.

Where in the Constitution is the federal government delegated the power to change state election laws? Nowhere. Why? Because election laws are a power of police, which means the power is reserved to state governments.

“The power of the State to impose restraints and burdens on the persons and property in conservation and promotion of the public health, good order and prosperity is a power originally, and always belonging to the States, no surrendered by them to the General Government nor directly restrained by the Constitution of the United States, and essentially exclusive, and the suppression of lotteries as a harmful business falls within this power, commonly called of police,” writes Justice Peckham in dissent. (Champion v. Ames)

In fact, the very practice of the federal government usurping power from sovereign state governments with regards to election laws has been clarified as unconstitutional.

Regarding the Voting Rights Act of 1965 Chief Justice Roberts noted that the law impedes on state sovereignty and equality among states to run their own elections. Roberts calls it a departure from the principles of the Constitution. “The Voting Rights Act sharply departs from these basic principles. It suspends “all changes to state election law—however innocuous—until they have been pre-cleared by federal authorities in Washington, D.C.,” writes the Chief Justice. He clarifies that if the Act was being drafted today it would in no way have become law due to the clear unconstitutionality of federal action in state elections (Shelby County v. Holder).

Knowing this, the Ohio Libertarian Party’s lawsuit focuses on something entirely different. “What we are asking for is the right to be able to use our First Amendment rights to be able to select our own candidates,” said Earl.

By framing their argument as a First Amendment violation, the party grossly misinterprets the federal Constitution as a means to an end.

The First Amendment has nothing to do with state law election laws, or state law in general. This is a hard pill to swallow for some. The Bill of Rights technically only applies to federal laws.

The Supreme Court has ruled multiple times that the Bill of Rights was not bound to state laws. Even Chief Justice John Marshall, American history’s greatest proponent of centralized federal power, knew this much. “The constitution was ordained and established by the people of the United States for themselves, for their own government, and not for the government of the individual states,” wrote Chief Justice Marshall for the Court (Barron v. Baltimore).

“It is settled law (emphasis added) that the clause of the Fifth Amendment, protecting a person against being compelled to be a witness against himself, is not made effective by the Fourteenth Amendment as a protection against state action on the ground that freedom from testimonial compulsion is a right of national citizenship,” Justice Reed for the Court plurality (Adamson v. California).

The Founders never intended the Bill of Rights to be bound to state governments. Why? They were building a republic and nothing else. The Constitution only applies to federal laws. By keeping the Constitution restrained to the federal government only, the result is vast decentralization of power. This was the goal of the republic.

Eventually, the federal government came to an insidious conclusion. If they were to rule that the Fourteenth Amendment “incorporated” the bill of rights then they could vastly expand federal power and begin manipulating state law.

The Fourteenth Amendment never bound the Bill of Rights to the states. In fact, no such language to insinuate so can be found in this historical record. The Fourteenth Amendment applied exclusively to freed black slaves. Regardless, the Fourteenth Amendment has been used to grow the federal government at an alarming pace.

Where is the Court granted the power to “incorporate”, thus creating laws for all fifty states? Nowhere. But who cares, right? The incorporation doctrine now allows the federal government complete control over all police powers. This is the portrait of a dead republic.

Although the intentions of incorporation may have seemed innocuous, the move was dangerous because it centralized federal power.

Libertarians will gladly argue that the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Amendments may have never been properly ratified. However, the Fourteenth Amendment was certainly never ratified. Historical record definitely proves this much. Ohio Libertarians seem to be silent in their dissent now that they are relying on faulty theory as a means to an end.

Most important is to realize the precedent Ohio Libertarians are trying to set. By requesting the federal government rule with favor to their cause they are abandoning the principles of the constitutionally restrained federal government.

The federal Constitution delegates no power for federal involvement in state elections. Because of this, the federal judiciary, a branch of the federal government, has no jurisdiction to rule in favor, or against the Libertarian Party of Ohio. However, as a means to an end, the Libertarian Party is willing to abandon this constitutional principle.

The precedent? How can libertarians argue Obamacare is unconstitutional with this cognition in place? They can’t. Due to abandoning the principles of a constitutionally restrained federal government, liberals successfully sought the very same cognitive path to justify Obamacare.

Of course the Court upheld Obamacare. We have abandoned the principle of constitutional restraint in order to justify our individual means to an end. Once you abandon this principle you cannot protest the same actions by others. It is grossly hypocritical and the Courts will rule in favor of “equality” to ensure an ever expanding federal government.

The Solution? Remember the republic. The republic was designed with one goal in mind, which was decentralization of power. This decentralization of power allows for change on the local level. Running to the feds for help only sets the precedent that the feds can intervene where they cannot. Take responsibility of your state and local governments. No one said it was easy, but running to the feds creates corruption and usurpation of power on a much larger scale in the long run.

“We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard…”- John F. Kennedy.

Reach for the stars Ohio.

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook and on Twitter.

Featured, Politics, US

EXCLUSIVE: Federal Lawsuit Filed After Ohio Kicks Libertarian Candidate For Governor Off Primary Ballot

41 Comments

A federal lawsuit has just been filed by the Libertarian Party of Ohio, challenging a new effort to deny Libertarians a vote for Governor.  This latest attempt, comes from Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted on Friday as he decided to kick Libertarian Party candidate for Governor Charlie Earl off the primary ballot.  Attorney General candidate, Steven Linnabary, also a Libertarian was kicked off the ballot as well.

In an exclusive interview with Libertarian Candidate for Governor, Charlie Earl, Ben Swann asked about this latest stumbling block put up by the GOP leadership.

“They see us as a threat and a challenge [to Governor John Kasich], we are coming from a Constitutional perspective.  We are on his right” says Earl, who served for a number of years as a Republican State Rep in Ohio.

If you haven’t heard about the efforts by Ohio Republicans to stop at all costs the Libertarian party from having a candidate on the November 2014 ballot, then you have missed one of the most dramatic political stories of this year.

Already twice in the past few months the Ohio State Legislature, which is overwhelmingly controlled by Republicans has created two bills that would strip the Libertarian Party of the ballot access.  Both of those bills were signed into law by Governor John Kasich, both of those bills halted by a federal judge.

In this latest case, Secretary of State Husted, a Republican, said he had adopted a hearing officer’s recommendations in disqualifying Charlie Earl.  The decision came after two protests were made against the process by which Earl gained enough voter signatures to be on the primary ballot.

The Libertarian Party needed 500 registered voters to sign a petition in order to gain primary ballot access.  The party hired a professional firm to gather those signatures.  In all, just under 1,500 signatures were gathered, turned in and verified by various county clerks across the state as well as by the Secretary of State’s office.  Then came two challenges to those signatures.  The first claim alleged that the people who were hired to collect signatures on nominating petitions from registered voters did not disclose who had employed them, as required by law.  The second claim alleged that the firm collecting signatures were not Libertarians or independents, as required by Ohio law.  That second claim was disproven in a hearing.

On the first claim however,  one independent contractor who collected signatures did not disclose the name of the enitiy that hired him.  That contractor testified in Friday’s hearing that he has collected signatures for ballot initiatives in Ohio for 12 years and during that time has never once disclosed his employer and yet this is the first time any petition has ever been rejected.  The contractor went on to say that he does not disclose his employer because he is an independent contractor.

Saturday night a federal lawsuit was filed by the LP’s attorney Mark Brown. Brown is looking for a judge to rule on this issue and recognize the pattern of behavior by the Ohio Republican Party to stop any challenge that might harm Gov. John Kasich’s re-election chances.

Earl:  “What we are asking for is the right to be able to use our first amendment rights to be able to select our own candidates”

Swann:  “Are you asking for a ruling or an injunction?”

Earl: “A ruling.  We already have an injunction in that legislation that you talked about. This would be a ruling tied into that injunction, ok.  In other words he would rule that this is an extension of an attempt to keep us off the ballot.”

Swann:  “So you’re compiling all of these things together and saying this is not an isolated incident, rather there is a pattern of behavior over the past few months to try to keep the Libertarian Party off the ballot?”

Earl:  “Precisely.  And as a former Republican and as a citizen of Ohio, I was born and raised here, it’s not that, its just limiting choice for the people of Ohio. Whether its Libertarian or Green or anybody else for that matter I think they should have the choice of choosing someone.  Keep in mind, 50% of the voters in Ohio are unaffiliated.  They don’t belong to a party because they are fed up with what these two old parties are doing to them and they would like to have an option and an opportunity to go another direction.”

So why is the Republican Party so desperate to stop Libertarians from being on the ballot?  Governor Kasich has embraced a number of issues that have angered conservative and Tea Party voters across the state including a massive Medicaid expansion, lack of transparency in his public/private Jobs Ohio board and most recently, the Governor’s support of Common Core.

Meanwhile, the Libertarian Party is growing in Ohio.  In the 2010 election when Kasich defeated then Governor Ted Strickland, Kasich only won by a 2% margin, 49% to 47%.  At that time the Libertarians took about 2% of the vote.  This time around, the Libertarian Party could take anywhere from 5% to 10% of the vote and could not only cause Kasich to lose his place in the Governor’s mansion but would harm any possible hopes for a future Presidential run.

According to Earl, “I served with John 30 years ago, he was a Senator and I was a House member. He’s a decent fellow but he’s just become a part of government. He’s embracing government, he’s having an affair with government.  They are trying to protect him. They also see him as a possible Presidential contender.” says Earl.  “They are hoping people will fall by the wayside and John can sneak in there but they can’t do that if he gets only 40% or 45% or 51%, they need an overwhelming victory.”

Video:

Politics, US

Porn Appears On Govt. Website, Bureaucrats Take Over One Week To Remove It

3 Comments

A porn video called “Sexy Babe” was put on the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) website. The video remained on the site for an entire week before it was finally noticed and subsequently removed.

The film was uploaded to the site on February 18. It was eventually discovered on February 28 in an area of the site where companies share information about oil and gas.

The Columbus Dispatch reported, “Within the department’s division of oil and gas site, there is a Risk Based Data Management System that contains ‘comprehensive well data for over 100,000 wells permitted since 1980.’ There you can find a file transfer protocol or FTP site used mainly to allow companies to transfer large files such as maps to ODNR.”

article-2572840-1C07C01600000578-140_634x492

Apparently, at the time the porn video was uploaded, no credentials were required to get onto the site and transfer files. So the video could have been uploaded by anyone. Officials say that from here-on-out, credentials will be required to make any uploads.

Eileen Corson, an ODNR spokeswoman said, “Someone was using it as cloud storage. Unfortunately, that happens.”

In response to the incident, Ohio state Rep. John Patrick Carney (D-Columbus) is urging an investigation into the video’s upload. He said that government sites should “not be abused for personal use, especially for storing unauthorized or pirated files that expose them to malware and viruses.”

It is easy for one to argue that this is yet another example of government incompetence, specifically because it took over a week to even realize the video was on the department’s website. Had such a video been posted on a private company’s website, it likely would have been identified and removed promptly. The fear of a tarnished reputation is a powerful, motivating force in the private sector.

Follow Kristin on Facebook and Twitter.

Education, US

Lawmaker Withdraws “Worst Homeschool Bill in U.S. History”

13 Comments

UPDATE:  Lawmaker backs down on “worst Homeschool bill in history”.  State Sen. Capri Cafaro released this statement Friday:

“SB 248 was never meant to be a policy debate about educating children in the home. It was meant to address weaknesses in the law pertaining to child protection. Unfortunately, the true intent of the bill to curtail child abuse has been eclipsed the by the issue of homeschooling.

After consultation with Teddy’s family, we have collectively decided the best course of action is for me to withdraw SB 248, and instead pursue a more comprehensive approach to address the current challenges in the state’s social service and criminal justice system.”

“It is our hope that this new focus will bring the discussion back to where it was always intended to be: protecting children. I am requesting field hearings to address the impact of current law, government agencies and nonprofit organizations on child welfare in Ohio.  I will not include any content related to education in the home in a new bill, or in any other bill.”

According to station WKBN  She said she will make a formal motion on the Senate floor when they return after Jan. 1.

To see our video about Teddy’s Law, watch:

A new bill has just been introduced in Ohio and it may be one of the most regressive bills in nation when it comes to the rights of homeschool famlies and parents.

It is called teddy’s law.

The backstory here, Teddy Foltz-Tedesco was 14 years-old when he was killed by his mother’s boyfriend Zaryl Bush. Teddy was reportedly being abused for at least 3 years. According to his father when teachers at school noticed signs of abuse and reported it, Teddy’s mother pulled him and his two siblings out of public school and began homeschooling them. Ultimately, teddy died from severe head trauma in january of 2013, after undergoing years of methodical abuse. His mother and her boyfriend are now serving prison time.

So now comes Teddy’s Law or SB 248. A new bill introduced december 3rd in the Ohio Senate by State Senator Capri Cafaro. So what does Teddy’s Law do?

According to Cafaro, “The bill creates protocols for those applying to educate a child at home by creating a link between the local public service children agency, and the education system.”

So what are the specifics here? Well, for one, Teddy’s Law takes the very unusual and unbelievably tragic case of Teddy Foltz-Tedesco and strips the rights of every homeschool family and parent in the state.

If passed, Teddy’s law would require background checks and interviews before the children are allowed to become a part of a homeschool or online program. So before a parent is allowed to teach their own children, social workers have to deem you fit.

School and child service officials would be able to access a statewide data base to determine whether there are past or current abuse investigations against anyone in the child’s household.

If there are records of child abuse by anyone in the household or if the interviews elicit negative information, it must be passed on to the local superintendent or educational leader.

According to Cafaro, “Once a complaint is acknowledged and a negative recommendation is given, the new school would have to delay or deny the admission to the home or Internet-based school program.”

Of course local media is reporting the predictiable story. The headlines… “Teddy’s Law Aims To Protect Children.” “Teddy’s Law Would Battle Child Abuse” But the part of the story the media isn’t telling you, that the death of Teddy, while heartbreaking is being mis-represented.

Why? Because Teddy was already in a public school for years while he was undergoing abuse at the hands of his mother’s boyfriend and while his mother allowed it to go on. Signs of abuse were seen by teachers, who reported it and it was Child Protective Services that left him in that home.

The question now being asked by groups like Homeschool Legal Defense, why did social workers who had the information in front of them not intervene in a serious way and enforce the already strong and existing child protection laws in Ohio?

State Senators pushing for this law will say, “if only we had known this kind of abuse was taking place Teddy could have been saved” but the truth is social workers and teachers DID KNOW THAT TEDDY WAS BEING ABUSED AND THEY DIDN’T STOP IT FROM HAPPENING

That is the the reality that homeschool families in Ohio and across the nation should be confronting lawmakers with.

We are setting up a special page for this issue. You can go to benswann.com/teddyslaw and there you will find the text of the bill and action steps that you can take.

 

You can contact the bill’s sponsors using the following contact information:
Senator Cafaro (Primary Sponsor)
1 Capitol Square, Ground Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
(614) 466-7182
Email: http://www.ohiosenate.gov/senate/cafaro/contact
Senator Brown (Cosponsor)
1 Capitol Square, Ground Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
(614) 466-5204
Email: http://www.ohiosenate.gov/senate/brown/contact
Senator Turner (Cosponsor)
1 Capitol Square, 2nd Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
(614) 466-4583
Email: http://www.ohiosenate.gov/senate/turner/contact
Senator Schiavoni (Cosponsor)
1 Capitol Square, 2nd Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
(614) 466-8285
Email: http://www.ohiosenate.gov/senate/schiavoni/contact

When you contact these offices be firm and polite. Although this law is misguided, it was drafted in response to a terrible tragedy, and we should keep Teddy’s family in our thoughts and prayers.

Home School Legal Defense Summary of Bill
Summary:
Senate Bill (SB) 248 was introduced on December 3, 2013, and would require children’s services to review all homeschool notices to determine whether homeschooling is “in the best interest of the child.” Under this proposed legislation, children’s services would be required to meet with parents who choose to homeschool and conduct separate in-person interviews with each of their children. Children’s services would then make a recommendation for or against the excuse from compulsory school attendance.

Children’s services would automatically be required to recommend against homeschooling if they determine it is not in the child’s “best interest” or if the family has any record of a child welfare investigation, regardless of the result of that investigation. If there is a recommendation against homeschooling, the superintendent would be ordered to delay excusing the children for homeschooling until the family participates in a CPS parenting “intervention.”

The effect of the bill would require children’s services to divert time and resources away from true child abuse investigations in order to review homeschool plans which they are neither prepared nor qualified to evaluate.

This bill is breathtaking in its attempt to impose unreasonable government intrusion on Ohio families. In responding to this ill-advised legislation, however, it is important to keep in mind the background that has led to this bill.

Children’s services would automatically be required to recommend against homeschooling if they determine it is not in the child’s “best interest” or if the family has any record of a child welfare investigation, regardless of the result of that investigation. If there is a recommendation against homeschooling, the superintendent would be ordered to delay excusing the children for homeschooling until the family participates in a CPS parenting “intervention.”

This bill would also require children’s services to divert time and resources away from true child abuse investigations in order to review homeschool plans which they are neither prepared nor qualified to evaluate.

 

You can sign the petition here:

http://www.change.org/petitions/ohio-state-senate-vote-no-to-ohio-senate-bill-248

Education, US

Worst Homeschool Law In History Just Attempted

15 Comments

UPDATE:  Lawmaker backs down on “worst Homeschool bill in history”.  State Sen. Capri Cafaro released this statement Friday:

“SB 248 was never meant to be a policy debate about educating children in the home. It was meant to address weaknesses in the law pertaining to child protection. Unfortunately, the true intent of the bill to curtail child abuse has been eclipsed the by the issue of homeschooling.

After consultation with Teddy’s family, we have collectively decided the best course of action is for me to withdraw SB 248, and instead pursue a more comprehensive approach to address the current challenges in the state’s social service and criminal justice system.”

“It is our hope that this new focus will bring the discussion back to where it was always intended to be: protecting children. I am requesting field hearings to address the impact of current law, government agencies and nonprofit organizations on child welfare in Ohio.  I will not include any content related to education in the home in a new bill, or in any other bill.”

According to station WKBN  She said she will make a formal motion on the Senate floor when they return after Jan. 1.

To see our video about Teddy’s Law, watch:

 

A new bill has just been introduced in Ohio and it may be one of the most regressive bills in nation when it comes to the rights of homeschool famlies and parents.

It is called teddy’s law.

The backstory here, Teddy Foltz-Tedesco was 14 years-old when he was killed by his mother’s boyfriend Zaryl Bush.  Teddy was reportedly being abused for at least 3 years.  According to his father when teachers at school noticed signs of abuse and reported it, Teddy’s mother pulled him and his two siblings out of public school and began homeschooling them.  Ultimately, teddy died from severe head trauma in january of 2013, after undergoing years of methodical abuse.  His mother and her boyfriend are now serving prison time.

So now comes Teddy’s Law or SB 248.  A new bill introduced december 3rd in the Ohio Senate by State Senator Capri Cafaro.  So what does Teddy’s Law do?

According to Cafaro,  “The bill creates protocols for those applying to educate a child at home by creating a link between the local public service children agency, and the education system.”

So what are the specifics here?  Well, for one, Teddy’s Law takes the very unusual and unbelievably tragic case of Teddy Foltz-Tedesco and strips the rights of every homeschool family and parent in the state.

If passed, Teddy’s law would require background checks and interviews before the children are allowed to become a part of a homeschool or online program.  So before a parent is allowed to teach their own children, social workers have to deem you fit.

School and child service officials would be able to access a statewide data base to determine whether there are past or current abuse investigations against anyone in the child’s household.

If there are records of child abuse by anyone in the household or if the interviews elicit negative information, it must be passed on to the local superintendent or educational leader.

According to Cafaro, “Once a complaint is acknowledged and a negative recommendation is given, the new school would have to delay or deny the admission to the home or Internet-based school program.”

Of course local media is reporting the predictiable story.  The headlines… “Teddy’s Law Aims To Protect Children.”  “Teddy’s Law Would Battle Child Abuse”  But the part of the story the media isn’t telling you, that the death of Teddy, while heartbreaking is being mis-represented.

Why?  Because Teddy was already in a public school for years while he was undergoing abuse at the hands of his mother’s boyfriend and while his mother allowed it to go on.  Signs of abuse were seen by teachers, who reported it and it was Child Protective Services that left him in that home.

The question now being asked by groups like Homeschool Legal Defense, why did social workers who had the information in front of them not intervene in a serious way and enforce the already strong and existing child protection laws in Ohio?

State Senators pushing for this law will say, “if only we had known this kind of abuse was taking place Teddy could have been saved”  but the truth is social workers and teachers DID KNOW THAT TEDDY WAS BEING ABUSED AND THEY DIDN’T STOP IT FROM HAPPENING

That is the the reality that  homeschool families in Ohio and across the nation should be confronting lawmakers with.

We are setting up a special page for this issue. You can go to benswann.com/teddyslaw and there you will find the text of the bill and action steps that you can take.

 

You can contact the bill’s sponsors using the following contact information:
Senator Cafaro (Primary Sponsor)
1 Capitol Square, Ground Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
(614) 466-7182
Email: http://www.ohiosenate.gov/senate/cafaro/contact
Senator Brown (Cosponsor)
1 Capitol Square, Ground Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
(614) 466-5204
Email: http://www.ohiosenate.gov/senate/brown/contact
Senator Turner (Cosponsor)
1 Capitol Square, 2nd Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
(614) 466-4583
Email: http://www.ohiosenate.gov/senate/turner/contact
Senator Schiavoni (Cosponsor)
1 Capitol Square, 2nd Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
(614) 466-8285
Email: http://www.ohiosenate.gov/senate/schiavoni/contact

When you contact these offices be firm and polite. Although this law is misguided, it was drafted in response to a terrible tragedy, and we should keep Teddy’s family in our thoughts and prayers.

Home School Legal Defense Summary of Bill
Summary:
Senate Bill (SB) 248 was introduced on December 3, 2013, and would require children’s services to review all homeschool notices to determine whether homeschooling is “in the best interest of the child.” Under this proposed legislation, children’s services would be required to meet with parents who choose to homeschool and conduct separate in-person interviews with each of their children. Children’s services would then make a recommendation for or against the excuse from compulsory school attendance.

Children’s services would automatically be required to recommend against homeschooling if they determine it is not in the child’s “best interest” or if the family has any record of a child welfare investigation, regardless of the result of that investigation. If there is a recommendation against homeschooling, the superintendent would be ordered to delay excusing the children for homeschooling until the family participates in a CPS parenting “intervention.”

The effect of the bill would require children’s services to divert time and resources away from true child abuse investigations in order to review homeschool plans which they are neither prepared nor qualified to evaluate.

This bill is breathtaking in its attempt to impose unreasonable government intrusion on Ohio families. In responding to this ill-advised legislation, however, it is important to keep in mind the background that has led to this bill.

Children’s services would automatically be required to recommend against homeschooling if they determine it is not in the child’s “best interest” or if the family has any record of a child welfare investigation, regardless of the result of that investigation. If there is a recommendation against homeschooling, the superintendent would be ordered to delay excusing the children for homeschooling until the family participates in a CPS parenting “intervention.”

This bill would also require children’s services to divert time and resources away from true child abuse investigations in order to review homeschool plans which they are neither prepared nor qualified to evaluate.

 

You can sign the petition here:

http://www.change.org/petitions/ohio-state-senate-vote-no-to-ohio-senate-bill-248

US

Senate Votes To Ban The Libertarian Party From Ohio Election

165 Comments

Since 2008, the idea of third parties started to gain more popularity across America.  Principled conservatives and libertarians united against both the Democrat and Republican establishment started to explore methods of opposing Washington elites and the status quo.

The Tea Party had some success – and has continued most successfully – with primary campaigns which put principled people like Ted Cruz and Rand Paul in races as the Republican candidate.  Once they won the GOP nomination, winning the general election was often pretty straightforward.

Yet many liberty activists have become disenchanted by the two party system and are turning to other options. Third parties have been the other option, employed for a variety of reasons both practical and ideological for many voters.

box_libertarian_party_stickers_door_hangers

Third parties are becoming more popular in the U.S.

In 2012, both the Libertarian Party and the Constitution Party executed impressive grassroot campaigns to get their candidates on the ballot in most states. Both parties created milestones by debating each other on a national stage, the first ever third party presidential debate, moderated by Larry King. In this historic event, many Americans heard their message for the first time, while streaming live over the internet. Third parties around the country are gaining momentum because there is a growing outcry for real political change and people want more options than just a two party system in American.

In 2010, for instance, the American Constitution Party earned major party status in Colorado when its gubernatorial candidate earned more votes than GOP candidate Dan Maes.  After Maes suffered a series of scandals, it became apparent he could not win, and he refused to drop out of the race.  His primary opponent, Tom Tancredo, who had stayed on the ballot as the ACP candidate, quickly became more popular, and may have won if Maes hadn’t siphoned just enough votes away to seal a victory for Democrat John Hickenlooper.

It’s in this environment that the Ohio State Senate has passed this bill which would essentially eliminate all third party candidates from ballots.  In the bill, only candidates from parties which earned 3% or more of the vote in a presidential election would be placed on the ballot; all other candidates would be write-in options.  Newly qualifying parties must also submit petitions with at least 55,809 valid signatures.

The bill would, in many ways, solidify the placement of the Democrat and Republican parties at the center of American politics.  Voters must look up and remember the names – something which should be simple but many people simply vote party line, and this will create a discrepancy amongst parties – and write-in candidates must apply to be counted.  Write-in votes are also counted much more slowly than others, if at all, meaning they will not be discussed in the initial analysis of election results.

In addition, many third parties choose to build support by running in small, local campaigns before progressing to expensive and challenging presidential elections, but the Ohio bill only bases its judgment on presidential elections.  Any third party candidate from a party which chooses to focus its limited time and money on winnable campaigns would be at an immediate disadvantage.

Many Americans who want limited government are dissatisfied with both parties. They feel there is no real opposition party that seeks a responsible fiscal policy. Establishment Republicans are threatened by the growing competition from tea party supporters and liberty activists who are say they may support a third-party challenger to incumbent moderate Republicans.

A statement from the Libertarian Party of Ohio’s website says, “The bottom line is that the John Kasich Re-election Protection Act would disenfranchise every Ohio voter by taking away their right to vote for a candidate for governor other than a) John Kasich, a governor who has miserably failed the state of Ohio and betrayed millions of fiscal conservatives who expected him to follow Ohio law and oppose Obamacare, or b) the nominee of the other big-government party who is promising to double down on most of Kasich’s failing policies.”

If Ohio’s proposed law passes it will be yet another rule which helps the establishment maintain power.  The Ohio bill will have a similar effect of creating different standards for different candidates in America’s democratic process.