I apologize if this should go in a different thread, or be titled something else (DeWine governorship?).

 

 

By other candidates, does he mean "himself in the past?"

3 minutes ago, DarkandStormy said:

I apologize if this should go in a different thread, or be titled something else (DeWine governorship?).

 

 

By other candidates, does he mean "himself in the past?"

 

Admittedly I am not the most versed in political and election laws, but at face value this sounds shady as all get out. 

Please, someone explain.

Edited February 19, 20196 yr by DevolsDance

https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/handling-loans-debts-and-advances/personal-loans-candidate/

FYI:  Thread retitled "Governor Mike DeWine" to conform with previous threads about Ohio governors.

 

And its about time there was a thread for the current Ohio governor, he took the oath of office almost two months ago ⚠️

That's probably a sign that his governorship is going to be less chaotic and newsworthy than Kasich's was at times, although so far it appears that it will be about the same policy-wise.

On this topic, Dewine has halted executions in Ohio and wants to raise the gas tax. I support both policies and I'm thankful for it, but I would note that he campaigned on the idea that Richard Cordray would raise your taxes and be soft on crime. 

3 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

On this topic, Dewine has halted executions in Ohio and wants to raise the gas tax. I support both policies and I'm thankful for it, but I would note that he campaigned on the idea that Richard Cordray would raise your taxes and be soft on crime. 

 

I witnessed firsthand Dewine hustle the Ohio GOP into thinking he would be cut from the Trump/Cruz/Paul mold - it was glorious. 

 

I think he's a bit too "cronied in", but I think he'll be a good governor. 

8 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

On this topic, Dewine has halted executions in Ohio

 

Only until the state is able to find a more "humane" method.  It's not out of some renewed sense of being "pro life."

25 minutes ago, Columbo said:

And its about time there was a thread for the current Ohio governor, he took the oath of office almost two months ago ⚠️

 

I had to laugh when he was sworn in on, what, half a dozen bibles?

1 minute ago, DarkandStormy said:

 

I had to laugh when he was sworn in on, what, half a dozen bibles?

 

Lol, yeah. I think they were supposed to represent his kids or something.

1 minute ago, DarkandStormy said:

 

Only until the state is able to find a more "humane" method.  It's not out of some renewed sense of being "pro life."

 

Right. But I do think the practical result will be that executions are halted for the entirety of his term. I don't know that we're anywhere close to finding a solution for the humane drug problem. 

46 minutes ago, DarkandStormy said:

 

I had to laugh when he was sworn in on, what, half a dozen bibles?

 

To be fair, he is from Cedarville, a place with more bibles than condoms. 

Mike Polk is a treasure.

DeWine proposes 18-cent increase in gasoline tax to generate $1.2B

 

In addition to proposing an 18-cents-a-gallon gas tax increase, Gov. Mike DeWine is asking the Ohio General Assembly to allow the state's motor fuel tax to increase each year with inflation, Cleveland.com reports.

 

That’s what Ohio Department of Transportation Director Jack Marchbankstold lawmakers on Thursday morning. The gas tax would be tied to the consumer price index and could increase or potentially decrease with deflation. By April each year, under DeWine’s proposal, the Ohio tax commissioner would calculate inflation over the previous year.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2019/02/21/dewine-proposes-18-cent-increase-in-gasoline-tax.html

^ That's the way to do it. Have it automatically increase based on inflation so we don't end up in the same situation as the federal gas tax, where it hasn't been raised for 25 years and there is no political will to vote to raise it.

First, is any gas take increase going to actually be used for transportation infrastructure?  So much of that money has traditionally been used to plug budget holes elsewhere. 

Second, if they're just going to use it to build even more roads, they're missing the whole point of the problem.  There are already too many. 

Third, a portion of it should be set aside for expanding transit options.  Ohio's current transit budget is a national joke.  Gas tax increases hurt the middle and lower income people the hardest, and there are few alternatives for them.

Edited February 24, 20196 yr by jonoh81

^The Ohio constitutional limits gas tax to only be spent on roads and bridges. It cannot be used for other budget needs or transit.

5 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

First, is any gas take increase going to actually be used for transportation infrastructure?  So much of that money has traditionally been used to plug budget holes elsewhere. 

Second, if they're just going to use it to build even more roads, they're missing the whole point of the problem.  There are already too many. 

Third, a portion of it should be set aside for expanding transit options.  Ohio's current transit budget is a national joke.  Gas tax increases hurt the middle and lower income people the hardest, and there are few alternatives for them.

They're probably going to use it to replace the bridge in Cincinnati, Cleveland is done and Columbus is within 5 years.  Have to focus on Cincinnati now and get that done asap.

On 2/24/2019 at 10:06 AM, jonoh81 said:

Second, if they're just going to use it to build even more roads, they're missing the whole point of the problem.  There are already too many.

 

That is the key point. If they just use this additional money to build new highways and expand existing ones, rather than doing basic maintenance that is long overdue, we're going to find ourselves in the same position a decade from now -- struggling to afford maintenance on an over-expanded highway network.

Gov. DeWine has his first State of the State address tomorrow:  https://www.dispatch.com/news/20190304/state-of-ohio-as-dewine-starts-job-good-job-growth-last-year-lagging-nation-elsewhere

 

Quote

 

Mike DeWine is entitled to start with a clean slate as the state’s new governor pursues his vision of a better Ohio.  But the veteran Republican politician does not wade into his governorship in a vacuum.

 

DeWine must deal with the legacy of governors — and legislators — who came before, most recently the eight years during which John Kasich served as state CEO.  As DeWine prepares to give his first State of the State address Tuesday, he inherits a state — the nation’s seventh largest — that is decidedly midpack, or worse, on a number of key measures of Ohioans’ quality of life.

 

 

The cartoon included with that pre-State of the State article:

On the eve of DeWine's first State of the State address, he's getting an endorsement of his proposed 18-cent-a-gallon gas tax increase from some Central Ohio leaders:

 

https://www.dispatch.com/news/20190304/mayor-ginther-other-leaders-endorse-dewines-proposed-gas-tax-increase

 

Quote

 

Gov. Mike DeWine’s gas-tax proposal got a boost Monday from a group of central Ohio leaders, including Columbus Mayor Andrew J. Ginther, who endorsed the suggested 18-cents-per-gallon increase at a news conference in Grandview Heights.

 

The support offered by Ginther, City Council President Shannon Hardin, Franklin County Engineer Cornell Robertson and others comes as state lawmakers consider specific solutions to a projected $1 billion shortfall in road and bridge funding.  Ginther also was joined by Stephanie Hightower, president and CEO of the Columbus Urban League, Bexley Mayor Ben Kessler and Grandview Mayor Ray DeGraw.

 

 

In State of State speech, DeWine proposes more money for roads, children

 

Gov. Mike DeWine, during his first State of the State speech on Tuesday, laid out a series of ambitious spending proposals to improve the state’s road system, environment, state parks, mental-health and addiction programs, and assistance to Ohioans young and old, Cleveland.Com reports.

 

But except for the transportation plan, DeWine did not say how much money these proposals would cost, nor how he intends for the state to pay for them.

 

DeWine, a Greene County Republican, made his case to lawmakers to approve his plan to raise $1.2 billion for state and local road and highway projects by raising he state’s gas tax by 18 cents per gallon.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2019/03/05/in-state-of-state-speech-dewine-proposes-more.html

 

Mike DeWine is criticizing the former AG here and...*checks notes*... you'll never believe it, it's the same person.

The good news is we're getting some indication that Mr. DeWine is a bit more friendly to passenger rail than his predecessor. Not surprising considering his pro-Amtrak voting record in Congress.

On 6/3/2019 at 11:18 AM, KJP said:

The good news is we're getting some indication that Mr. DeWine is a bit more friendly to passenger rail than his predecessor. Not surprising considering his pro-Amtrak voting record in Congress.

Glad to hear!  

 

Any clues you can share with us? 

On 7/6/2019 at 3:49 PM, Cleburger said:

Glad to hear!  

 

Any clues you can share with us? 

 

His administration won't be able to do anything dramatic since the ODOT budget is already set. But it may be able to support a bunch of existing projects (new/rebuild stations, track capacity enhancements, etc) by pursuing a federal grant(s) for them or provide other assistance. It's a continuation of a policy already begun during the Kasich Administration. As to which projects, see AAO's new posting here: http://allaboardohio.org/2019/07/08/what-rail-projects-may-be-on-ohios-radar/

Edited July 8, 20195 yr by KJP

Not sure where to put this, but why are Republican lawmakers over a week late on passing a budget?

On 6/3/2019 at 11:18 AM, KJP said:

The good news is we're getting some indication that Mr. DeWine is a bit more friendly to passenger rail than his predecessor. Not surprising considering his pro-Amtrak voting record in Congress.

 

On 7/6/2019 at 3:49 PM, Cleburger said:

Glad to hear!  

 

Any clues you can share with us? 

 

Maybe this? ?

 

 

 

Quote

In addition to the nuclear plants, the bill would continue subsidies collected to support two old, coal-fired power plants, one in Ohio and one in Indiana.

 

Ohio GOP wants to bail out a plant in Indiana.

Omfg. Is DeWine really going to sign this? 

A couple of notes on this bill:

 

-"$150 million [from this fee] would go to the state's two nuclear plants and the other $20 million would be directed to existing solar farms."

 

-"The bill, which has seen many drafts since being introduced, keeps renewable standards around until 2026. The standards require utilities to put a certain amount of renewable energy into their portfolio. The final benchmark would mandate that 8.5% of energy on a utility's portfolio come from renewable sources, such as wind and solar. Sen. Steve Wilson (R-Maineville) says the efficiency standard will remain at 17.5% by 2020, which means the utilities must achieve 17.5% in saved energy. But Wilson says, "When they reach the 17.5%, then energy efficiency [standard] ceases.”"

 

https://www.wyso.org/post/senate-nuclear-subsidies-plan-ends-energy-efficiency-requirements

 

The government in this state is a regressive disaster. People pay no attention and just keep voting these fools because "blah blah murica", it's truly mind blowing. 

3 hours ago, Zyrokai said:

Omfg. Is DeWine really going to sign this? 

 

It has passed the House by a 51-38 vote.  Speaker Householder had said he'd wait until August 1st to bring it to the floor when the House reconvened, then Sunday night called a Tuesday session, and the GOP even nearly sent a taxpayer funded jet to pick up some House members from Chicago Monday night to ensure they'd have the 50+ votes needed.  They didn't send the jet, ultimately.

 

Indications are, yes, DeWine will sign it.

When Ohio money is going to prop up an Indiana coal plant, you know that some lobbyist was the author! 

 

I'm a fan of nuclear for now as it is the best way to reach 100% clean energy in the near term.  Large-scale battery deployment is a decade or more away, and until then solar and wind are not viable as full-scale energy sources.  On the surface, I'm fine with the idea of making sure our nuclear stays running, but I wish they would have taken some control if we are bailing our corporations. 

 

Bailing out coal and cutting renewable standards are unacceptable though.  Although I don't think renewable growth will suffer as a result, you can't stop the train at this point.

Also, I'll admit, I'm glad Cordray lost.  Democrats state-wide would be lambasted for the unavoidable gas-tax increase, and then subsequently vetoing  "jobs" and "low-energy bills" legislation. I've seen Republicans mad at 'tax-crazy' DeWine for what happened at the beginning of the year. Then on top of that Cordray wouldn't be able to get anything done given the state reps anyway.  So he'd only be known for the gas tax bill and costing us jobs...

 

It is much more important that Democrats are in better standing for the 2020 elections where they will have a say in the state rep maps in that cycle.

Perry and others across the country are ancient. First Energy will never build newer generation reactors so all this bailout does is pad First Energy's pockets and delay the inevitable which is Perry getting shut down. Being "pro-nuclear energy", which I am as well, is no reason to support this bill.

If the plants get shut down after this bailout then of course that's a huge problem, which is why I said that the state should have  had some say in what happens.  New nuclear power plants will never get built though, they are way too expensive to build nowadays.

 

It appears you can buy off Ohio GOP elected officials with not all that much money.

https://www.cleveland.com/open/2019/07/gov-mike-dewine-says-he-supports-front-license-plates-despite-signing-bill-to-get-rid-of-them.html

 

Quote

Gov. Mike DeWine said Tuesday he supports a legislative effort that would undo a part of a bill he signed in April to no longer require front license plates.

 

“Throughout my career, I have favored two license plates,” the Republican former Ohio attorney general said at the Ohio State Fair, after signing a bill legalizing hemp.

 

Signs bill no longer requiring front license plates.

Three months later; "Actually, I support front license plates."

 

A real leader, this guy.

You know the State Highway Patrol lost their minds over the front plate. They are the most powerful lobby in the state and they get what they want.

California requires a front plate, and I've always just assumed it was a money making scheme for the state. Annoying, but I'd prefer the state make more money off drivers/cars than looting transit funds or something. I don't really see why anyone would care one way or another about this issue. Perhaps I'm missing something...

11 minutes ago, edale said:

California requires a front plate, and I've always just assumed it was a money making scheme for the state. Annoying, but I'd prefer the state make more money off drivers/cars than looting transit funds or something. I don't really see why anyone would care one way or another about this issue. Perhaps I'm missing something...

 

They cite a number (not provided) of arrests made solely on the basis of a front license plate sighting by law enforcement.

A "lack of a front license plate" was also supposedly why Ray Tensing pulled over Samuel DuBose. Cops like to use a missing front plate as an exucse to pull people over that they deem "suspicious".

These days if you're a (non-white collar) criminal the very first thing to go is your driver's license and car if you even had them in the first place. They're taken at the drop of a hat. The Bad Guys aren't driving rusty, primered El Caminos like in the '70s and '80s. They're bumming lifts from girls.

1 hour ago, BigDipper 80 said:

A "lack of a front license plate" was also supposedly why Ray Tensing pulled over Samuel DuBose. Cops like to use a missing front plate as an exucse to pull people over that they deem "suspicious".

 

Ok, that's very true and a good point. I tend to be against a lot of nuisance laws because of the ability/likelihood that they will be enforced disproportionately against people of color and the poor.

 

Actually, now that I think about it, my dad was pulled over for some BS like rolling a stop sign, and the cop made some veiled threat about how he was within his right to cite him for lacking a second plate. My dad is a middle/upper middle class white guy, so I can only imagine the experience of people who don't look like him have about this issue. Haven't heard of any problems with this in CA or really any push to change it, which is surprising given that CA will put just about anything for a vote. 

3 hours ago, edale said:

 

Ok, that's very true and a good point. I tend to be against a lot of nuisance laws because of the ability/likelihood that they will be enforced disproportionately against people of color and the poor.

 

Are minor traffic laws really enforced disproportionately against the groups you have identified, or do the groups you have identified violate said nuisance laws disproportionately?

 

If you have an honest answer to this question, one way or the other, I'd follow up and ask how can you possibly be so sure?

19 minutes ago, Ram23 said:

 

Are minor traffic laws really enforced disproportionately against the groups you have identified, or do the groups you have identified violate said nuisance laws disproportionately?

 

If you have an honest answer to this question, one way or the other, I'd follow up and ask how can you possibly be so sure?

 

I know that whites and blacks smoke marijuana at nearly identical rates (whites are even higher) but blacks are 4 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession.

https://www.aclu.org/issues/smart-justice/sentencing-reform/war-marijuana-black-and-white

 

You can find a ton of lawsuits that contain data that shows racial profiling occurring when it comes to traffic stops. In 2016, 62% of all drivers stopped by Cincinnati Police were black, despite their population only accounting for ~40% of the city population, and only ~25% of the county population. https://www.wcpo.com/news/government/greater-cincinnati-government/early-warning-system-to-spot-racial-profiling-in-cincinnati-police-should-be-back-by-january

 

There is plenty of evidence that shows racial bias in policing. Perhaps a little research of your own would do you good. 

14 minutes ago, edale said:

You can find a ton of lawsuits that contain data that shows racial profiling occurring when it comes to traffic stops. In 2016, 62% of all drivers stopped by Cincinnati Police were black, despite their population only accounting for ~40% of the city population, and only ~25% of the county population. https://www.wcpo.com/news/government/greater-cincinnati-government/early-warning-system-to-spot-racial-profiling-in-cincinnati-police-should-be-back-by-january

 

Your response here just raises the exact same question I asked. You assume black drivers in Cincinnati were stopped because they were black. That's quite an assumption, and one that I think many people mistakenly jump to. Why are you so certain that skin color is the root cause here?