Thursday, October 7, 2010

Visit this link for my recent TV interview (Beck was a No-Show, Of Course!)

Here is my recent TV interview with the Dayton League of Women Voters.  Click here to watch!


Saturday, September 18, 2010

Why Won't My Opponent Agree to a Debate?

I am running for the seat of State Representative of the 67th District. I strongly believe that the voters have a right to hear the candidates debate in a public, nonpartisan forum. Unfortunately, my opponent, Pete Beck, does not agree and thus far has refused to debate with me and the Libertarian candidate on the ticket, Robert Waters. Mr. Beck is technically the incumbent. He was appointed to the seat by the moderate higher-ups in the Republican party one year ago. He has never been voted into the position by the people of Warren County, and many conservative Republicans and Tea Party members don’t support his candidacy. 
It appears that my opponent is afraid to debate me, for fear of losing ground in what he assumes will be an easy victory. Since serving as your state representative, my opponent has not introduced one bill to the Ohio House of Representatives, nor has he initiated any changes that would bring jobs to our local economy. He has simply rested on his Republican laurels, and now takes the seat for granted by virtue of his party label.
Is that what the people of Warren County want? Don’t you want to hear the candidates engage in a vigorous debate on the issues that affect your daily lives: jobs, taxes, and excessive government spending?
Only through a debate can I prove to the people of Warren County that I am the best candidate on the ticket. Yes, I am a Democrat, but you will be surprised that my fiscal views are actually more conservative than Mr. Beck’s views. I am also pro-life, and support gun owners freedoms under the Second Amendment. As an attorney who frequently argues issues in court, I am confident that I can convince the voters of my competence and integrity. As your state representative, I will aggressively work to bring jobs to this county and not raise taxes. However, I cannot convince you unless Mr. Beck stops running from me and agrees to debate in the name of true  Democracy.
It also appears that Mr. Beck is reluctant to debate with Mr. Waters, a charismatic Libertarian who attends local Tea Party meetings and appeals to the conservative Tea Party base. The electorate is understandably wary of partisan labels. Voters want to elect the best person for the job, regardless of label. That’s why the Tea Party has surged in popularity. I urge you to contact Mr. Beck and demand a debate. You are hiring the candidate to work for you, and you have a right to interview each one for the job.  

Monday, July 26, 2010

It's Soylent Green All Over Again!

Remember the movie "Soylent Green"? Maybe you are not as old as I am, but it was a big hit in the 1970s when I was a kid. It told the story of a highly efficient, futuristic world where old people were required to undergo a peaceful euthanasia when they hit a certain age. At that point in time, they were considered wasteful in society; no longer capable of working 40 hour weeks and contributing to the tax base.
Sometimes I feel that the ultra-conservative movement in America reflects a "Soylent Green" mentality. Ironically, the Bible and Christianity is used to justify an ideology that is far from what Jesus preached. In recent weeks, I have encountered several Republican women in my community circulating petitions for signing which state that the Health Reform Act is "Unconstitutional." I usually politely decline signing these petitions and tell them that I support Health Reform. One woman at the county fair wanted to argue with me, however. And so I engaged (briefly).
I told her that I am a Social Security Disability attorney and every week I help people who have lost everything (and I mean everything) due to a devastating family illness. I have seen literally hundreds of hardworking local residents lose a lifetime of retirement savings, their homes with full equity, and their peace of mind (i.e. they cannot sleep at night due to mounting, unpaid medical bills), due to an illness. These same people cannot get the medical care they require, even in cases of terminal illness. I also reminded her that 32 million people are uninsured in America today. Someday she could be one of them.
In response, the thirty or forty-something year old woman said "That's too bad. I feel sorry for them, I really do. But it's not my problem."
Does she really "feel sorry for them"? I don't think so. The 32 million people that I reference are simply numbers in the heads of people who have not been truly affected by the plight of the uninsured. I deeply believe that this woman, and others holding those petitions, would change their minds if one of their loved ones: a mother, a sister, a sick child, was a part of that 32 million statistic.
Circulating petitions stating that Health Reform is "Unconstitutional" is the ultimate Republican spin. In my first year as a law student at UC Law School 13 years ago, I was instructed that the US Constitution included a Bankruptcy Clause because the drafters acknowledged that losing all of one's financial resources through job loss, or sickness, or failure to keep a business afloat, could quite literally lead a person to suicide. Bankruptcy was the merciful solution provided by the government to relieve a citizen in that time of stress.
But now, for some reason, a person's right to be slaughtered by medical bills (more than half of all bankruptcies are the result of unpaid medical bills) is Constitutionally PROTECTED? That's a farce. It's a lie.
The private insurance companies have made a killing on sick Americans through unjust policies regarding pre-existing conditions and countless other profiteering tactics. Politicians like John Boehner support these money making private companies and convince Americans that their corruption is somehow Constitutionally protected. The Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves.
The United States of America is the only industrialized Democracy that does not require the right of basic health care to its citizens. So if this mandate is so "Unconstitutional" and demands repeal, then why have no other industrialized nations required such repeal based on their respective (Democratic) Constitutions?
I have said it many times: a society and its government is only as strong as its treatment of its most vulnerable citizens. Case in point, the Nazi regime. Only the strong and the young were valued in that Godless system. There is something very dark about saying one "sympathizes" with a fellow citizen and then denying his or her access to basic medical care.
Finally, I say to the healthy woman who told me that "she feels sorry for the 32 million" but that "it's not (her) problem": someday it WILL be your problems. You will grow old and/or sick and not have proper coverage, or your loved ones will need medical care and not have coverage. It's not enough that you supposedly sympathize with people in these sad situations. As Americans, we must EMPATHIZE with their plight, recognizing that someday it will be us, or our loved ones in the same predicament.

Saturday, July 10, 2010

Containing Costs the IT Way

Governments are in financial crisis, Ohio included. Simply put, we have run out of money. Tax revenues  have dropped as property values have tanked and household incomes dwindled. Falling prices for stocks and real estate have further injured previously underfunded public pension plans. Unemployed workers have increased the demand for welfare and Medicaid services. This year, Ohio faces a 300 million dollar shortfall in its budget and unlike the Feds, we don't have the luxury of printing dollar bills and living on credit. Our state leaders must find practical ways to aggressively cut waste and make the government that we have "lean and mean." One of the best ways to do this is through Internet Technology (IT). Below is an interview with my husband, Chris Howard, addressing this issue. We hear a lot of emotional rhetoric from partisan and nonpartisan groups. Now let's starting talking REAL solutions.

Tell me briefly about your job

I am a Chief of Research at Gartner, a technology research and advisory firm. I am responsible for setting and executing a high-value research agenda for technology professionals within the public and private sectors. In my job, I travel extensively worldwide and interact with clients at all levels of leadership. I have worked with various levels of government in North America and Europe.

What are the common differences you see between private companies and government agencies? Why do those differences exist? Are there differences in management and employee mindsets? Do you approach these groups differently?

Public and private sector organizations have different primary drivers and motivators. Whereas profit and competitiveness are primary for most companies, cost containment and accountability are crucial for government. In a sense, they both have similar stakeholder responsibilities: corporation to its shareholders (and others); government to the citizens. The essence of the difference is that corporations exist to generate wealth. Governments exist to govern.

Governments and corporations both consume information technology (IT). Over the past several decades, each have spent billions adding software, hardware, networks, data centers, and staff to create and support the IT environment. The result for each is a complex, expensive, poorly-understood collection of equipment and functionality where money can leak out in a torrent. The growth of the IT environment should be controlled by effective standards and vendor management policies. Unfortunately, and this is especially true in governments, standards often don’t exist or are not enforced. As a result, complexity compounds, fragmented contracts add cost, and change becomes more difficult to implement. Uncontrolled complexity creates additional cost and this, ironically, is an internal governance issue.

In IT, there are a handful of mindsets, common in both public and private sectors. Some people are constantly curious and always learning: searching for better ways to craft solutions. Others are what we call “lifers”: people who attach themselves to a particular technology or system and ride it out into retirement. Lifers are resistant to change because they perceive it as a threat. Those who remain open and curious are more likely to embrace change but are also more likely to take maverick steps that require management support and intervention.

Another similarity between corporations and governments is the often fractured nature of business lines/agencies. In large organizations, silos develop that are aligned with lines of business, product, services, or some other function. As a result, you may have multiple groups that are doing very similar things, but collaboration is limited and difficult. The more fractured the environment, the harder it will be to effectively serve the needs of the customer/citizen.

Provide examples of ways that you were able to help a government body save money.

In my work as an advisor, I help executives spot the opportunities for consolidation in their environment and counsel them on dealing with political issues that will arise. At the end of the day, the discussion is not about technology solutions: those are pretty straightforward. Most inertia in organizations is caused by culture, habits, and broken relationships.

Most governments worldwide, at all levels, are working on shared-services solutions that consolidate common functions across agencies. This involves reaching consensus on what can be made common and reusable. It is complex work, and requires analysis of existing workflows to determine where redundancies can be collapsed. It is a balancing act: not everything should be centralized, and agencies need some level of autonomy to be effective.

Computing infrastructures are also candidates for consolidation. Using new virtualization technologies and emerging cloud computing capabilities, governments can reduce their spending on data centers. Some of my government clients are making decisions about whether to build new data centers or retrofit their existing ones. In many cases, older government facilities are not appropriate for new data center architectures and they should build a modern facility that incorporates new approaches to power, heating, and cooling. In the long run, such a facility will save them money. In the near term, governments should start by reducing the number of physical servers and replacing them with virtual machines running in their existing data centers.

Consolidation and computing infrastructures come together in effective ways. The Canadian Federal Government, for example, built a completely virtualized infrastructure for shared services that supports most agencies. Virtualization allows for quick provisioning of computing power at lower cost than traditional methods. In this scenario, everyone wins: standards and policies mandate use of the shared infrastructure, turn-around time for new functionality is accelerated, and cost (and technology sprawl) is contained.

Why is the move to e-government just a surface solution?

E-government is an important strategy. It places more control in the hands of the citizen as they interact with their information and services. It also potentially reduces “customer service” costs and personnel. The challenge with e-government is that it may not go deep enough. Truly effective e-government requires refactoring of the underlying systems to create integration and consolidation. Most of these legacy systems were put in place before the concept of citizen self-service (or the internet for that matter) existed. Human workflow will also need to be refactored to support a more integrated environment.

Thursday, June 24, 2010

Why I Will Vote Pro-Life

  If elected as your state representative, I will vote “pro-life” on all issues involving abortion. I have held pro-life views for the majority of my lifetime. As a child growing up in the Catholic Church, I was taught that a human being becomes viable at the moment of conception. This stance was reinforced when I became pregnant with our two children in my twenties. I recall the “flutter” of movement that I felt when carrying each of our children in my first trimester. There was no doubt in my mind that such movement indicated God-given life. 

My pro-life stance loosened in my thirties, however, as my work in local juvenile courts tested my convictions. As an attorney and guardian ad litem, I was exposed to many real-life tragedies in which young women found themselves facing unwanted pregnancies. Some of these cases involved rape, incest, or drug addicted mothers who continued to abuse substances while pregnant. For a few years, I embraced a broader approach to abortion because I saw, firsthand, the painful nature of these sad and complicated situations. Did this belief sit well with me? Never.

In recent years, my husband and I have returned to the church and the abortion issue has continued to trouble me. I now believe that as Christians, we must err on the side of caution and protect unborn life in the womb at all costs, even if the infant will be born with serious disabilities, or into situations involving drugs, poverty, abuse and neglect; even if it is a hardship for the mother to carry that child to full-term (unless the mother's life is at risk.) My renewed conviction regarding the sacredness of life at all levels is strengthened by my work on Ohio’s Board of Nursing Home Examiners (BENHA), and Warren County’s National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI). Both organizations seek to protect the rights of vulnerable individuals regardless of age or physical/mental status.   

As a Christian and a Pro-Life Democrat, I will put my energies into honoring and enhancing the private and public systems that support women and children. I would like for the voter to understand that I have internally struggled with this issue in the past. Nevertheless, my return to the pro-life position that I held for the majority of my lifetime is permanent.

I welcome your response to this blog.

Sunday, June 13, 2010

Save our Public Schools!

I've been knocking on a lot of voters' doors in recent weeks. There is always that awkward moment when the homeowner is thinking, "Is she a Jehova's Witness?" The potential voter is relieved when I hand them my card and say that I am running for State Representative in November. "So what are the issues that you are most concerned about?" I ask. Often, the answer involves public school education. Families and teachers want more funding for our local schools. Older folks on fixed incomes are fearful that property taxes will be raised in pursuit of that goal.

In 1996, the Ohio Supreme Court decided that the current method of funding by relying heavily on local property taxes was inequitable (see DeRolph v. State of Ohio). Simply put, the schools in Mason prospered and the schools in downtown Cincinnati suffered when relying on property taxes. Although the Court ordered that Ohio's government "enact a constitutional school-funding system", it did not provide any concrete guidance on how the legislature was to enact such tax reform. Our elected leaders were then faced with a quagmire similar to the oil spill in the Gulf. To correct the problem required a total overhaul of the system. Politicians run from that kind of task. Obvious solutions involve raising income taxes and tangible property taxes on the local electorate, thereby committing political suicide.

Consequently, the legislature took the easy way out and authorized more state funds to schools; a band-aid solution that could not last in the face of a subsequent "Great Recession" and present-day cutbacks in state and federal funding. So now we are faced with a harsh reality. How do we run our schools with diminishing revenues, especially when local levies like the one in Little Miami fail? At this point, my fingers take a long pause on the keyboard.

As your elected State Representative, I will encourage the passage of local levies; better schools increase our property values and make for stronger communities. However, I will not vote for increases in property, income, or tangible taxes without majority consent. People are strapped and struggling to pay their monthly bills and the unemployment rate remains high. We all need to find ways to reduce school spending without raising taxes. First, I will fight to eliminate the requirement of full-day Kindergarten as set forth in House Bill 1. Most local voters agree that this is an indulgent mandate given the limited finances of our public schools. Moreover, there is no strong data to show that all-day Kindergarten is worth the astronomical expense involved in increasing operating costs, staffing, and support staff. Presently, Mason and Lebanon have been granted a one-year waiver of this requirement. However, the full-day Kindergarten mandate should be done away with altogether. It's great in theory, but we just can't afford it.

Our local schools also need to get creative with cutting back on staff through attrition. In Mason, the attrition rate averages 25-35 staff members yearly. By not adding new teachers to replace the ones that leave, it is estimated that over 69 million dollars will be saved in Mason City schools alone in the next 10 years.  
This will obviously put a burden on the teachers that remain, especially in light of the 19-1 student-teacher classroom ratio required in House Bill 1. Nevertheless, we are living in tough financial times and these types of cutbacks are inevitable unless the public wants to pay more in taxes.

Schools can also continue to make cuts in nonessentials like paper costs. By using electronic worksheets and  report cards, large amounts of money can be saved. Similarly, reduced energy consumption in our schools will lead to significant savings, as will a freeze in all funding for extracurricular activities. Other initiatives include a workers' compensation discount program, and cooperative purchasing agreements.    


I am opposed to excessive legislation being placed on top of our local school systems at the whim of the government. An example is Senate Bill 210, intended to fight childhood obesity by requiring 30 minutes of physical activity per day for students in K-12. It's great in theory, don't get me wrong. But our schools don't have the monies to employ the require certified teachers to oversee the programs.


Unfortunately, the proposals referenced above don't come close to solving the dilemma of decreasing revenues and increasing student population faced by the communities in the 67th District.  When all is said and done, we need to increase tax revenues by attracting more lucrative industry to our area. Governor Strickland and the Ohio legislature endeavor to make Ohio the bell weather state for renewable energy in years to come. Communities in the 67th district need to attract money-making, green industry with more tax incentives. The paradox is that offering tax incentives to such industries will result in adding more money to the tax base than what currently exists. We also need more jobs in Internet Technology and Health Care.

By increasing tax revenues through additional businesses and industry, and aggressively decreasing costs, the communities of the 67th District can improve their public schools. I welcome any ideas from the readers on how to solve the school funding crisis in our district. There is a lot of criticism and attack out there on this issue. Let's talk about SOLUTIONS.

Monday, May 31, 2010

Campaign Kickoff Event in Lebanon: Bring Friends!


Paid for by Friends of Anne K Howard, 12 E Warren St Lebanon OH 45036, Chris Howard Treasurer

Saturday, April 17, 2010

Independent Voters Rock!

Last night I had the pleasure of meeting with a group of Independent voters in my district. These individuals had a very refreshing approach to politics. They did not adhere to any "party line" just for the sake of sticking with the label. Rather, they thought for themselves and were not afraid to go against the mainstream on issues. They also had a healthy skepticism of the media, and the barrage of emotional messages that come at them 24/7 from various news channels.

What impressed me so much about this group was its desire to vote for the leader, not the label. The individuals had a history of voting for both Republican and Democrat candidates in their respective pasts. They did not get caught up with labels, but took the time to get to know the local leader and what he or she stood for. One woman said that in the last election, she had an Obama sign in her yard right next to a (Republican) Mike Turner sign. She felt that Mike Turner had done a lot for her district and was the best choice at that time. She frankly did not care what her neighbors thought. Now that's the American spirit!



The issues facing our country and our state are often extremely complex. To remain Independent shows a thinking and questioning mind; a person who understands that many issues are not black and white, and cannot be neatly framed in a 30-second sound bite. That person also understands that no one party has all the answers. Moreover, neither party is "the enemy." Both parties are designed to keep our system in balance, and each party has beliefs and ideas that are worthy of respectful consideration.

Just over 20% of Warren County voters call themselves Democrats. Just over 30% call themselves Republicans. About 45% of Warren County voters call themselves Independents. I believe that the Independents will vote me into office in November. I have absolute faith in their ability to see that I am a competent woman who will listen to the people she represents and support legislation that will  bring prosperity and balance to the 67th District. If you know an Independent voter in Warren County, please give them my information. No doubt about it, Independent voters ROCK!

Thursday, April 8, 2010

Q and A


Question: Can a Democrat EVER win an election in Warren County?

Answer: With your support, I will be elected on November 2, 2010 for State Representative of the 67th District.

Here’s why I stand a chance:

As a responsible moderate business person in Lebanon, I have a passion for bringing significant job growth to Warren County. This is the ONLY way to increase the tax base. 

The new jobs that must come to District 67 should be in lucrative areas like IT, healthcare, and renewable energy. I hear what the voters are saying: NO new taxes or tax increases! Our home values have plummeted and many of us have experienced job loss, or reduction in income since the recession began. 

Question: Can a Democrat lead District 67 as a fiscal conservative?

Answer: This one will.

House Democrats in the Ohio General Assembly have reduced spending by $4.3 billion over the past three years. A $296 million shortfall is expected in Ohio's mid-year, 2010 budget. This means that deeper budget cuts must occur. Big government does NOT mean better government.  

Question: Does this mean you want to cut out vital services?

Answer: Absolutely not.

By cutting back on government waste and aggressively offering tax incentives for IT and energy-related businesses in the 67th District, we can protect vital services such as desperately needed road repairs, help for the elderly and disabled, and education. A community is only as strong as its middle class and its local industry. More jobs, better jobs = a stronger tax base to fund essential services.  

I cannot win this election without YOUR support. Please contribute as generously as you can to my campaign. To contribute, write check to "Friends of Anne K Howard" and mail to 12 East Warren St., Lebanon, Ohio 45036. Also, I would love to see you at my Campaign Kick-Off Event at Gourmet on Broadway, Saturday, June 5, 2010 at 7PM. 

Thursday, March 25, 2010

Save the Middle Class!

Yesterday the Ohio Supreme Court ruled in a unanimous 7-0 vote to put Libertarian candidate, Robert Waters, back on the ballot. (Waters had made an error in completing his filing petitions, which the Ohio Supreme Court determined was not fraudulent or misleading in nature). The race for State Representative of the 67th District is now three-way.


I am personally very pleased that the public will get a real choice in the voting booth this year. For too long in Warren County, the only choice was the one ruling party. Many times, I would vote for a Republican candidate simply because there were no other options. In November 2010, the choices are much clearer: myself, a responsible moderate business person who has a real concern for the health of our communities and our people; a truly conservative working person with a libertarian approach who had to fight just to get on the ballot; or one more of the string of the same tired politicians who have kept our county and state under their rigid control for years. 

I have been connecting with many voters in recent weeks- through the Internet, and at local functions. The political climate is exciting and volatile, to say the least.  Many feel that the very survival of the middle class is at stake in November. Like most Americans, the residents of Warren County are under tremendous stress. They are working harder for less and giving up comforts like eating out and cable TV. Those with jobs feel lucky just to have work. Those without jobs are growing anxious and depressed by the day- wondering when the local job market will improve.
   
In this climate, people cannot even contemplate tax increases. Their home values have plummeted (if they have not foreclosed), and the days of using credit cards to "supplement" one's income, paying for unexpected car repairs, medical treatment, or vacations, are over. The people that I am meeting with in Warren County are going back to the basics. They are doing without, and trying to rebuild their net worth by saving more and spending less.

This frugal approach must be practiced in our state's government, as well. As much as Republicans like to talk about fiscal responsibility, the reality is that Democrats are better at handling money. Our governor, Ted  Strickland, inherited an astronomical deficit from the overspending of the Taft administration. Governor Strickland and the Democrats in the Ohio General Assembly have done an admirable job in the last two years at chipping off two billion dollars of that deficit.

Historically, Republican presidents have built the deficits during their administrations much higher than Democrats with exorbitant military spending and no plans to pay for such grandiose endeavors. Need I even mention the wasteful spending of Bush's War in Iraq, which led to a monstrous deficit inherited by the current administration? Many complain that the Health Reform bill that recently passed will drive up our deficit. In fact, stats from other countries show that health reform actually drives down health care costs and premiums. The Congressional Budget Office projects that the bill will cost $940 billion over the first 10 years and reduce the deficit by $130 billion during that period. Between 2020 to 2029 it will reduce the deficit by $1.2 trillion.

On the local level, many Republican leaders in Warren County felt the Federal Stimulus was a mistake. But look at the facts: this nation and its states were on the verge of a Great Depression and that Stimulus prevented further disaster. Those same Warren County Republican leaders went on to accept stimulus funds for the county and use the money to improve roads, courts, and offer jobs to local citizens. So much for holding on to principle! When push came to shove, they realized that they needed that money to assist the middle class of Warren County.
There is still so much work to do to ensure the financial well-being of our communities, and I believe that I am the best person for that job. A $296 million shortfall is expected in Ohio's mid-year, 2010 budget. This means that deeper budget cuts must occur. It also means that our legislature must work overtime at bringing new and better jobs to Ohio to build the tax base. A grown adult should not be standing in line at a Kings Island Job Fair looking for a minimum wage job to feed his or her family. The jobs that must come to Warren County should be in lucrative areas like IT, healthcare, and renewable energy- REAL jobs that provide for entire families. 

Many Independents in our district have told me that they will vote for me because they wish to vote for the person, not the party. In these stressful times, competent and fiscally responsible leadership is imperative. I will bring that leadership to the district, and focus all of my efforts on saving our middle class.    

Saturday, March 6, 2010

More film production = More JOBS for Warren County

Sometimes government gets it right. Last July, the Ohio General Assembly passed legislation that offered almost $7 million in motion picture tax credits to encourage companies to make movies in Ohio. As a result, four movies are currently being filmed in the Buckeye State, and are expected to employ nearly 3,000 Ohioans as part of the production crews and extras. Even better, the films will bring about $25 million in economic activity to Ohio with production crews utilizing restaurants, hotels, and other businesses.

As your elected State Representative, I would aim to put Warren County on the map for film production. Lebanon is a prime site for movies requiring a certain historic ambiance. Hollywood realized this in 1977 when it utilized the lofty brick structure of Berry Middle School for the sitcom, Harper Valley PTA. In 1994, historic downtown Lebanon and its quaint Ice Cream Parlor came to life on the big screen in Milk Money, starring Ed Harris and Melanie Griffith.

We have so many more sites to offer film crews wanting unique, "all American" settings for their stories. Think about the authentic Civil War mansions along Cincinnati Avenue, the harness racing track on Broadway, and Fort Ancient's 18,000 feet of earthen walls built 2,000 years ago by Ohio's Hopewell Indians, to name just a few. A city like Franklin would be a perfect site for an independent film wishing to depict a familiar blue collar world. And let's not forget the residuals of increased tourism that film production would bring to our district. People from out of state will plan their summer vacations around visiting the Glendower Museum and exploring its Greek Revival architecture, or eating at Ohio's oldest inn, The Golden Lamb, as (hypothetically) portrayed in a hit HBO mini-series the year before.

A common complaint of the unemployed is the anonymity of the job seeking process. An individual gets on the Internet, sends out hundreds if not thousands of resumes to faceless employers, and never hears anything in response. The reality is that networking for jobs is usually a face-to-face endeavor. People need to get out into their communities and connect. Local film productions would enable the unemployed of Warren County to do just that. If you read in The Western Star that a film is soon to be shot at Kings Island, hurry down to Great Wolf Lodge as the hotel will need extra staff for the summer. Granted, most film jobs are temp jobs, but these can lead to permanent jobs, and there is also something to be said for simply having ANY job that pays the bills right now.

As your State Representative, I would push for MORE tax credits for Ohio film production.

Saturday, February 27, 2010

It's all about prosperity and vision

The year was 1987 and I was in Nova Scotia, Canada, meeting my future husband's family and friends for the first time. Their economy was in crisis due to the gradual collapse of the fishing industry. It was comparable to the  loss of Ohio's manufacturing rust belt in the last twenty years. Times were changing, and the main enterprise was now outdated and could no longer provide jobs.

I was startled by the attitude of many locals. They were mad at the government.  They wanted more subsidies to assist the fishermen who were out of work, and had been for years. They also wanted more money for the industry itself. In short, they wanted to cling to the old way of doing things, putting the expense on the back of an over-sized, deficit-ridden government, rather than changing and finding new, forward-looking industries to support the economy.

In a private moment of frustration, I said to my husband, "It's like everyone around here views the government as a wealthy corporation, and not an entity created by taxpayer money. The government is not some rich grandfather in the sky!"

That's when I realized that my father's thinking had rubbed off on me more than I previously thought. He was a self-made dentist; a Reagan conservative with a military background; the sole provider in a Catholic family of seven where hand-me-downs and left-overs were a way of life. "Got a cold? Get off your lazy arse and get to school." There was no tolerance for whiners in my family, or attitudes of entitlement.

I am a fiscally conservative Democrat. My main complaint about the liberal end of my party is its unrealistic sense of entitlement. Often, liberal Democrats want more and more funding for social programs without being honest about rising deficits on both state and national levels. When they don't get that money, they whine and complain. "Why is the government so heartless and stingy?" (That said, it's not as if the Bush and Taft administrations represented responsible spending, either!)

The reality is that social programs should only be funded by money that actually exists. That's why we need to focus on bringing new businesses to Warren County through small business incentives, and urge green innovation such as windmills, solar power, and the development of cutting edge IT and financial services. In so doing, we will not have to raise taxes. Rather, our growing prosperity will be able to fund vital programs for the disabled, the elderly, public transportation and education, and local food cupboards.

I cannot talk about funding social programs in the 67th district without addressing a dangerous and, I feel, unChristian attitude that has been at work in this county for a long time. Sadly, our local  Republican leaders frequently voice sentiments to the effect that individuals relying on social programs are all lazy, or weak. Granted, there will always be fraud in the system that must be weeded out. There are lazy and entitled "takers" out there, no doubt about it. We need to put an end to that. But to label all social programs and the people that use them in a derogatory manner is hateful and ignorant.

Our social programs and their workers provide an enormous service to our communities in the 67th district. They deserve our respect and support. Thousands of elderly, disabled, and unemployed residents benefit from the work of our local MRDD, Health and Human Services, and the Warren County Mental Health Center, to name just a few. And let's not forget our police force, public school teachers, libraries, courts, roads and infrastructure. We must honor these public services and their servants by continuing to build a prosperous district that can adequately fund such vital programs.

In sum, it's all about money, and money cannot be spent until it is first earned.   As a House Representative, I will listen to and lead the voices of this county in the same way that I run my law practice. I personally know that these are not easy times for small business owners and their employees in Ohio. Our top priority must be MAKING money, and A LOT of it, and designing an annual budget based on what money is actually in the pot. Governor Ted Strickland  and our Democratic House have practiced this principle by successfully trimming the prior Republican Adminstration's deficit by billions in the last two years, and bringing innovative energy to Ohio.

I am happy to say that my husband recently returned from a trip to Nova Scotia, Canada with good news. The economy is doing quite well. It took twenty years, but the government got over the fishing crisis by strategically targeting companies in defense, aerospace, financial services, advanced manufacturing, and energy. There is a vibrancy on the streets, and much needed social programs are adequately funded.

I will say it a lot throughout my campaign. It is not about being Republican or Democrat. It's about being smart. Please share with me your ideas on how to make Warren County a prosperous and compassionate place to live.

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Let's Quit the Partisan Fighting and Solve the Problems!

In my early days of practicing law, I represented divorce clients. There were always the parties that resembled Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner’s characters in The War of the Roses. Nothing was good enough. Each party always wanted more than what they could realistically expect. Even after the judge issued orders from the bench and the divorce decreed was filed, these people were still fighting and blaming their problems on everyone but themselves.
It seems to me that the state of our government resembles an antagonistic divorce right now. Neither of the parties are listening to each other, let alone respecting one another. There are a lot of hateful words to go around, and no one is in problem solving mode. The voters resemble the children in cantankerous divorce battles. We’re sitting on the sidelines saying, “Hey, stop your selfish fighting and think about our needs! We’re hurting, here.” The middle class is getting squeezed by the day; health care premiums are rising (for those lucky enough to have health care); job loss continues with salaries stagnating; and retirement savings are a luxury for most Americans. The Democrats say it’s all the fault of the Republicans and the overspending and easy-money of the Bush administration. Republicans say that the time for blaming the Bush Administration is long over. They are sick of the rising deficits and feel threatened by the prospect of larger government which will inevitably lead to higher taxes.

If we don’t get our act together, this angry environment will get angrier and the public will suffer the most. My favorite Bible verse comes from Isaiah, 1.18: “Come let us reason, says the Lord.” This verse has guided me throughout my life, and inspired me to become an attorney. Only through reason and focusing on the facts can problems truly be solved. Earlier this week, an example of that reason prevailed in the Senate, and it gave the people hope. The Jobs Bill, which involves tax credits for small business and highway construction, passed on the Senate floor in a vote of 62-30. A handful of Republicans (including newly elected moderate Republican Scott Brown) voted with the Democrats because they wanted jobs for the people in their districts. We need more of this bipartisan effort on state and national levels.

Sadly, most politicians are focused only on winning their next election from the day they take office. Gridlock results because they do not want to take a stand on any issue that will end up coming back to bite them in their future campaigns. The American people are fed up with this mindset. More voters are leaving party labels and becoming Independents due to their cynicism about the two-party system.

I am running on the Democratic ticket for the 67th District House Representative seat. I hear what the people of Warren County want: no more taxes (they are strapped enough); no big government (we can’t afford the one we have); strong public education and affordable healthcare (the bill that ultimately passes may not please everyone, but we need to make some kind of improvement).

I realize that there are only elected Republicans in Warren County, and I will be perceived in this race as the underdog (The last Democrat who ran for this seat gained 38% of the vote, and I have the audacity to expect victory! )I also realize that at this junction, party label is not what it’s all about. It’s about getting beyond the name calling and serving the common good.

Saturday, February 20, 2010

Miracles happen, even in the world of politics.

The call came on my cell phone early Wednesday morning from the Ohio Democratic Party in Columbus. As I drove back from a Social Security Disability hearing in Cincinnati, I was informed that the man who intended to run on the Democratic ticket for the House Representative seat in the 67th District had decided not to run after all. The spot was now vacant, and the Ohio Dems were desperate for a candidate. The deadline for filing was 4:00 PM the next day, and I was the only prospect on their list.  I told the caller that I would give it serious thought and phone her back with my decision in a few hours.

By then I had entered Warren County, the red zone. The 67th District covers most of Warren County, a beautiful and relatively prosperous region of Ohio with 100% of its elected leaders wearing the Republican brand. When George W. Bush was getting flack over the torture and prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib prison and the questionable existence of WMD's during his re-election campaign, he visited the county seat of Lebanon and was greeted like a king. Likewise, when McCain chose Palin as his running mate, one of the early stops was Lebanon because it was such a great PR opportunity. Throngs of supporters cheered in the streets surrounding The Golden Lamb, Ohio's oldest inn, and I had a firsthand view of it from the second story window in my law office. The enthusiasm and commotion in the streets below would leave anyone with the impression that Obama was doomed come November.

And that's the way it is in Warren County, Ohio. To the Democrat, it feels like the whole world is Republican and to challenge that label is nothing short of laughable. To run as a Democrat with serious hopes of winning is also laughable. And yet, at 2:00 PM on Wednesday, February 17, I called back the Ohio Dems and said "I'm in." Ironically, it was the recent upset in Massachusetts in which moderate Republican Scott Brown seized Ted Kennedy's former senatorial seat that pushed me over the edge. In that election, Martha Coakley shared the same kind of "resting on your laurels" complacency of most elected Republican officials in Warren County. As a Democrat in blue territory, Coakley obviously thought the Republican Scott Brown didn't stand a chance, and thus she put little effort into her campaign. This gave Brown the underdog advantage. One should never underestimate the opposing party, no matter how improbable the climate for victory.

According to Wikipedia, "A miracle is an unexpected event attributed to divine intervention." A moderate Democrat can win as state representative in Warren County, but only with the assistance of God. And I'm not talking a little comfort along the way; a few prayers heard during the campaign. I'm talking Moses and the burning bush kind of grace. Jesus turning water into wine. This begs the question: why should God grant us a miracle?

The answer is simple: God loves balance. Look at the seasons: hot, cold, dry, wet. The same holds true in the world of politics. One party rule is NEVER a good thing. To have 100% of the elected officials in the 67th District wearing red caps means that a big chunk of people (Democrats being a little over 30%) are not being represented. That said, the logical conclusion remains that there is no way for a candidate to win with a little over 30% of the ticket. That's where the Independents of the 67th District figure into the equation. The good news is that the MAJORITY of voters in the 67th District are neither Democrat or Republican, but call themselves Independents. These people vote for the person in each election, not necessarily along party lines.

And so, through this blog, I want the Independent voters of Warren County to get to know me, and also the Republicans who are open to crossing party lines. And I will get to know all of you. Personally, I have always believed that one must vote for the person, not the political label. I have voted for local Republican officials in previous elections in Warren County because I knew they would make good leaders. We as a nation and as a county need to get beyond partisan lines and hostile gridlock and elect people who can competently serve. Let's talk about real solutions to real problems. Please send me your questions and concerns!