- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -

« News Home

SB 5 is too broad, too divisive; a no vote on Issue 2 is urged

Published: Sun, November 6, 2011 @ 12:00 a.m.

It is impossible to argue that public employees in the state of Ohio can continue to expect to live in the style to which they have become accustomed, given that most taxpayers who are supporting that lifestyle have already made larger concessions to the economic realities of the day.

But it is equally impossible to argue that the only — or even the best — response to that disparity is contained in Senate Bill 5.

SB 5 is an unwieldy document that fills 56 pages of newspaper print, and much of that references hundreds of other pages of law that would be repealed. Like much of what passes as thoughtful legislation today, it is more than anyone could be expected to read and comprehend.

The bill is a testament to Gov. John Kasich’s contention that his narrow victory last November over Ted Strickland was nothing short of a mandate for one-party rule in a state that voted blue in 2006 and 2008 and red in 2010.

There is little argument that Ohio today leans more Republican than Democratic, and last fall’s election results reflect that. It should also have been obvious to any voter who had been paying attention that Kasich knew where he wanted to take the state. Kasich was on the record with almost all of his initiatives, with the notable exceptions of his plan to privatize the Ohio Turnpike and his newfound enthusiasm for expanding gambling opportunities in the state.

Unnecessary overreach

Still, it would have been perfectly possible and far preferable for Kasich to use a scalpel rather than a machete in carving up government. If he had, it is unlikely that we would be addressing SB 5 in a referendum. A bill more focused on reining in abuses and reducing costs for local schools and governments would not have inspired more than 900,000 Ohioans to sign petitions to put the issue to a vote.

But a more focused bill would not have been in keeping with Kasich’s interpretation of his mandate, and it would not have fit the governor’s plan to balance the state budget.

A large part of that plan was to reduce state disbursements to local schools and other entities, with the assurance that local governments would be able to balance their own budgets through the money they’d save by cutting their personnel costs. It was a master stroke that allowed Kasich to declare victory over the budget monster while using the bulk of SB 5 to shift the heavy lifting to city and village councils and township and school boards.

There was an elegant simplicity to the plan, but few complicated problems are subject to simplistic solutions. The proper response to the governor’s overreaching is for the voters of Ohio to send him and the state’s legislators back to the drawing board. And they can do that by voting no on state Issue 2.

There are reforms that are necessary, abuses that must be eliminated and money to be saved. But those things can be accomplished through less sweeping legislation, in a more bipartisan way — and without inviting years of legal wrangling and labor unrest that would move the state backward at a time when Kasich says he is trying to move it forward. For instance:

Require all state and local employees to pay a minimum of 10 percent of their salaries toward their pensions and a minimum of 15 percent of the cost of their health-care coverage. That can be accomplished in a two-page bill that should get bipartisan support in the General Assembly.

Eliminate the stockpiling of vacation time and sick leave for purposes of cashing-out at retirement. Another couple of pages.

Provide for greater transparency in public pensions by giving the public access to information on individual retirees. This would be more contentious, but chiefly because it would make the retirement packages of the legislators and other elected officials public. If every public employee had only one public job in his or her lifetime, estimating their retirement benefits would not be difficult. But many jump from part-time to full time positions, from one government office to another, making their pension benefits more a guessing game than a reliable computation.

Binding arbitration as an alternative to public safety strikes has eliminated strikes, but the process is flawed. Arbitrators too often search for a compromise, when, sometimes, one side should win on the merits and the other should lose. Legislative hearings should be held to show a pattern of arbiter abuses beyond the anecdotal. There are alternatives to arbitration, including a system that would allow the voters to be the ultimate arbiters by placing a proposed contract on the general election ballot.

Sending a message

Both sides of the Issue 2 debate have relied largely on advertising campaigns that appeal to the emotions or to long-held biases. That reflects the weaknesses of SB 5 as much as anything, and it speaks to the wisdom that votes would show in voting no on Issue 2 Tuesday. By so doing, they will send an emphatic message to the governor and to the Republican and Democratic delegations in the General Assembly that it is time for them to do the hard work that is necessary to eliminate abuses of the taxpayers and still treat with dignity the employees who police our streets, put out our fires and teach our children.


1AnotherAverageCitizen(1193 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

""Require all state and local employees to pay a minimum of 10 percent of their salaries toward their pensions and a minimum of 15 percent of the cost of their health-care coverage. That can be accomplished in a two-page bill that should get bipartisan support in the General Assembly""

This is what is needed in the state. Not all the other union busting that is in sb5. I have said this all along. The key being ALL public employees. However so many teachers all ready pay those percentages, Ohio will not save as much as kasich had advertised. Also kasich will give his people additional raises to cover the cost of their share of bene's. After all gis people deserve double digit raises after 6 months of work.

I foresee something like this being proposed as soon as sb5 is voted down on Tuesday.

Suggest removal:

2VindyPost(436 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Vote NO On Issue 2!

sb5 is done, gone, buried...
sb5 was Disposable TRASH!

"it would have been perfectly possible and far preferable for Kasich to use a scalpel rather than a machete in carving up government. "

Ka-Sick created this "attack" on Middle Class Ohioians. A War. He and his re'bluff'ican cronies are responsible for the hostile environment in the State of Ohio. Their primary goals were geared and driven to public sector employees to union bust, attack all teachers, attack policemen, attack firemen, attack emt's, attack nurses, etc...Dirty, plain dirty.
SB5 didn't get him too far, evidently. The Anti-issue 2 momentum simply got bigger and better. It's not exactly rocket science to figure out WE ARE OHIO is more energized and engaged!

The citizens of Ohio literally "busted" Ka-Sick! (in MORE ways than one
Lies, Lies, Lies! ) Backfire!

Now, it's easy to see why Ka-Sick has the unfavorable criticism ...it's reality -his charge wasn't effective...rather contaminating. The PEOPLE Have Spoken! We Are Ohio!

Vote NO On Issue 2!

Suggest removal:

3author50(1121 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Gee what a surprise, the SPINDY has played to the Valley's Status Quo of government and business. Didn't you just publish a headline a few days ago about this area being the #1 poverty area in the US of A? Keep worshiping at the shrine of the government sector unions, incumbents who bow to the aforementioned demands, contractors who kick back to incumbents and one political party - and you reap what you sow.

Suggest removal:

4repeaters(314 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

You should have titled this, "HOORAY FOR THE UNIONS, HORRAY FOR THE UNIONS, AND DOWN WITH THE STUPID TAXPAYERS." All you tough union workers who think you'll get the next piece of the pie....it's coming in the form of newer levies that you can pay. Be sure to explain it to your boss why you need a raise to pay for those tax increases...they'll be very understanding. As for this rag newspaper...you didn't suprise anyone!!! Come Wednesday morning, please change the name of your paper to "THE PROSTITUTE", you EARNED it.

Suggest removal:

5UnionForever(1470 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

The Vindy endorses every Democratic & Union Issue and every Tax Levy! No surprise here at all. It's no wonder the newspaper is almost out of business in a valley that is bankrupt and leads the nation in population loss.

***Yes on Issue 2 is the fairness for Ohio and tapxpayers' vote***

Suggest removal:

6author50(1121 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

@jessedavid and reapeaters:

keep the faith.

Suggest removal:

7Stan(9923 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

With unlimited taxation our goals are unlimited . Higher levels of taxation can make up for slumps in the economy with no need for austerity .

Your getting taxed to the limit one more time is good for government workers in The Valley .


Suggest removal:

8Alexinytown(246 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

The response is simple.

New law #1. No union striking for public employees.

New law #2. Every public employee must pay 10% towards their retirement.

New law #3. Public employees can opt out of paying union dues.

Bottom line here, the Republicans will piece meal this thing to death, and then we will see how much might the national labor unions have to referendum 20 different laws from Washington D.C. The new Democratic motto: if we can't beat them in Columbus, we will put a referendum to everything we don't like.

Suggest removal:

9Alexinytown(246 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Issue 2 has been the best election money can buy, and unfortunately, it has been outside influence that has financed the vast majority of this.

You can bet this serves the interest of the national labor unions more than it serves the interests of the people of Ohio.

Suggest removal:

10NoBS(2763 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

AlexinYtown wants to see these new rules:

"New law #1. No union striking for public employees.

New law #2. Every public employee must pay 10% towards their retirement.

New law #3. Public employees can opt out of paying union dues."

*New Law #1: There has to be some way to settle differences. I've long advocated that binding arbitration by a neutral third party is the way to go. That way, there is no work stoppage. Both sides sit down like civilized adults and reason out their differences. If they can't reach agreement, a neutral third party person makes it for them, based on the information provided by the two sides. This process, however, apparently frightens the TeaPublicans, who would rather return to Dickensian times, where they view themselves as Scrooge and the workers as Bob Cratchet. Yes, it would quickly return to that state, if they had their way.

*New Law #2: The great majority - something over 93% - do now. Most of those who have the political entity pick up their costs are school system superintendents and the like. NOT rank-and-file union workers.

*New Law #3: They can now. However, many places of employment have an agreement with management that the union is the sole agency representing the workers. This is to avoid the favoritism that would be shown to the boss's nephew or the son-in-law of a big political supporter.

Given the huge amount of Republican money that has recently appeared in the pro-Issue 2 coffers, unrecorded and undocumented, of course, I'd say the issue of mandating that political donations be public record should not be repealed, which the TeaPublicans are striving for. Playing fair and playing within the rules just isn't in their vocabulary.


Suggest removal:

11Education_Voter(1167 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

References to outside money in the campaign against SB5 are ironic since the YES campaign did not even attempt to hide the origin of campaign materials by mailing them from a location in Ohio.
Fliers advocating a "Yes" vote arrived at my house from Alexandria, Virginia. Now what interest would an organization from Virginia have in the Ohio budget difficulties? Those are budget difficulties, by the way, that are mild compared to budget meltdowns in states like California and Nevada.

So I agree with the Vindicator -- the legislators should go to work on the budget. They should cut the numbers of bureaucratic workers in Columbus, who, by the way are not union workers.

They should restore a portion of the local funds they cut to ensure that Columbus lifestyles would not be touched.

Suggest removal:

12peacelover(838 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

A lot of you seem to forget that PUBLIC EMPLOYEES PAY TAXES TOO.
NO on 2.

Suggest removal:

13Alexinytown(246 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

You know the law I really want to see? State issues must be funded by state money. Period.

No more big union money from Washington D.C., no more corporate money.

No more paid petitioners.

If you have the wherewithal to put on a referendum, you ought to be able to raise the money in your own state to support it.

Suggest removal:

14Askmeificare(1170 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Vote YES on issue two.

The valley NEEDS this or we all will face HUGE costs if this issue fails.

Vote YES on issue two.

Suggest removal:

15borylie(946 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

I doubt Todd Franko had anything to do with the Vindy endorsement to vote No. He's the only person at the Vindy with courage.

Suggest removal:

16Education_Voter(1167 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Are you kidding me? How about a race for governor that doesn't depend on money from Rupert Murdoch and the Koch Bros. as Kasich's did?

Hypocrisy, thy name is Ohio GOP.

Suggest removal:

17AnotherAverageCitizen(1193 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

The problem with issue 2 is it only attacks the unions. All everyone wants to do is attack the unions. If you really wanted to save Ohio financially, we should attack ALL public workers. make ALL public workers pay the same % for retirement and bene's. Then I could agree with that. But Issue2/sb5 attacks unions too much with collectively bargaining. With sb5 not effecting so many public workers is where so many miss the piont on saving Ohio financially.

Again, If kasich would have made the law All public employees pay the %'s stated in sb5 and eliminate most of the other hundreds of pages in sb5 then we would not be where we are today. Paying more By all public workers is where Ohio and locals will save money. A lot more money saved in a shorter period.


Vote NO on issue 2

Suggest removal:

18doubled(210 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Stan -- a tip for you. In order to pull off sarcasm, one must be both witty and intelligent. You're neither. Try a different approach.

And jessiedavid -- you're mostly pathetic in your attempts to logically support your illogical rantings. But keep trying, I don't want to damper your deluded enthusiasms.

Suggest removal:

19AnotherAverageCitizen(1193 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Vote NO on Issue 2

It's been so good to read so many posters al lready conceding issue 2. You know who you are, kasich and so many others.

Turn oun the lights, The Teaparty is over.

Suggest removal:

20jupiter(116 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

After the Vindicator's FAILED attempts to vilify the labor unions at Y.S.U. and their FAILED attempts to demonize public employees, this was their only option in light of growing public sentiment against SB-5. They are attempting to appear relevant. By writing an editorial that champions what public opinion is, they can appear to have some type of relevance on issues.
Of Course anyone with half an ounce of common sense understands the real facts of the matter and the bigger picture: NO ONE WHO WANTS TO BE A JOURNALIST "chooses" TO WORK FOR THE VINDY. ITS DEAD-END EMPLOYMENT FOR THOSE WHO COULDN'T MAKE IT IN THE REAL WORLD...

Suggest removal:

21jupiter(116 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

FD6636-you are correct in your observation regarding Johnny. I believe that the voters of Ohio are much more intelligent than the Republican machine gave them credit for. This entire drama was supposed to down with the middle class cannabilising itself for the disingenuous urgings of the Republican rhetoric machine.
Fortunately the middle class is smarter than that. They have seen the issue for what it is and want no part in strangling themselves...all the while Johnny boy holds staged "meetings" and gives out raises.
The only objective that Johnny boy has accomplished is to LOSE SUPPORT FOR THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. One must almost ask themselves if he isn't really a Democratic "plant" due to the sheer level of incompetence he embodies. As you pointed out: "Every time he opens his mouth..."

Suggest removal:

22jupiter(116 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

@Dodge2002-The losing side screwed themselves over first by forcing punitive legislation down the electorate's throat. Second they underestimated the intelligence of the middle class in Ohio. Third they played to suspicions and stereotypes with their rhetoric ("Granny-Gate"). Fourth...maybe the good guys do win once in a while ;)
Vote "NO" on Issue 2

Suggest removal:

23Education_Voter(1167 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

I just got robo-called by Pat Boone! (First of all, I'm insulted that the YES on Issue 2 people think I am old enough to remember Pat Boone, or stupid enough to vote his way just because he says, "God Bless You."


Suggest removal:

24doubled(210 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Hey Jupiter -- after reading your assanine comments I realize that you are the kind of person that only hurts this area with your negativity about everything. Tell you what, if you hate this place so bad -- then please leave. It will only be until your kind is gone for good that this area will begin to rebound. It's a matter of attitude.

Suggest removal:

25doubled(210 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

After SB5 is smashed to bits, can we all then agree that the small minority tea party does not speak for the rest of us in ohio - or in this country. If so, can the small minority tea party please shut the F up.

Message to the small minority tea party -- we don't give a sht how loud you scream -- you've shown what you are truly all about -- and we are no longer listening.

Suggest removal:

26honestman(33 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

i love the final whining statements of the prosb5 people, if it fails our taxes and levy's will go thru the roof, vote yes, blah blah blah, i've been mostly ignored on here when i ask them what they actually think fire and police cost them a year. i've said in my previous post's what i pay a year for police and fire, they claim taxes taxes taxes, well put up or shut up, tell me how much you pay now, i'm guessing you never bothered to even find out, you just spew your party rhetoric, this has been one of the better threads, i'm a union worker and i see some need for reforms, as well as some need for political reforms. the rebubs spent 19 million directly on yes gargage, and that doesnt include thier special interest groups like building a better ohio. there was about 5 or 6 pirvate fundraisers. the dems spent 7or 8 mill, with we are ohio and a few others providing support. not near the cash of the rebublicans. boy instead of worrying about all the taxes, maybe you shoulda saved that cash and paid your much lower taxes. you want slaves to push around in this state. you cant strike, you cant have arbitration, you'll take what we give you and like it lazy union employee, well remember the last big tea party we had when a power hungry govt decided to tell us what to do. get rid of middle class keep yourself super wealthy, see what happens. you want to reset the clock back to the late 1800's again when we worked like slaves while the captians of industry smoked their cigars and drank thier brandy and laughed at all the poor, you should be ashamed of yourselves

Suggest removal:

27AnotherAverageCitizen(1193 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

""big mouth, thug, bully thinking and speaking, that doesn't allow you to see anything that is even vaguely close to the truth.""

Do you mean like statement such as ""get on the bus or get run over""
We will destroy the backbone of the teachers union.

Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

Suggest removal:

28jmagaratz(189 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Simple guide for voting....


Suggest removal:

29Education_Voter(1167 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Right jmagaratz.

No to their phony Issue 1, which would allow judges to START working at 75 years old (and coincidently allow Republicans to appoint justices to the Ohio Supreme Court).
No to Issue 2 for reasons given in the editorial.
No to Issue 3, which in a partisan Republican attempt to embarrass the federal government accomplishes nothing regarding the federal health care legislation, but does gum up programs related to health care in our state.
Easy to remember: no, no, no.
old-dude, what you don't know about schools today would fill an encyclopedia. 90k? Give me a break. In my dreams. I was the $12,000 new employee. I didn't break $30,000 for 15 years. So for the $50,000 I'm making now after 30 years, the guilt I feel is 0.

Suggest removal:

30author50(1121 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

I love the argument that public employees use "Hey, we pay taxes too!"

But your taxes come from the taxpayers who really pay the taxes that keep you living way beyond OUR means.

10% to 15% for health care -I pay 100% of my health care and I pay taxes too!

Also, when it comes to representing the people during contracts in Mahoning County - who does? Every elected official in this one horse town is against issue 2 in order to shore up their base and get campaign donations and endorsements - not to mention sign locations too.

As for the SPINDicator - how can anyone of us take this paper seriously when it's news partner Looooie Free is a convicted income tax cheat and has lost two to three house for not paying his property taxes?

Suggest removal:

31NoBS(2763 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

commoncitizen(439 comments)posted 21 hours, 19 minutes ago

Who wrote the endorsement??? No guts to put their name on the artical??

No BS, I think that you "hit the nail on the head" with #3. Is that what the unions are really agianst? It is only fair that if a person in a union doesn't agree with the way that the union "leaders" spend their dues on political endorsements should have to pay the dues.


Commoncitizen, I should have expanded upon what I wrote. In environments where the union is recognized by management as the sole agency representing workers, workers may be able to "opt out" and withdraw from the union. However, if the non-union worker has something happen that the worker feels requires a grievance be filed to settle, the union will represent them. The non-union worker gets the same pay and benefits as the union workers, too. But the non-union worker has no vote in union elections, and is not eligible for things like life insurance policies that the union may buy for its members.

Suggest removal:

32NoBS(2763 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Author50, so what you're saying is that public employees shouldn't have to pay taxes, right? If they live off of the taxes of others, then those taxes have already been paid.

And if you pay 100% of your health care, you must be a small business owner. Do you get any tax breaks, benefits, or perks that rank and file people don't? Sure you do.

I have to say I'm amused by those who have to find an ulterior motive whenever an elected official doesn't agree with them. I guess it's beyond the scope of possibilities that any elected officials just think SB5 is the wrong way to go - there has to be something in it for them personally. People who think like this - author50 - usually behave in that way, and can't comprehend that not everybody does.

Suggest removal:

33author50(1121 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago


Small businessman with not one tax break ever. Nothing but more and more government taxes, fees, rules, regulations ad nauseam to support a bloated, corrupt, inefficent way that has lead this area in being the number one poverty area in the US of A. But thats okay with parasites like you - because you don't create - you take.

Suggest removal:

34Westsider(269 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

So let me see if I understand this - the Vindicator, especially columnist Bertram DeSouza, has been discussing ad nauseam the unfairness and inequality of public vs private sector employment, including massive payouts for unused sick and vacation time for years. Now when there is an initiative to end these practices, the editorial staff says vote NO on Issue 2? Most of the other newspapers have come out in support of this issue. Is it perfect? No, of course not; but change is painful and has to start somewhere. This is one of the most gutless endorsements (or lack thereof) I have ever read. I don't think Bert should spend one more column inch of space on this topic if it is defeated - because there is obviously no spine or stomach for battling the unions here in the Mahoning Valley. I am so happy to be moving soon.

Suggest removal:

35grand4dad(218 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

As pointed out in this column, SB5 is a bad piece of legislation, ill conceived and not well thought out, also too many loopholes for all the management types. Let's repeal this bill and then move to address the abuses or problems in the public sector. When the governor says all must share in sacrifice, let that really mean ALL including himself and his friends/staff/etc.


Suggest removal:

36Askmeificare(1170 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

@ Westsider:

I completely agree with you.

I wonder if the Vindicator took their stance because they didn't want to alienate themselves from their readers any more than they already have.

Columnist Bertram DeSouza is very controversial, but with most readers the very mention of his name elicits a negative, bad taste response and that translates into a negative view readers have of the Vindicator.

The Vindicator has even offered personal views of international politics (check out their "How we see it" column), which they have every right to do, but what the hell does the Vindicator know of international politics when those same folks can't even get local sympathies and emotions correctly?!

Anyway, right on Westsider!

Suggest removal:

37NoBS(2763 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

author50, really? You don't get to write off household items you "bought for the business" - even Kleenex ™ or paper towels? You don't get to write off the use of your vehicle for "work-related" wear and tear? If that's true, you need to get a new financial adviser.

You yourself is what's wrong with this valley. You resent anybody who has one iota more than you have yourself. "If I don't have it, nobody else deserves it!" is your mantra. Used to be, Republicans saw someone else who had more than they did, and they'd work harder to enable themselves to have those things. Now, envious wanna-be neo-cons like yourself just try to tear down anyone who has more than you do. It's easier than actual work, especially with your pouty lip stuck out so far you're in danger of tripping over it. Poor, poor, you!

Suggest removal:

38Westsider(269 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

One more thing. . .the reason we have not heard much from teachers is that their benefit issues are covered in House Bill 153, which became law on September 29. In that law is mandatory health care contributions of 15%. Make no mistake about it, Senate Bill 5 will be deconstructed and adopted into law piece by piece. Vote "NO" if you want, eventually, it will be law because the state of Ohio can no longer afford the status quo and neither can most reasonable, rational taxpayers.

Suggest removal:

39author50(1121 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago


Please change your name to full of BS. You don't know diddlysquat about what small businesspeople can and cant deduct. As far as taking kleenex home and calling it a 'business expense', that happens about as much as you government employees stealing pens, pencils and papers and justifying it by saying something like 'I work hard for the taxpayers,' which in itself is a oxymoron.

Suggest removal:

40doubled(210 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Ok -- jessiedavid -- what is the "truth" -- go ahead and I promise I will listen. I may even respond. And please, don't insult me by suggesting that I listen to - or even worse follow - dave betris' lead.

Suggest removal:

41doubled(210 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Author50 -- quit your whining ya big crybaby...if you have a job that forces you to pay 100% of your health insurance then you work for a crappy company...and if you're a business owner and you're paying 100% then so what -- it comes with the territory of running your own company....just like the profits. So do us all a favor and keep your personal problems to yourself -- no one feels sorry for you. You're a republican or a bagger -- so follow your own advice and start pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps.

Suggest removal:

42AnotherAverageCitizen(1193 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Who cares what the vindy is for or against? I believe the paper should NEVER support/defend/fight for any political issue or person. The paper "SHOULD" just print the information fair. Too bad news stations cannot be fair and balanced. They only want to tell you what they want you to believe.

Suggest removal:

43Education_Voter(1167 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Well, the Columbus Dispatch said they wished that there had been revision of SB5, but gives a qualified "yes", not surprising since they are generally Republican.
But they did have the following fair article the same day, which concludes that public workers are not overly compensated, probably getting less than private workers:

In their editorial on their recommendation, they said that public workers should be respected, and are not overly compensated. Again, not surprising -- it is Columbus, after all, home of many public workers.

Suggest removal:

44Education_Voter(1167 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Should have said the above post was in reply to falconeddy
The Toledo Blade blasted SB 5 with both barrels recommending a "no" vote.
"Defeat of Issue 2 would make clear that Ohio voters recognize the need for change in labor-management relations between state and local governments and their employees, but can distinguish those reforms from hard-core union-busting."
"Ohioans weren't bucking a trend; 2010 was a GOP year across the country. But the new governor and Republican lawmakers interpreted their victories as a near-absolute mandate.

We've seen the results. They enacted an all-cuts state budget that erased a projected deficit by slashing aid to essential public services, while cutting taxes for the state's wealthiest residents.

We've seen attempts to privatize nearly every state (read: taxpayer) asset that isn't nailed down, and proposals that would jeopardize the environmental health of Lake Erie and state parks, in return for vague promises of job creation and economic growth.

More recently, we've seen nakedly partisan efforts by Columbus Republicans to cement their political dominance by working to disfranchise voters who aren't likely to support them, and by drawing new maps for Ohio's U.S. House delegation and General Assembly that mock the idea of fair representation.

And much of this has occurred without any pretense of allowing political opponents -- or citizens -- a piece of an open, inclusive policy-making process."

Suggest removal:

45WilliamSwinger(341 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Boy oh boy does this overfed baby cry when mama tried to pull away the teet.

I'm voting for SB5 babies.

Suggest removal:

46VindyPost(436 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago


An Issue 2 question for undecided voters: Who do you trust?
....On the eve of the election, it’s hard to imagine a voter being moved by a long explanation of the factual details surrounding Issue 2, in either direction. We’ve detailed every conceivable angle of Senate Bill 5, starting with its inception in February, its coming of age as it became a law, and its mid-life crisis as Issue 2. Tomorrow, and in the days that follow, we will discuss its death and subsequent dismemberment by Republicans.

But tonight, as we think about voters who may still be undecided and looking to you, our readers, for direction, we wanted to find a final way to thoughtfully guide them. It comes in the form of a question:

Who do you trust?

Many of us rely on the opinions of others when making important decisions, asking our friends and family for input. We also frequently consider the values of public figures through commercials, endorsements, and news stories (both positive and negative), processing all of this information and constructing our decisions by aligning our final choice with our personal values.

And so we pose the question to voters: WHO DO YOU TRUST?

A Vast Majority Below:

NO on Issue 2
Police Officers=thousands
Emergency Techs=thousands
U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown
Marlene Quinn, Grandmother
Ed Schultz
Vice President Joe Biden
John Glenn

Yes on Issue 2
John Kasich
Sarah Palin
Newt Gingrich
Tea Partiers
State Senator Shannon Jones
Mike Huckabee
Mitt Romney (sometimes)
Out-of-state organizations

Vote with those whom you trust.

Vote with those who represent your values.


We’re voting NO on Issue 2.


Suggest removal:

47author50(1121 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago


Doubled is obviously yet ANOTHER parasite for the status quo.

You know, the ones who have given us the vaste waste land known as Mahoning County where a few thousand people hold the rest of us hostage to their corrupt and inefficent ways and then tend to know everything that is wrong with the producers.

Suggest removal:

48jmagaratz(189 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

How about an "OCCUPY THE VINDY" backlash to see if Bertram can be ousted?

Who knows--just might work.

Maybe he can go to work with WKBN--Mahoning Valley's home of the "YACKASSES!"

Suggest removal:

49honestman(33 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

vote no issue two, i really hope it goes down by at least a 25% margin so we can shut up these blowhards, again pro people, tell me how much you pay for your police and fire in your taxes, over and over, bloated wages, bloated benifits. horsecrap, its a 5 to 1 ratio on the web stating that public makes more, the only people stating private is making less is run by the sb5, independant studies show equal education equals private making more. period, rebublican liers, just like the shady tactics to get the bill thru in the beginning of the year, you coninue with the lies, i pay less than 400 bucks for police and fire a year on a 100000 dollar house in the suburbs, not y-town, not bad, i'd keep paying that, its a great service. your all mad cause we actually make a good living, guess what i drive cars that are at least 7 years old, i turn the heat down, i pay for my health care and retirement, you may pay more or you may pay less, i'm 10 and 10 %, dont have as good as gm, but i'm not crying to the govt to ruin thier benifits. get bent, so tired of your rhetoric, i serve my community with pride, do a quality job, and generally care about people, not just myself. you should try it. i know, i know your gonna say, if you care you'll give up all your nice cushy benefits......... so i'm only a firemedic i should live in squaller, well, i see it differently, i hope most of ohio does to

Suggest removal:

50VindyPost(436 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Excellent sincere comment.

Suggest removal:


HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2016 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes