____________________________________________________________
This amendment says that some powers that may not be held by the federal government but can be held by local and state governments, or by the people of the state.
____________________________________________________________
10/12/2009
Tacticians with history fight over Ohio casinos
By JULIE CARR SMYTH
,
AP
posted: 23 MINUTES AGO
COLUMBUS, Ohio -Behind the daily barrage of accusations and attack ads in the latest ballot campaign to bring casinos to Ohio are two notoriously aggressive tacticians.
Voters in the Nov. 3 election are told they should vote against "Las Vegas-style casinos" coming to Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati and Toledo. Proponents say there is "no limit to the lies" being peddled by their opponents and urge a yes vote.
The escalating tactics were decried last week by a Columbus city councilman after the anti-casino TruthPAC posted an ad on its Web site picturing a police officer wielding a billy club over the head of a clergyman. The posting, quickly removed, stemmed from an influential church leader's accusation that the Fraternal Order of Police had "been bought" to support the ballot question; the FOP angrily denied it.
Both groups are being funded primarily by casino developers taking opposing positions on the proposed business arrangement.
The media strategist for the pro-casino Ohio Jobs & Growth Committee, funded by Penn National and Cleveland Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert, is Rex Elsass.
Elsass, 47, is an admirer of legendary GOP tactician Lee Atwater, and one of the "Nasty Boys" of the 1994 U.S. Senate primary that was marred by the unauthorized sharing of a coveted Republican donor list.
Elsass also conceived the infamous 2000 ads against Ohio Supreme Court Justice Alice Robie Resnick, which earned Ohio a reputation for some of the harshest campaigning in the nation. In them, Lady Justice peeked beneath her blindfold at piles of campaign cash Resnick was said to be trading for her decisions. Both the contributions behind and the content of the ads were found to be illegal by the Ohio Elections Commission.
"The advertisement was so scurrilous that I don't know if I'd ever seen as many members of the commission upset before," said Phil Richter, the commission's executive director.
On the anti-casino side is Roger Stone, 57, who worked with Atwater before his death and ran Ronald Reagan's Ohio campaign in 1984. Stone has been an adviser to the campaign's primary backer, casino developer and MTR Gaming Inc. chairman Jeffrey Jacobs, on and off since 1982.
One of Stone's first forays into campaigning was as a volunteer at CREEP, the Committee to Re-Elect the President, whose misdeeds were at the center of the Watergate scandal. Stone posed as a young socialist, donated to Nixon's opponent and leaked word of the donation to the press. He bears a tattoo on his back of Nixon, whom he said he admires for his "relentlessness and resilience."
The two campaigns are fighting most forcefully this year over whether the casinos would add jobs in a state where unemployment has topped 10 percent, among the worst in the nation. Early voting has begun, and the election culminates on Nov. 3.
Jobs & Growth cites a study showing 34,000 jobs would be created by bringing casinos to the four cities. The anti-casino TruthPAC says the number would be far less than that. The University of Cincinnati economist who oversaw the economic analysis said one campaign is citing total jobs, the other is distinguishing between temporary and permanent jobs.
Anti-gambling advocate David Zanotti, president of the conservative public policy group Ohio Roundtable, called both Elsass and Stone "bad characters who behave badly for pay."
But Elsass rejects the notion that this is some sort of clash of tactical titans. He said his firm, Strategy Group for Media, is running a positive, upbeat campaign.
"There's nothing about Roger Stone that I either emulate, admire, or am like," Elsass said.
Elsass writes off the "Nasty Boys" episode as a youthful learning experience and notes that he was never accused of any wrongdoing. In the Resnick campaign, he said, he was simply the messenger.
"Everything that we did was approved by our clients and produced with their approval with the goal of professionalism and creative excellence," he said. "We produced the ads with the facts we were given."
Democratic strategist Gerald Austin said the constant barrage is classic Stone and intended to confuse voters. Confused voters generally vote no.
"One of Roger Stone's rules to live by is 'Hit from every angle, open multiple fronts on your enemy,'" Austin said. "'He must be confused, and feel besieged, on every side.'"
Stone makes no apologies for his track record. He said he has worked for seven gambling issues and lost only one.
He has been a magnet for drama from the outset of his career during Watergate. In 2000, for example, Stone formed a nonprofit called the New York Institute for Law & Society that underwrote a nasty ad campaign against an Indian gaming issue in New York. According to documents of the case, casino owner Donald Trump — who opposed the Indian casino — was the only major donor to the nonprofit.
David Grandeau, who headed the state lobbying commission at the time, said Stone never registered as a lobbyist on the issue as he should have and Trump paid $250,000 to settle the case. Stone said he still disagrees that he violated any lobbying law.
More recently, a law enforcement tip from Stone is said to have been key to bringing down then-New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer in a prostitution scandal.
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
2009-10-12 15:32:41
http://money.aol.com/article/tacticians-with-history-fight-over-ohio/714015
Thoughts:
One power that the state holds is the ability to hold elections to decide on decisions or laws. This article is an example of one conflict that the city of Columbus Ohio held in order to make a decision as far as casinos were concerned. People taking the time to vote during these elections is extremely important because local and state conflicts and laws more directly effect you.
____________________________________________________________
10/12/2009
Same-sex marriage battle moves to Maine
- Proposition seeks to overturn bill signed by governor six months ago
- Governor says he decided "civil union didn't equal a civil marriage"
- But, he says, state constitution allows the people to have their say
(CNN) -- Voters in Maine will decide next week whether to overturn the legislation signed by Gov. John Baldacci nearly six months ago that allows same-sex couples to wed.
Baldacci, who originally opposed the legislation, said upholding the bill comes down to a fundamental understanding of equal protection and constitutional responsibility.
"Initially, I had the opinion for several years that civil unions were the limitations of what I was willing to support," Baldacci said. "But, the research that I did uncovered that a civil union didn't equal a civil marriage."
On May 6 when Baldacci signed the legislation, he did so knowing there was a possibility that voters could overturn it.
"Just as the Maine Constitution demands that all people are treated equally under the law, it also guarantees that the ultimate political power in the state belongs to the people," Baldacci said in a statement released as he signed the bill.
On September 2, opposition groups delivered the 55,087 signatures necessary to put the legislation to a vote on the November 3 ballot.
California's state Supreme Court issued a similar ruling in May 2008 after which some 18,000 gay and lesbian couples got married there. But in November 2008, California voters approved Proposition 8, which amended the state constitution to ban gay marriage.
Map: Same-sex laws by state If the legislation is upheld, Maine would join Massachusetts, Vermont, Iowa, Connecticut and New Hampshire in allowing same-sex marriage.
Chris Potholm, a professor of government at Bowdoin College and a Maine resident, said the spotlight is now on Maine because of the defeated bill in California.
"I think this is a nationwide effort to get the gay marriage agenda back on track -- not just in Maine, but in terms of the whole country," Potholm said.
But the leading opposition group, Stand for Marriage Maine, says accepting the legislation would strip the meaning and tradition out of marriage.
"Question one on the ballot offers Mainers a choice, and the choice is whether to keep marriage legally defined ... or to take that definition and replace it with a radical definition," said Stand for Marriage Maine communications director Scott Fish.
The latest campaign finance reports show Stand for Marriage Maine has raised $1.1 million, while No on 1/Protect Maine Equality, the group leading the fight to keep the legislation alive, raised $2.7 million in the last quarter.
Both campaigns have waged a ground war, airing television ads, handing out pamphlets, canvassing door to door and running phone banks.
Like Baldacci, No on 1 says the bill is a true testament to Maine values.
"[Citizens] don't believe in a separate set of laws for a separate set of people," said Mark Sullivan, the organization's communications director. "When you try separate, it's never equal."
Even in tough economic times, Sullivan says people across the country are reaching into their pockets and getting involved in any way possible to help the cause. Beyond donating money and time, the campaign has seen donations in frequent flyer miles so other supporters can travel to Maine to volunteer.
Both sides are concerned that voters will not understand the language on the ballot.
Question 1 reads: "Do you want to reject the new law that lets same-sex couples marry and allows individuals and religious groups to refuse to perform these marriages?"
Potholm said confusion on Election Day could work in same-sex marriage advocates' favor.
"Either small amounts or big amounts of confusion help whichever side has the no vote," he said. "When in doubt, [people] vote no."
Regardless of the outcome, Baldacci said Maine will have gained because of the educational efforts put forth by both campaigns.
"What you want to have coming out of this is respecting each other regardless of your sexual preference," the two-term governor said.
Maine residents will also vote whether their state should legalize the use of medical marijuana on the same ballot.
Thoughts:
The issue of same-sex marriage in the US is not one addressed by the Constitution. Therefor, I believe that the states have the right to hold voting to either allow it or deny it based on what the people of the state wont.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/10/25/maine.same.sex/index.html
____________________________________________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment