LOVELAND MAGAZINE

News and Events from the Loveland, Ohio Area

Without fear or favor
Since 2004

Author: Ohio Capital Journal

  • Ohio Ballot Board approves controversial language to describe anti-gerrymandering amendment

    Ohio Ballot Board approves controversial language to describe anti-gerrymandering amendment

    Attorney Don McTigue speaks before the Ohio Ballot Board on Friday, Aug. 16, to discuss summary language that will appear before voters in November on the redistricting reform amendment. (Photo by Susan Tebben, Ohio Capital Journal.)

    By:  – Ohio Capital Journal

    The Ohio Ballot Board passed controversial language written by Secretary of State Frank LaRose on Friday as the ballot summary that will explain to voters November’s anti-gerrymandering amendment. Supporters of the amendment have called the language deceptive and unconstitutional and have said they would challenge it in court.

    The board met on Friday morning to determine the summary that will appear on individual ballots, the final words Ohioans will see before they choose to accept or deny the measure.

    The proposed amendment would remove Ohio politicians from the process of drawing Statehouse and congressional district maps, and instead create a citizen commission to draw maps made up of Republicans, Democrats, and independents.

    The board was led by LaRose in passing his preferred ballot language for the amendment 3 to 2, with both Democratic members of the board, state Sen. Paula Hicks-Hudson and state Rep. Terrence Upchurch, voting against the approval. LaRose is one of the politicians who sits on the current Ohio Redistricting Commission, and one of the Republican members who repeatedly voted for maps that were declared to be unconstitutionally gerrymandered by a bipartisan majority on the Ohio Supreme Court before they were nevertheless forced on voters by a federal court in 2022 after time to draw constitutional maps had run out.

    One amendment was made to the LaRose language Friday, brought by board member and Republican state Rep. Theresa Gavarone. That change takes a paragraph that says the commission will be “required to manipulate the boundaries of state legislative and congressional districts…” and changes it to say the commission will be “required to gerrymander” those districts, a change that elicited shocked scoffs from the crowd gathered at the board meeting.

    The ballot measure seeks to create a 15-citizen redistricting commission to decide Statehouse and congressional voting districts throughout the state, which authors of the proposed amendment from the group Citizens Not Politicians say will be done in public meetings and include opportunities for public input as the process goes on.

    Citizens Not Politicians submitted its own proposed summary for ballot board consideration, and it said commission members would be non-elected citizens who “who have demonstrated the absence of any disqualifying conflicts of interest and who have shown an ability to conduct the redistricting process with impartiality, integrity and fairness.”

    Democrats attempted to approve the language provided by Citizens Not Politicians, but the motion was voted down 3 to 2, supported only by the Democratic members of the board.

    Hicks-Hudson also tried to amend the LaRose-written language to replace it with the Citizens Not Politicians language, but that motion was also struck down.

    “This is a dangerous proposal that threatens the integrity of the vote on Issue 1,” Hicks-Hudson said of the Secretary of State language.

    With the title that says the amendment would “create an appointed redistricting commission not elected by or subject to removal by the voters of the state,” the language approved by the board speaks of the elimination of “the longstanding ability of Ohio citizens to hold their representatives accountable for establishing fair state legislative and congressional districts,” and the purpose to “repeal constitutional protections against gerrymandering approved by nearly three-quarters of Ohio electors participating in the statewide elections of 2015 and 2018.”

    Attorney Don McTigue made the point that it’s impossible for citizens to hold their elected lawmakers responsible by voting in gerrymandered districts — which are by definition guaranteed to ensure the gerrymandered lawmakers’ victory.

    “The problem is that the whole accountability argument only works when you have fair districts, not when you have the severely gerrymandered districts that you have in this state,” McTigue said during the public comment portion of the board meeting.

    McTigue, who represents the creators and supporters of the ballot initiative, requested the use of the language Citizens Not Politicians submitted rather than the Secretary of State language, citing Ohio law dictating ballot language and title.

    “The (SOS) language is stunning in it being false and misleading, and it is unabashed in terms of its prejudicial language,” McTigue said. “There’s no reasonable person who … after reading that language could conclude that it is an honest attempt to provide fair ballot language that allows voters to make an independent decision about the issue.”

    He cited the 2015 and 2018 redistricting measures, in which the ballot board “distilled the most important aspects of the proposed redistricting changes to the Ohio Constitution.”

    The language, which LaRose said in the ballot board meeting was written by him “with the input of my team,” was harshly criticized by the measure’s leaders and supporters leading up to the meeting as misleading and biased language that violated constitutional rules.

    LaRose defended the language in his summary that said the amendment would “limit the right of Ohio citizens to freely express their opinions to members of the commission or to commission staff regarding the redistricting process or proposed redistricting plans,” saying the language might unduly shield members of the new commission from public scrutiny.

    McTigue pushed back, saying context is important in reading the summary, which is why he didn’t support the Secretary of State language.

    “I think that something can be misleading or deceptive if you don’t have the full context,” McTigue said.

    The Secretary of State’s language was released Thursday, giving board members and McTigue little time to read through it, something that was discussed in the meeting.

    “I think the record should be really clear that 24 hours isn’t necessarily a lot of time to deal with 900-some words that really, I’m not sure fit in to the confines of what the law requires and … making a really thoughtful evaluation of the language,” said Hicks-Hudson.

    Gavarone said the 900 words in the LaRose language “accurately explain what this is,” and noted the details on the process of redistricting were not included in the Citizens Not Politicians proposed summary language.

    LaRose also touched on the selection process for commission members in the amendment, saying the longest part of his summary language was explaining that process.

    “The way that you end up on the current commission (the Ohio Redistricting Commission) is pretty straightforward,” LaRose said. “(The proposed process) is a bit of a Rube Goldberg device that involves a lot of twists and turns … it’s a complex process.”

    He called the five-bullet summary proposed by the CNP “wholly inadequate” and said it could not “identify the substance” of the lengthy amendment.

    Noted opponents of the ballot measure include Senate President Matt Huffman and Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, both of whom made public cases against the measure. Huffman said the effort would bring about an onslaught of legal trouble for the state, and DeWine said the focus on proportionality in the rules of the redistricting process would cause more problems than supporters claim it would fix, and “Ohio would actually end up with a system that mandates, that compels map-drawers to produce gerrymandered districts,” he said at a recent press conference.

    Supporters of the amendment have said they will appeal the decision of the Ohio Ballot Board in court, just as the supporters of the ballot measure on reproductive rights did to the Ohio Supreme Court after ballot board approval.

    Indeed, immediately after the board meeting adjourned, Citizens Not Politicians pledged to “seek remedy” from the Ohio Supreme Court by filing a brief next week on the language, according to Jen Miller of the League of Women Voters of Ohio.

    LaRose did not speak to reporters after the meeting.

    Susan Tebben
    Susan Tebben

    Susan Tebben is an award-winning journalist with a decade of experience covering Ohio news, including courts and crime, Appalachian social issues, government, education, diversity and culture. She has worked for The Newark Advocate, The Glasgow (KY) Daily Times, The Athens Messenger, and WOUB Public Media. She has also had work featured on National Public Radio.

    Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

    MORE FROM AUTHOR

  • Ohio AG Yost and three other AGs push for grocery mega-merger between Kroger and Albertsons

    Ohio AG Yost and three other AGs push for grocery mega-merger between Kroger and Albertsons

    By:  – Ohio Capital Journal

    Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost and his counterparts in Alabama, Georgia and Iowa went to court Wednesday to urge that the merger between Kroger and Albertsons go through.

    Opponents of the merger — including the Federal Trade Commission and eight state attorneys general — say that such a huge merger in a consolidating marketplace will drive up prices and drive down the wages of people who work there.

    But Yost and his colleagues argue the opposite — that the merger of the grocery giants will actually increase competition by allowing the resulting company to compete with giants like Walmart, Amazon and Costco in what is a highly competitive marketplace. But as part of that marketplace, their friend-of-the-court brief cites players such as dollar stores and pharmacies, which are not generally considered to be good alternatives to a full-service grocery.

    Blockbuster deal

    The attempted merger is playing out against a backdrop in which the inflating price of groceries is a top election-year issue.

    The New York Times on Tuesday reported that inflation in the sector has eased, rising 1.1% this year through June, but prices are up a whopping 20% over the past four years. The story cited polls showing that 64% of Americans believe inflation is a very serious problem and that grocery prices were the type of inflation that most concerned them.

    While the rate of inflation in the grocery aisle might be dropping, consumers could be forgiven for asking: If the coronavirus was to blame for price spikes, why haven’t prices dropped with the end of the supply problems caused by the pandemic?

    The FTC might have shed some light on that in March when it issued a report that looked at what happened during the pandemic. It said players like Kroger, Walmart and Amazon used their huge size to gain unfair advantage with suppliers, securing better prices and getting first dibs on scarce items.

    The dynamic seems to persist. Profits spiked with prices, and they both stayed high into 2024, the report said.

    With the merger, Kroger and Albertsons would have even more clout with suppliers. They operate a combined 5,000 stores and approximately 4,000 retail pharmacies and employ nearly 700,000 employees across 48 states, the FTC said.

    Cincinnati-based Kroger has a larger national footprint, while Boise, Idaho-based Albertsons is mostly confined to the West. Arkansas, Louisiana and Texas are home to both chains and they say they’ll sell stores to other grocers in markets where both chains are present.

    Who’s harmed and how?

    In a press release announcing the effort to block the merger, the FTC said the proposed deal “will eliminate fierce competition between Kroger and Albertsons, leading to higher prices for groceries and other essential household items for millions of Americans. The loss of competition will also lead to lower quality products and services, while also narrowing consumers’ choices for where to shop for groceries.”

    Saying that the companies’ divestiture plans were inadequate, it added, “For thousands of grocery store workers, Kroger’s proposed acquisition of Albertsons would immediately erase aggressive competition for workers, threatening the ability of employees to secure higher wages, better benefits, and improved working conditions.”

    In response, Yost and the merger supporters argue that the marketplace would become more competitive after a merger.

    “The acquisition would likely increase, not restrain, competition in the market for grocery sales, benefiting consumers,” their friend-of-the-court brief said. “It promises to strengthen Kroger’s ability to compete effectively for consumer dollars in an already crowded field of retailers, and there is no factual or legal basis for the (FTC) to claim otherwise.”

    Who are the other retailers Yost and his colleagues say are crowding the field?

    “… club stores (Costco, Sam’s Club); limited assortment stores (Aldi, Lidl); premium natural and organic stores (Whole Foods); dollar stores (Dollar General, Family Dollar); and online retailers…” the amicus brief said.

    Whether all those stores would meet the needs of distressed communities is questionable. In Austin, where Whole Foods is headquartered, some mockingly call it “Whole Paycheck” because of its cost, and dollar stores are not known for their healthful offerings.

    In an interview Thursday, Yost said he “hasn’t been the biggest fan of dollar stores.” In February, he announced a million-dollar settlement with Tennessee-based Dollar General over allegations that the chain was overcharging at the cash register.

    However, Yost said, dollar stores sell food, so they count as competition to grocers.

    The core of the problem

    Along with the findings in the FTC’s pandemic-pricing report, others have said smaller competitors are squeezed out because they just can’t get supplies at the cheap rates the big boys — including dollar stores — do. That can create food deserts in distressed communities, where existing health conditions are made worse by limited access to proper nutrition.

    The phenomenon is literally killing people. JAMA Oncology last year published a study finding that mortality from breast cancer and colorectal cancer is elevated in food deserts, for example.

    Last week ProPublica and Capitol News Illinois published an investigation into the fate of government-supported stores in food deserts. It looked at 24 stores in 18 states that received government funds in 2020 and 2021. As of June, five had closed and six never opened.

    Some of their struggles have to do with cynical competition.

    Cairo, at the southern tip of Illinois, had Dollar General stores. They’re known to locate in struggling communities, push out healthier food options and have been accused of being magnets for crime.

    When a government-supported store opened offering fresh produce, one of the Cairo dollar stores put in a produce aisle of its own. Now the downtown grocery is struggling to hang on.

    But back in 2018, when U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., asked Dollar General to add produce at one of its Cairo stores, the company wasn’t interested, the story said.

    Beyond such bare-knuckled practices, the investigation found, is a deeper problem. Stores like the Cairo grocery just couldn’t get the same deals from suppliers that bigger businesses could.

    Alvaro Bedoya, the newest member of the FTC, in 2022 said a 21-store chain that operates in and around South Dakota Indian suffers from the same problem — even though it buys through a cooperative comprising hundreds of such stores.

    “They often don’t get access to the same products,” Bedoya said in an interview with the Capital Journal.

    Seeking solutions

    As he awaited Senate confirmation, Bedoya spent his time reading congressional debates and otherwise digging at the roots of antitrust laws passed in the late 19th and the first half of the 20th century. He said the goal of the laws was fairness for consumers and small businesses — particularly in small towns and on farms.

    In 1936, Congress passed a law — the Robinson-Patman Act — that seems to go to the heart of the issue facing small grocers. In 1998, the FTC described its intent.

    “Congress believed that large firms could dominate markets through predation and other forms of economic warfare directed against smaller firms, and felt that ‘power buyers’ such as large retailers could use their market power to extract price concessions from manufacturers and other sellers that were unavailable to their smaller competitors,” the agency said. “As the Commission has stated, ‘[t]he major legislative purpose behind the Robinson-Patman Act was to provide some measure of protection to small independent retailers and their independent suppliers from what was thought to be unfair competition from vertically integrated, multi-location chain stores.’”

    However, the FTC doesn’t appear to be deploying the law in its quest to stop the Kroger-Albertsons merger. “Robinson-Patman” doesn’t even appear in the FTC complaint.

    Yost said that’s because it’s too difficult under the law to prove that seemingly unfair practices caused the outcomes it seeks to stop.

    Saying he doesn’t subscribe to the “big-is-always-bad” school of antitrust enforcement, Yost said scale can help consumers.

    “How do we get our food?” he asked. “If Kroger and Albertsons merge and become a larger entity, they are not going to be the only ones with that kind of scale. Walmart, for example, has a big, big scale, and huge numbers of Americans shop for their food at Walmart.”

    Yost added, “If places like Kroger and Albertsons are not permitted to achieve scale for what they’re doing… you’re going to have the same effect we had with local grocers going out of business. By allowing this merger, you’re putting Kroger and Albertsons (on par) with places like Walmart.”

    However, the National Grocers Association — which represents independent grocers — took a different stance in February, when the FTC sued to stop the merger. It praised the suit and urged the agency to go further.

    “NGA appreciates the FTC’s commitment to a competitive grocery industry, and we look forward to the FTC taking further action to level the playing field, including enforcing antitrust laws like the Robinson-Patman Act that prohibit economic discrimination against independent grocers and their customers,” Chris Jones, NGA’s chief government relations officer and counsel said in a statement.

    Antitrust positions

    Yost’s stance on allowing the Kroger merger might seem perplexing.

    Since he was state auditor, he’s taken on huge pharmacy middlemen that are part of even larger health conglomerates. The FTC is going after the same businesses.

    As attorney general, Yost sued one of the middlemen, Express Scripts, and a sister company under Ohio’s antitrust law. He called pharmacy benefit managers “modern gangsters” and said Express Scripts, its sister organization and others were colluding to fix drug prices.

    The suit also says the companies improperly retaliated — against Kroger, ironically — because the Cincinnati-based grocer pulled out of what it believed was a bad deal for employee benefits.

    There are big differences between the FTC action against the Kroger merger and Yost’s actions against the pharmacy middlemen. Also, Yost’s actions against the pharmacy middlemen predate the proposed grocery merger by five years.

    But Yost is planning a run for governor in 2026, and his intervention in the merger case begs a question: Is the attorney general currying political favor with Ohio’s second-largest corporation? Yost said that’s not the case.

    A quick perusal of state and federal campaign-finance databases seemed to indicate that Kroger isn’t very active politically.

    However, secretary of state’s records show that Kroger’s political action committee gave $7,000 in 2022 to Gov. Mike DeWine and Lt. Gov. Jon Husted — Yost’s biggest rival for the GOP gubernatorial nomination. Kroger also contributed $10,000 to the Mike DeWine Jon Husted Transition Fund in February 2023.

    For his part, Yost said he wants to keep the FTC from blocking the merger because it’s a misuse of antitrust law.

    “Scale has long been recognized in American economics and American law. If I was a small guy competing against Amazon, would I be angry? Yes,” he said, describing a shoe store in his hometown of Delaware that was driven out of business by Walmart. “Whether that should be is a fine policy argument to have. That is not an antitrust argument.”

    Marty Schladen
    Marty Schladen

    Marty Schladen has been a reporter for decades, working in Indiana, Texas and other places before returning to his native Ohio to work at The Columbus Dispatch in 2017. He’s won state and national journalism awards for investigations into utility regulation, public corruption, the environment, prescription drug spending and other matters.

    Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

    MORE FROM AUTHOR

  • Ohio anti-gerrymandering leaders say LaRose’s draft ballot text is deceptive and unconstitutional

    Ohio anti-gerrymandering leaders say LaRose’s draft ballot text is deceptive and unconstitutional

    By:  – Ohio Capital Journal

    The office of Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose has drafted ballot language for the Ohio Ballot Board to consider Friday that supporters of an anti-gerrymandering amendment say is deceptive and unconstitutional. The Ballot Board decides the text of proposed amendments that voters actually see on their ballots when they vote.

    The anti-gerrymandering amendment before Ohio voters in November, according to the language drafted by LaRose’s office, would “eliminate the longstanding ability of Ohio citizens to hold their representatives accountable for establishing fair state legislative and congressional districts.”

    The Citizens Not Politicians group that authored the ballot initiative and collected more than 535,000 necessary signatures from Ohio voters to get the measure on the ballot, has proposed their own language for the ballot as well, saying it would remove politicians from the redistricting process in favor of a citizen board.

    The group is proposing a redistricting amendment that would replace Ohio’s politician-led redistricting commission with a citizen-led commission made up of Republicans, Democrats and independents. Currently, the Ohio Secretary of State is one of the politicians sitting on Ohio’s redistricting commission, along with the governor, the Ohio Auditor, two lawmakers from the majority party and two lawmakers from the minority party.

    The language drafted by the Secretary of State’s Office claims in its proposed title that the amendment’s purpose is, “To create an appointed redistricting commission not elected by or subject to removal by the voters of the state.”

    Moreover, the draft language says its purpose is to “repeal constitutional protections against gerrymandering approved by nearly three-quarters of Ohio electors participating in the statewide elections of 2015 and 2018.”

    Backers say the amendment is actually intended to protect voters against gerrymandering by removing politicians who stand to benefit from the process, and to not allow them to continue drawing gerrymandered district maps.

    After the 2015 and 2018 reforms were.passed by voters, Republican politicians on the Ohio Redistricting Commission including Ohio Secretary of State LaRose repeatedly voted for Statehouse and U.S. Congressional district maps that were declared unconstitutional gerrymanders by a bipartisan majority on the Ohio Supreme Court. Nevertheless, Ohio voters were forced to use the maps as the politicians refused to produce a maps that reflected voting preferences of Ohioans.

    The Ohio Secretary of State’s Office further claims in its proposed language that the new amendment would also “limit the right of Ohio citizens to freely express their opinions to members of the commission or to commission staff regarding the redistricting process or proposed redistricting plans.”

    It claims the amendment would “prohibit any citizen from filing a lawsuit challenging a redistricting plan in any court, except if the lawsuit challenges the proportionality standard applied by the commission, and then only before the Ohio Supreme Court,” and that new “taxpayer-funded costs” would be imposed by the amendment, with “an unlimited amount for legal expenses incurred by the commission in any related litigation.”

    Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine recently publicly opposed the ballot measure because of its emphasis on proportionality, alleging there was no way the measure could work as written. In opposing the measure, he said whether or not it passes in November, he’s considering going to the legislature to adapt Iowa’s redistricting process for Ohio. Iowa’s process leaves lawmakers with final say over maps.

    The proposed constitutional amendment penned by Citizens Not Politicians calls for a 15-person redistricting commission made up of citizens, rather than the Ohio Redistricting Commission that is currently made up entirely of elected officials.

    The language proposed by Citizens Not Politicians to the ballot board states the proposed amendment would “require that the commission consist of 15 members who have demonstrated the absence of any disqualifying conflicts of interest and who have shown an ability to conduct the redistricting process with impartiality, integrity and fairness.”

    The amendment would “provide that each redistricting plan shall contain single-member districts that are geographically contiguous, comply with federal law, closely correspond to statewide partisan preferences of Ohio voters and preserve communities,” according to the Citizens Not Politicians proposed language.

    The current Ohio Redistricting Commission made up of politicians produced six different Statehouse maps and two congressional maps over the two years it did its work. Five of the Statehouse maps were ruled unconstitutional by the Ohio Supreme Court and neither of the congressional maps passed constitutional muster, according to the state’s highest court. The second of the congressional maps remains the state’s congressional district map, despite being found to be unduly partisan by the state supreme court.

    The redistricting commission was criticized for disregarding hours of testimony from hundreds of Ohio citizens, and numerous citizen and group-proposed maps in favor of maps written by legislative staffers, and disregarding the authority of the Ohio Supreme Court when they were ordered to redraw maps within deadlines and utilize paid independent mapmakers coordinated by the court.

     Retired Republican Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Ohio, Maureen O’Connor. (Poto by Graham Stokes for Ohio Capital Journal. Republish photo only with original article.) 

    Former Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor, a leader for Citizens Not Politicians, who has called for reforms to redistricting since she left the bench, said the Secretary of State’s proposed language violates the Ohio Constitution.

    “The self-dealing politicians who have rigged the legislative maps now want to rig the Nov. 5 election by illegally manipulating the ballot language,” O’Connor said in a statement. “We will make our case for fair and accurate language before the Ballot Board and if necessary take it to court.”

    O’Connor’s statement claims the language proposed by the Secretary of State’s Office violates an article of the Ohio Constitution that prohibits ballot language that “is such as to mislead, deceive, or defraud voters,” according to the law.

    Ohio law also states ballot titles “shall give a true and impartial statement of the measures in such language that the ballot title shall not be likely to create prejudice for or against the measure.”

    It’s not the first time even in the last year that ballot language has been criticized as a misleading representation of the proposed initiative. Last year’s reproductive rights ballot measure went through the same process, with language written by Ohio Secretary of State staff approved as the language to appear on the ballots.

    The creators of the ballot measure sued, with the Ohio Supreme Court approving the ballot language, but sending it back to the board for small changes.

    Despite the language, which critics said intentionally misrepresented the reproductive rights amendment, the measure passed with 57% of the vote last November.

    State Secretary of State LaRose is the head of the Ohio Ballot Board that will consider the language on Friday. The board is also made up of Republican state Sen. Theresa Gavarone, Democratic state Sen. Paula Hicks-Hudson, Democratic state Rep. Terrence Upchurch and citizen-member William Morgan.

    A spokesperson for the Secretary of State’s Office did not respond to request for comment on the language Thursday afternoon.

    Susan Tebben
    Susan Tebben

    Susan Tebben is an award-winning journalist with a decade of experience covering Ohio news, including courts and crime, Appalachian social issues, government, education, diversity and culture. She has worked for The Newark Advocate, The Glasgow (KY) Daily Times, The Athens Messenger, and WOUB Public Media. She has also had work featured on National Public Radio.

    Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

    MORE FROM AUTHOR

  • Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost settles with FirstEnergy for $20 million

    Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost settles with FirstEnergy for $20 million

    Ohio Governor Mike DeWine (left) and Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost (right) answer questions during a press conference. (Photo by WEWS).

    Unannounced amount dwarfed by scale of epic utility ripoff that featured more than $61 million in bribes and a $1.3 billion bailout

    By:  – Ohio Capital Journal

    Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost has agreed to settle the largest bribery and money laundering scandal in state history with the massive utility that funded it.

    At just $20 million, the settlement amounts only to less than a third of the bribes Akron-based FirstEnergy paid and it is dwarfed by the benefits Ohio utilities have received from ratepayers as a consequence of the corrupt legislation those bribes paid for.

    Yost’s office sends out frequent press releases, but not one regarding Monday’s settlement, which was first reported by the Cincinnati Enquirer, citing an SEC filing by FirstEnergy.

    In response to questions, his office said Yost had “voluntarily walled himself off from the case months ago to avoid any suggestion that the case was politically driven or any outcome was influenced by politics or political decision making.” But it didn’t explain how.

    The statement comes after more than a year of questions about the attorney general’s own involvement in the fight to pass and protect the $1.3 billion ratepayer bailout that mostly went to FirstEnergy.

    Yost’s office added that the company was cooperating in state prosecutions of two former executives, and that the company had reformed in the years since the scandal.

    “The non-prosecution agreement signed between FirstEnergy, the Ohio Attorney General’s Office and the Office of the Summit County Prosecuting Attorney requires FirstEnergy to provide evidence, access to witnesses and testimony in the ongoing criminal cases against (former CEO) Chuck Jones and (former Vice President) Michael Dowling, as well as in civil proceeding relating to the passage of” the corrupt bailout bill, spokesman Steve Irwin said in an email.

    By agreeing to the pact, FirstEnergy won’t be charged criminally. The company paid the federal government $230 million in 2021 to get criminal charges dropped in that instance.

    In dropping the charges, the state and federal governments allowed FirstEnergy to dodge a big financial hit. Consultants told the company it could face nearly $4 billion in fines if indicted, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported Tuesday.

    According to weeks of testimony in federal court in Cincinnati last year, FirstEnergy executives began wooing Larry Householder and other state leaders in late 2016. The executives had bet heavily on coal and nuclear generation that was losing money because they failed to anticipate that the fracking boom would make gas-fired electricity generation cheaper.

    So the executives — CEO Jones and Vice President Dowling — undertook a frantic search for a bailout.

    They flooded $61 million in corporate money into 501(c)(4) dark money groups. From there, the money went to elect friendly Republicans who would vote to make Householder speaker of the Ohio House at the start of 2019.

    From that perch, Householder shepherded the corrupt bailout, House Bill 6.

    Sam Randazzo, Gov. Mike DeWine’s pick to chair the Public Utilities Commission, helped write and lobby for the bailout even though he was supposed to be a neutral regulator. FirstEnergy later said it paid a $4.3 million bribe to Randazzo, who died by suicide in April.

    DeWine, whose administration had several senior officials connected to FirstEnergy, signed the bill the same day that it passed. But it ran into instant opposition in the form of a fierce campaign to repeal the bailout.

    The FirstEnergy executives — who are now under state indictment — were so alarmed at the repeal effort that they put up $36 million to stop it. The resulting campaign included false, xenophobic TV commercials, bullying people gathering signatures to put a repeal on the ballot and even allegations of assault.

    Yost gave HB 6 supporters a big assist in the heat of the repeal fight.

    Before a repeal could go on the ballot, supporters had to gather 1,000 valid signatures from registered voters and submit a ballot summary to the attorney general. Yost had to approve that before repeal advocates could start gathering the necessary 265,000 additional voter signatures. And they had just 90 days after DeWine signed the corrupt bailout on July 23, 2019 to do it.

    The summary and 1,000 signatures were submitted within 10 days. But then Yost rejected the ballot language on the first go-round. By the time they had submitted different language and more signatures — and Yost approved it — their time to gather more than a quarter-million signatures had been cut by 40% and the repeal failed.

    While Yost — a hopeful to become governor in 2026 — hasn’t commented on his conduct during this period, some of the conspirators did.

    During last year’s trial, federal prosecutors presented messages between former Ohio GOP Chairman Matt Borges, who is serving a five-year prison sentence for his involvement, to Juan Cespedes, who has pleaded guilty to his.

    In one, Borges said the attorney general told him that he thought the bailout was a bad law, but he wasn’t speaking publicly as a favor to Borges and FirstEnergy. Yost “‘would be out front (in opposition) if not for (FirstEnergy) support and your involvement,’” Borges quoted Yost as supposedly saying.

    In another, Borges — who had run some of Yost’s past campaigns — said of the repeal summary, “If there’s any way the law will allow him to reject the language, he will do it.”

    Irwin, Yost’s spokesman, justified the settlement by saying FirstEnergy had reformed.

    “FirstEnergy today is not the company it was five years ago – the corporation has undertaken, and continues to undergo, reforms to strengthen its internal ethics programs, to increase transparency, and promote reporting of questionable conduct by its employees and leadership,” Irwin said. “It has also restructured its board and leadership to remove the individuals responsible for the conduct that gave rise to the House Bill 6 scandal. This is an important step in bringing the disgraced corporate leaders who used their positions of power to betray FirstEnergy’s ratepayers and employees and the people of Ohio to account for their crimes.”

    However, institutional investors are in court arguing that FirstEnergy is trying to limit the blast radius of the scandal. They accuse the company of trying to protect other executives and board members who might have been culpable — or at least might have known of the scheme.

    Indeed, the company is battling furiously not to turn over an internal investigation it commissioned in the wake of the scandal. After being denied an attempt to appeal an order to turn it over, the company filed a risky petition for a writ of mandamus on July 30.

    After the HB 6 scandal broke in 2020, Yost donated $24,000 in contributions from FirstEnergy and Cespedes to charity. It’s an open question when he’ll explain what he knew and did in a scandal that imprisoned Householder for 20 years and led to two suicides — including that of indicted lobbyist Neil Clark.

    Meanwhile, ratepayers are still paying big money as a consequence of HB 6. Its provisions solely benefitting FirstEnergy were repealed after the scandal broke. But the state’s leadership has refused to repeal the rest of the bill.

    It includes a measure that has so far paid $343,000,000 to subsidize two aging coal plants owned by a group of Ohio utilities. One’s not even in Ohio.

    Marty Schladen
    Marty Schladen

    Marty Schladen has been a reporter for decades, working in Indiana, Texas and other places before returning to his native Ohio to work at The Columbus Dispatch in 2017. He’s won state and national journalism awards for investigations into utility regulation, public corruption, the environment, prescription drug spending and other matters.

    Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

    MORE FROM AUTHOR

  • The race for Ohio’s 2nd U.S. Congressional District features two political newcomers

    The race for Ohio’s 2nd U.S. Congressional District features two political newcomers

    Republican Rep. Brad Wenstrup currently represents the 2nd Congressional District, but he announced that he would not seek reelection in 2024

    Democrat Samantha Meadows is going up against Republican David Taylor and neither candidate has held office before.

    By: – Ohio Capital Journal

    A political newcomer will represent Ohio’s 2nd U.S. Congressional District starting in 2025.

    Democrat Samantha Meadows is going up against Republican David Taylor and neither candidate has held office before.

    Republican Rep. Brad Wenstrup

    Republican Rep. Brad Wenstrup currently represents the 2nd Congressional District, but he announced at the end of last year that he would not seek reelection in 2024 after serving six terms.

    The 2nd Congressional District covers 15 southern Ohio counties: Clermont, Clinton, Pike, Adams, Brown, Highland, Ross, Scioto, Pickaway, Hocking, Vinton, Jackson, Lawrence, Gallia, and Meigs counties, and part of Fayette County.

    The 2nd Congressional District historically leans Republican and President Donald Trump won in all of those counties during the 2020 election.

    Meadows

    This is Meadows’ second time running for the 2nd congressional district. She lost against Wenstrup in 2022 — receiving only 25% of the vote — but she thinks her odds of winning have increased since Wenstrup is retiring.

    “I am beating down doors …  I’m doing everything that I can to let people know that I, personally, as a candidate, care about them,” she said.

    Meadows doesn’t feel intimidated running as a Democrat in Republican-dominated counties.

     Democrat Samantha Meadows is running for Ohio’s second congressional district. (Headshot provided.) 

    “I know that a lot of folks down here are Republicans by anger rather than policy,” she said. “I have faith in our region that, no, this isn’t about Republican or Democrat. This is actually about a person that’s going to help us.”

    She grew up in McDermott in Scioto County, attended Shawnee State University and Ohio Christian University and went on to work as an EMT.

    “I’ve always felt compelled to be of service to my community,” she said. “… I always felt compelled to help others.”

    Through her work as an EMT, Meadows has seen firsthand the devastation of the opioid epidemic and she remembers the first Oxycontin overdose patient she helped treat. They administered Narcan and were able to revive the patient.

    “At that time, this was new to us,” she said.

    That same patient overdosed again a couple weeks later, but didn’t make it this time.

    “Addiction was one of the catalysts that made me run for office,” she said.  “Everybody knows somebody that’s either addicted or a family that’s going through those things.”

    Meadows said she never had any aspirations to be in politics, but decided she had to do something when she saw drug overdoses increase during COVID-19.

    “I had a moment where I literally looked at the TV and said, somebody’s got to do something about this. And so I was like, I’ll do it,” she said.

    Taylor

    Wenstrup retiring, how most of the 2nd District is Appalachian and “the laundry list of national crises we have going on both inside and outside our borders” is what led to Taylor to run for office.

    “The needs of the Appalachian community has been something that’s been in the front of my mind my whole life,” he said. “The opportunity to see this overlooked, underserved community that is the 2nd District of Ohio get the attention it deserves is what compelled me to get into politics.”

    Taylor had to endure a competitive primary against ten other Republicans — including state Sens. Shane Wilkin and Niraj Antani — to get on the November ballot. Taylor came out on top with 25% of the vote.

     Republican David Taylor is running for Ohio’s second congressional district. (Photo provided by Taylor’s campaign.) 

    “People don’t want career politicians right now,” he said. “They want somebody from the outside. I think actually, for the voters in the 2nd District, not being a person with a political background was actually a plus.”

    Even though the second district leans Republican, Taylor said he is treating the race as if the district was split 50-50 and has been traveling the district to meet people.

    “We’re running the tires off my pickup truck and going to all corners of the district,” he said.

    Taylor has lived a majority of his life in Clermont County, graduated from Miami University and the University of Dayton School of Law and worked for a prosecutor’s office.

    “In criminal law, you’re getting to the nitty gritty on every word in the law, because sometimes somebody’s freedom is at stake,” Taylor said. “So that will serve well in dealing with the legislation that’s written and passed or repealed.”

    He now owns his own concrete business Sardinia Ready Mix and said his experience of operating within a budget could help him in D.C.

    “Those are things that the government could use a large dose of so more people with that mindset, I think, would lead to better outcomes in Washington, D.C. and those returns come here to Ohio, specifically the second district,” he said.

    On the issues

    Taylor wants to defund and dismantle the U.S. Department of Education.

    “It’s another federal agency that overreaches the federal government’s mandate under the Tenth Amendment,” he said. “We have so many federal bureaucracies that are overstepping the mandate of the Constitution.”

    Meadows wants to better fund public schools.

    “We don’t have enough private schools in our district to take on an influx of public school kids,” Meadows said, referring to the voucher program.

    Meadows wants to protect reproductive rights.

    “The ability to have body autonomy and make our own decisions, that is absolutely terrifying that we don’t have that type of freedom, or that we’re trying to be denied that kind of freedom,” she said.

    Taylor is anti-abortion, but doesn’t support a total ban on abortion.

    “The issue is going to be a state issue from state to state, and that’s where it needs to stay,” he said.

    Both candidates support the Second Amendment.

    “But I also believe at the very least, we need to have a moratorium on the sale of assault rifles,” Meadows said. “I do believe that they are not necessary in the hands of an average American. They belong on the battlefield.”

    Taylor said he would fight against infringements on the Second Amendment.

    “Every time you have one of these incidents that causes (people) to call for gun control, multiple laws have been broken, so I’m not sure what law they think can be written that’s going to stop that,” Taylor said.

    Follow OCJ Reporter Megan Henry on Twitter.

    Megan Henry
    Megan Henry

    Megan Henry is a reporter for the Ohio Capital Journal and has spent the past five years reporting in Ohio on various topics including education, healthcare, business and crime. She previously worked at The Columbus Dispatch, part of the USA Today Network.

    Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

    MORE FROM AUTHOR

  • Ohio begins offering mobile ID with Apple, but it can’t be used to vote or during traffic stops

    Ohio begins offering mobile ID with Apple, but it can’t be used to vote or during traffic stops

    (Getty Images)

    Don’t get rid of your physical ID

    By:  – Ohio Capital Journal

    Last month, Ohio joined a handful of other states allowing residents to load their Driver’s License or ID card onto an Apple iPhone. It’s a nifty little feature not unlike the phone’s tap-to-pay service, but while the virtual card is handy for getting through TSA checkpoints, in many other circumstances — like voting or a traffic stop — it just won’t cut it.

    Where it does (and doesn’t) work

    In a press release announcing the program, Gov. Mike DeWine bragged “Ohio has always been a leader in innovation, and now we are the fifth state in the country that gives residents the option to securely add their driver’s license to Apple Wallet.”

    “This is another example of how Ohio is using technology to better serve its customers and residents,” he added.

    The Apple wallet version of your ID may have all your information, but it’s not like a photocopy of the card. Instead, the phone shares your information digitally, which means whoever is reading that information will need a specific card reader.

    In an emailed statement, DeWine’s spokesman Dan Tierney explained that’s part of the reason the TSA can move quickly to accept mobile ID while local law enforcement or boards of elections simply can’t.

    “The reason that you are seeing TSA checkpoints announced before other transaction points is the sheer number of terminals involved,” he explained. “An airport will only need a dozen or so, while implementation with polling locations and law enforcement patrols will require the purchase of tens of thousands of terminals or other devices that contain the required hardware and software.”

    In Ohio, TSA checkpoints at Columbus’ John Glenn International Airport and Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport are ready to accept mobile ID. So far four other states, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia and Maryland, have joined the program. Major airports in Phoenix, Denver, Atlanta and Baltimore are equipped for mobile ID.

    But for the time being, using your mobile ID for something as mundane as picking up a six pack will depend on whether the store you’re visiting has the required reader. To help facilitate that process, Ohio has launched an app that businesses can use to read mobile IDs.

    “I expect that with any technology,” Tierney said, “we will see these tap terminals and reading devices become much less expensive over time, which would allow for wider implementation in much larger systems.”

    Potential confusion?

    In several places on the BMV website the agency warns a mobile ID does not replace your physical card. In a frequently asked questions menu, the BMV insists “you must continue to carry your physical card,” and describes the mobile ID as “a convenient, secure companion” to your traditional card.

    On the other hand, “the fine print” is an expression because people so often don’t read it.

    And that’s a bit concerning for Mia Lewis of Common Cause Ohio.

    “So, I’m just envisioning people uploading it onto their phone and then saying great and leaving their ID at home and then going to vote and finding out that actually that isn’t good enough for voting,” she described.

    She argued just a few years ago Ohioans could vote with a bank statement or a utility bill. Since then, the requirements have tightened substantially, restricting voter identification to an unexpired photo ID. In response, Ohio election officials have seen a sharp uptick in the number of provisional ballots.

    “(Mobile ID) is good enough for the TSA, you can get on a flight, good enough for getting into a bar, but for some reason it’s not good enough for voting,” Lewis said. “But that hasn’t been clearly articulated to people, and I’m just envisioning more and more provisional ballots where people have gone to vote, and they haven’t been able to.”

    The promotional materials from Apple are careful not to overstate its utility. The webpage says “presenting your ID just got much easier” because “there’s no need to reach for your your physical ID.” And while the company emphasizes the convenience of the feature, there’s no bald-faced ‘leave your card at home’ messaging.

    Still, there’s no warning to keep your card handy.

    “You know, it’s promoted as like so convenient,” Lewis said. “Well, if it doesn’t work in all instances, I don’t really see how that’s convenient, because you still have to carry your license for the times that it doesn’t work, and I feel like voting is such an important one.”

    Follow OCJ Reporter Nick Evans on Twitter.

    Nick Evans
    Nick Evans

    Nick Evans has spent the past seven years reporting for NPR member stations in Florida and Ohio. He got his start in Tallahassee, covering issues like redistricting, same sex marriage and medical marijuana. Since arriving in Columbus in 2018, he has covered everything from city council to football. His work on Ohio politics and local policing have been featured numerous times on NPR.

    Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

    MORE FROM AUTHOR

  • JD Vance’s comments and foreword to Project 2025 book show his contempt for women

    JD Vance’s comments and foreword to Project 2025 book show his contempt for women

    VANDALIA, OHIO -Former U.S. President Donald Trump and Ohio Republican U.S. Senator JD Vance. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images.)

    Marilou Johanek

    It was the kind of juvenile stunt you’d expect from a frat boy being a jerk. But the problem child pulling the bizarre maneuver on an airport tarmac in Wisconsin last week — to stalk Vice President Kamala Harris — was none other than Senator Cringeworthy from Ohio, or J.D. Vance, his latest alias.

    The Republican vice-presidential nominee is seemingly hellbent on reinforcing his odious public image as a weird piece of work from The Handmaid’s Tale. No wonder the Gilead-curious Vance is soaring off the unlikability charts as more voters discover what Ohioans already have about the fringe right-winger with patriarchal fever dreams.

    Like the No. 1 man on the GOP ticket, the No. 2 man apparently has a problem with strong women who wield power. J.D.’s insecurities were on full display as he marched (uninvited) up to Air Force 2 on the tarmac to smugly “check out my future plane” and to “say hello to the vice president and ask her why she refuses to answer questions.”

    Unclear what questions the off-putting frat boy had in mind with his cheeky disrespect and overt menacing of the vice president of the United States. But Vance was oddly pleased with his performative obnoxiousness. “I had a bit of fun,” tittered the floundering running mate of a convicted felon. “Don’t think the vice-president waved at me as she drove away, but I’m glad to have done it.”

    Vance’s puerile ‘bit of fun’ stalking the woman who is now the Democratic presidential nominee backfired. His faux attempt to “confront” Harris was widely seen as both weird and creepy. Mary Trump, the estranged niece of the ex-president, even suggested Vance should be slapped with a restraining order by Secret Service agents “the next time JD tries to get within a mile of the vice-president’s plane.”

    You’d think Trump’s historically unpopular veep pick, whose net favorability rating with voters is under water and getting worse by the day, might course correct. But Vance struts with an invincibility borne of arrogance and a ruthless drive for power. The 40-year-old project of alt right tech billionaire Peter Thiel is deep into delusions of autocratic grandeur.

    Vance — and the anti-democratic Silicon Valley neo-reactionaries of the New Right — long to impose their new world order on the masses (as outlined in the alarming Project 2025 edicts). The Ohio Republican wrote the foreword to an upcoming book by the architect of that GOP manifesto, Kevin Roberts, that concludes, notably, with a call for revolution. “We are now all realizing that it’s time to circle the wagons and load the muskets.”

    And, declared Vance, Roberts’ Christian fundamentalist views of “culture and economics” that recognize “virtue and material progress go hand in hand” will be an “essential weapon” in the “fights that lay [sic] ahead.” Interestingly, the release date of the book, including Vance’s prominent affirmation of its dystopic premise, was abruptly changed from September to after the election to squash scrutiny of its burn-it-all-down rage against American democracy.

    Vance appears to be a true disciple of Roberts’ dystopian vision of a homogeneous, hierarchal society of power, status and freedom where cis white men naturally reign supreme. To be sure, the Ohioan bankrolled into fame and fortune by Thiel is as phony as a three-dollar bill, but he owes everything to the rich wingnuts who buttered his bread, bought him a U.S. Senate seat and catapulted him to the Republican presidential ticket.

    So Vance embraces the extreme orthodoxy of his far-right community that would have women return to traditional social roles — homemaking and child-rearing — and surrender social agency and bodily autonomy to the men in charge. The first-term senator’s recently resurfaced comments disparaging “childless cat ladies” and disregarding people with unconventional families were no blunder.

    They reflected the regressive agenda of a wistful patriarchy that wants to weaponize “family” as a cultural imperative and build a society around the white nuclear family with lots of white babies and women who secretly want to be subjugated. Vance derided leading Democrats as inferior because they had no biological children. He ridiculed them as less than childbearing tradwives.

    “You look at Kamala Harris, [transportation secretary] Pete Buttigieg, AOC [congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] — the entire future of the Democrats is controlled by people without children. How does it make any sense that we’ve turned over our country to people who don’t really have a direct stake in it.” Vance was unapologetic about his disparagement of those who don’t measure up to his metrics as proficient breeders.

    Days ago, he again doubled-down in defense of his personal attacks against Harris, (who is a stepmother to two children) Buttigieg, who adopted two children with his husband, Chasten, and Ocasio-Cortez who does not have children — like millions of other Americans. Vance clumsily attempted to defect growing disgust over his rank misogyny by blaming the media that “wants to get offended about a sarcastic remark I made before I even ran for the U.S. Senate.”

    Oh, J.D. It’s not the media you offended when you belittled those without children or weirdly stalked a powerful woman running for president like a self-impressed jerk. It’s the people who will cast a ballot in three months. “Women are paying attention,” warned a Harris spokesperson, “and will use their power at the polls.”

    Marilou Johanek
    Marilou Johanek

    Marilou Johanek is a veteran Ohio print and broadcast journalist who has covered state and national politics as a longtime newspaper editorial writer and columnist.

    MORE FROM AUTHOR

  • More than 1 million veterans receiving benefits via PACT Act ahead of anniversary

    More than 1 million veterans receiving benefits via PACT Act ahead of anniversary

    Susan Zeier, mother-in-law of late Sgt. First Class Heath Robinson of the Ohio National Guard, speaks during a press conference on the PACT Act on July 28, 2022 while Rosie Torres, co-founder of Burn Pits 360, comforts Robinson’s daughter, Brielle Robinson. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt, States Newsroom.)

    By:  –  Ohio Capital Journal

    WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden on Friday celebrated the number of veterans enrolled in VA health care and benefits as part of a law he signed nearly two years ago, though he said more work must be done for troops who were stationed at a base in Uzbekistan in the early 2000s.

    “Two years ago, I signed the bipartisan Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxins (PACT) Act enacting the most significant expansion of benefits and health care for toxic exposed veterans and their survivors in over thirty years,” Biden wrote in a statement.

    The law, which spent years gaining the support it needed in Congress, expanded health care coverage and benefits for veterans exposed to toxic substances like Agent Orange and open-air burn pits.

    To date, more than 1 million veterans and 10,000 survivors of veterans who died have begun to receive disability benefits stemming from the law, accounting for approximately $6.8 billion in earned benefits.

    Biden said in his statement that his administration would continue studying veterans’ other illnesses for a “presumptive status,” which could ensure them access to health care and benefits without having to prove to the VA that their conditions are directly linked to their military service.

    The VA is also planning to “close loopholes for certain veterans exposed to harmful toxins during their military service,” Biden wrote, without elaborating.

    A White House fact sheet says the VA is looking into providing benefits for 16,000 veterans who served at Karshi-Khanabad in Uzbekistan, also known as K2, between 2001 and 2005, since there were “several contaminants…in either the air, water, soil, or soil gas.”

    “VA plans to take steps to consider veterans who served in Uzbekistan as Persian Gulf Veterans so that any veteran who served at K2 and who experience undiagnosed illness and medically unexplained chronic multi-symptom illnesses can get the benefits they deserve,” it states. “VA will also create new training materials for claims processors and examiners on the hazards identified at K2.”

    Since the law — known as the Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act or the PACT Act — took effect nearly two years ago, the VA says that 739,421 veterans have enrolled in its health care programs.

    Of that total, 333,767 veterans are covered under the new law, including those who served in the Vietnam War, the Gulf War and the wars that followed the Sept. 11 attacks.

    The numbers released Friday are significantly higher than they were when Biden gave a speech on the law’s one-year anniversary. The VA said at the time, which was one year ago, that 408,581 veterans had filed their claims and that 348,469 of those had been approved.

    But Friday’s announcement is somewhat similar to one Biden made in May when he cheered the VA granting 1 million claims under the law.

    Secretary of Veterans Affairs Denis McDonough said on a call with reporters at the time the law had led to “more than $5.7 billion in earned benefits for veterans.”

    The exact number of veterans with approved PACT Act claims as of Friday stood at 1,005,341 while the number of survivors approved had reached 10,777.

    A total of 1,251,720 veterans so far have completed filing Pact Act claims as have 21,416 survivors.

    The VA has an interactive dashboard that provides veterans with information about how to apply for health care and benefits under the PACT Act as well as how many claims have been submitted.

    The VA has a calendar of in-person events that can be found here. Veterans or their family members can also call the VA at 800-698-2411 to inquire about PACT Act benefits.

    Jennifer Shutt
    Jennifer Shutt

    Jennifer covers the nation’s capital as a senior reporter for States Newsroom. Her coverage areas include congressional policy, politics and legal challenges with a focus on health care, unemployment, housing and aid to families.

    Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

    MORE FROM AUTHOR

  • Another wage theft lawsuit against Ohio Republican U.S. Senate nominee comes to light

    Another wage theft lawsuit against Ohio Republican U.S. Senate nominee comes to light

    By:  – Ohio Capital Journal

    In 2012, a Porsche dealership owned by Republican U.S. Senate nominee Bernie Moreno recruited a general manager from Virginia with decades of experience selling the German sports cars. A year and a half later they cut ties with the salesman, and pretty soon he was in court claiming Moreno hadn’t delivered on the pay package that lured him to Ohio.

    From hiring to firing

    Before agreeing to take the job, Michael Falcone’s complaint states, he wanted assurance that the move to Ohio would make financial sense. The offer on the table was $80,000 in base pay as well as a commission of 5% of the dealership’s “total variable gross profit.”

    In a follow-up email exchange, Falcone pressed Moreno on the terms and according to court documents, Moreno wrote back, “Just so we are clear, you will get paid on ALL VARIABLE gross profit.”

    Falcone signed the offer sheet the following day and began work shorty after. His complaint describes working for several months before asking for documentation so he could double check his commission. “Despite multiple requests,” Falcone argued, the company didn’t provide the kind of sales information that would help him calculate what he was owed.

    What’s more, Falcone contends that after he began asking about his compensation, his superiors retaliated against him and “embarked on a concerted campaign to force Mr. Falcone’s resignation.”

    Falcone was demoted from general manager to used car manager and stripped of responsibilities. In January of 2014, after he’d been working there for about a year and a half, Falcone was terminated. The company said he was being let go because of unsatisfactory performance and a “permanent reduction in force.”

    But that round of downsizing was exceptionally narrow. Falcone was the only employee dismissed.

    Falcone alleged that the manager in the meeting told him he would not receive his outstanding compensation until he signed the termination agreement. He did so, albeit reluctantly, because he wanted to be paid, and because he understood the reduction in force designation would make him eligible to collect unemployment compensation.

    They didn’t give him a copy of the form when we left and Falcone got an unsettling surprise when he emailed the human resources department asking them to provide one.

    “When HR e-mailed him a copy of the form, it was clear that the form had been altered after it had been signed and without Mr. Falcone’s knowledge or consent,” the complaint states. “Specifically, the line indicating that his termination was, in part, due to a permanent reduction in force had been whited out, leaving only the unsupported allegation of unsatisfactory performance as the sole reason for Mr. Falcone’s termination.”

    To claim unemployment benefits in Ohio a worker must be out of work through no fault of their own. If Falcone was terminated for his performance, and nothing but, it could have complicated his application.

    Moreno’s response

    In court filings, Moreno shared a copy of Falcone’s signed offer sheet. He argued Falcone can’t assert he was relying on Moreno’s representations in an email when he signed a form the following day.

    Falcone “cannot conceivably demonstrate reasonable reliance on his communication with Mr. Moreno on June 28, 2012 because he clearly signed the Pay Plan on June 29, 2012 that specifically outlines the terms of his monthly incentive,” Moreno argued.

    As for Falcone’s termination, Moreno acknowledged Falcone was the only one fired and that they did alter the termination form.

    “Defendants admit that the termination form was altered,” Moreno’s attorneys wrote, “but this was done to correct an error on Defendants’ part and was not done to accomplish a fraudulent purpose.”

    But Moreno argued even if they had engaged in fraud to get Falcone to sign the form, it would be irrelevant. After all, Falcone was an at-will employee.

    Moreno’s dealership was “entitled to terminate him for any reason or for no reason whatsoever — regardless of whether he signed the form,” the filing states. “Therefore, it is immaterial for (Falcone) to argue that he would have refused to sign the Form if the only listed reason for termination was unsatisfactory performance.”

    Although Falcone complains the changes to the termination form jeopardized his unemployment claims, “glaringly absent,” Moreno argued, “is any factual allegation that he was denied unemployment compensation benefits as a proximate result of signing the Employee Termination Form.”

    In March of 2016, Moreno and Falcone settled out of court.

    What now?

    Speaking to reporters at campaign event in Chillicothe, Moreno called Falcone “a good guy,” but added “in any business, somebody doesn’t perform, they typically don’t blame themselves, they blame others.”

    “This was a disgruntled employee that filed the suit,” he added, “and like all businesses, we eventually settle these things, because it’s cheaper than litigation.”

    Look at his hundreds of happy employees, Moreno argued. Look at his top workplace awards.

    But to Moreno’s political opponents, the Falcone case echoes wage theft cases filed against Moreno in Massachusetts. In that dispute, Moreno’s employees argued he had improperly withheld time-and-a-half pay. The court ordered him to maintain documents related to the case, but he shredded overtime reports. Moreno argued the underlying data was still intact, but the judge and the jury weren’t buying it. He was ordered to pay more than $400,000.

    In a statement, Ohio AFL-CIO president Tim Burga argued “the choice for Senate in Ohio is easy. While (Democratic U.S. Sen.) Sherrod Brown looks out for Ohio workers, Bernie Moreno continues to show them that he only cares about himself.”

    “With working people your word is your bond,” he added. “Sherrod Brown’s word is good while Moreno has proven he can’t be trusted.”

    Tiffany Muller who heads up the organization End Citizens United argued the cases demonstrate a “clear pattern.”

    “Moreno’s record of wage theft should be disqualifying,” she said. “If he can’t be trusted as a business owner, how can he expect Ohio voters to trust him in the Senate?”

    Follow OCJ Reporter Nick Evans on Twitter.

    Nick Evans
    Nick Evans

    Nick Evans has spent the past seven years reporting for NPR member stations in Florida and Ohio. He got his start in Tallahassee, covering issues like redistricting, same sex marriage and medical marijuana. Since arriving in Columbus in 2018, he has covered everything from city council to football. His work on Ohio politics and local policing have been featured numerous times on NPR.

    Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

    MORE FROM AUTHOR

  • Ohio women lawmakers face misogyny, double standards when campaigning

    Ohio women lawmakers face misogyny, double standards when campaigning

    Despite challenges, they encourage more women to join the cause, ‘change the world’

    By:  – Ohio Capital Journal

    When Kamala Harris was announced as the running mate for Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential campaign, the questions about her heritage, ethnicity and even eligibility for office came strongly from the opposition.

    Now that she’s running for the top job following President Joe Biden’s suspension of his reelection campaign, the emphasis on her skin color and her gender has come back fast and furious, just as swiftly as the enthusiasm for her campaign brings big fundraising numbers to the camp.

     A supporter holds a sign as members of the San Francisco Democratic Party rally in support of Kamala Harris. (Photo by Loren Elliott/Getty Images) 

    “The United States has conflicting traditions,” said Dr. Susan Burgess, distinguished professor emerita of political science at Ohio University. “One of rampant racism and misogyny, and another toward greater change and inclusion.”

    U.S. Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio, the vice presidential candidate alongside former president Donald Trump, added to the rhetoric in a 2021 clip that has been brought back up in light of his new role. In the clip from a Fox News interview, he mentions the fact that Harris (and others) has not birthed any children of her own (she has two stepchildren with First Gentleman Doug Emhoff), and criticizes Democrats as “a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable, too.”

    The comments don’t surprise those who are a part of or study the history of political campaigns, where sexism and misogyny are “alive and well,” according to Ohio University history professor Dr. Katherine Jellison.

    “A man running for office, I’ve never heard comments about him being a childless cat/dog/fish person,” Jellison said. “These double standards are so blatantly on display and voiced whenever we have a prominent woman running.”

    ‘Attacks on the person, not the policy’

    For women currently in the state legislature, criticism based on gender and family is nothing new. Even in local campaigns, female politicians have been underestimated and questioned on their merits in ways they say they don’t witness in male campaigns.

    The Capital Journal contacted every female state representative and senator in the Ohio General Assembly to talk about their experience campaigning and working in politics. Included in the those who responded were the leaders of the minority side in both chambers, House Minority Leader Allison Russo and Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio.

    Consistently, those that responded said they have talked to constituents with all sorts of interests and issues, and worked with local campaigns or in favor of local issues before they worked their way up to state office. Also consistently, it was their community and their families that were their biggest advocates.

     House Minority Leader Allison Russo, left, talks with Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio, as they await the start of the Sept. 13, 2023, Ohio Redistricting Commission meeting.
    (Photo by Susan Tebben, Ohio Capital Journal.)

    Often, the women who are now representatives and senators didn’t intend to pursue politics until they were encouraged to or an issue motivated them to action. For most, misogyny wasn’t blatant, but the fact that they worked among a “boy’s club” was still highlighted.

    “People told me I couldn’t win because, you know,” Antonio told the Capital Journal. “And I would make them say what that was, and it was because I was a lesbian.”

    She faced the criticism of being a woman running for office, but called it a “false narrative that some people embrace, that I think they want to hang on to because frankly, I think we’re better at the job.”

    The first time state Rep. Sharon Ray, R-Wadsworth, campaigned back in the early 1990s, she said she knocked on the door of a man in her community. She explained that she was running for local office and had a conversation with him about local issues.

    “At the end he said, ‘You seem nice and all, but I would never vote for a woman,’” Ray said. “I had to tell him, ‘Well you’re in a bad way, because the two people going up for this are both women.’”

    State Rep. Bride Rose Sweeney fought against the fact that not only was she a woman running for office, but she was also a 25-year-old.

    “Most people, when I’d go to the door, thought I was selling Girl Scout cookies,” she said.

    Though she had worked as a staffer in the Statehouse and could point to quotes she’d written for elected officials, she still had to answer questions about her life experience.

    “I was shocked at how many times they didn’t think I was the candidate,” Sweeney said.

    As a single mom who had adopted her children from China, state Rep. Rachel Baker went through a similar struggle to other moms running for office, in that she balanced taking care of her family and campaigning.

    But when Chinese flags appeared around her campaigns signs in the yards of her supporters, put there anonymously in the dark of night, she saw a different side of campaigning.

    It’s such a paradox, (my children) are why I’m doing it, but it’s also why I’m scared to do it.

    – State Rep. Rachel Baker, D-Cincinnati

    Russo – who also ran for a congressional seat in the U.S. House in 2021 against U.S. Rep. Mike Carey – said when she talks to women who are contemplating running for office, putting themselves out there, and even more, putting their family in the public eye is high on the list of reasons not to.

    “It’s that piece that is the hesitation: Am I willing to open up my family for the level of scrutiny and potential for harassment,” Russo said.

    She and other moms who campaigned often had no choice but to bring their kids along as they talked to voters, because of partner work schedules or a lack of alternative child care. Sometimes, that worked to the candidate’s advantage.

    “Voters appreciated that because I’m a real person just trying to balance all the things in my life,” Russo said.

    Still, she was questioned about who would care for her children.

    “I’m pretty sure my male counterparts never got that question,” she said.

    Accidental advantages

    Dealing with heightened scrutiny as a woman in public office can be a struggle, but it can also be something that feels familiar to women who have faced challenges their entire lives and for which women already have coping mechanisms.

    “You can’t change your ethnicity or race or sex,” said state Sen. Paula Hicks-Hudson, D-Toledo. “I am who I am, and therefore you just have to deal with whatever those issues are.”

     COLUMBUS, Ohio — MAY 10: State Rep. Bride Rose Sweeney, D-Westlake, speaks during the Ohio House session, May 10, 2023, at the Statehouse in Columbus, Ohio. (Photo by Graham Stokes for Ohio Capital Journal)

    Nothing can prepare you for “people writing the most heinous things about you,” as Sweeney said of social media attacks, but for many woman public officials, life has prepared them to work harder than might be expected of others.

    “We think that we have to check certain boxes to run, and the reality is most of us are overqualified for office,” Russo said. “The woman candidates that I’ve worked with are incredibly good at putting together teams and networks, and that’s something that I think is very intuitive for women.”

    Antonio said women are often “auditioning long before we see ourselves in that role” as a leader in the community or in politics.

    State Rep. Beryl Brown Piccolantonio, D-Gahanna, feels like “it’s much more relevant that I’m a woman” with the issues in the political spotlight these days, including reproductive health.

    “I don’t think the legislature should be making decisions about people’s health, and the population that is directly impacted, I’m in it,” she said.

    The state representatives and senators who talked to the Capital Journal had their start in smaller ways, whether it be working in the Statehouse, opening their houses for local candidate meet-and-greets, knocking on doors for local campaigns or volunteering in their children’s events. It was those efforts that gave them the inside scoop on the issues that were important to their neighbors and melded them into the community to the point that they would be encouraged to make bigger moves.

    As a divorced young mom going to night school, one thing Ray liked to do with her free time was work on campaigns. In one Wadsworth race, the candidate left the race and after being encouraged to – and seeing an opportunity to help her son get his Boy Scout government badge – Ray decided to run.

    Antonio was miffed after a pitch for her daughter and other Lakewood kids to have a safe place to skateboard fell to an uninterested city council, when the opportunity occurred to her.

    “I came home and I said I’m sick of explaining what’s important in our community,” she said. “I could do that job, and I heard myself say I could do that job.”

    Looking forward, reaching back

    The road to November will be fast-paced for the Vice President and other women running for office, but there’s a sense of hope from public officials that more women will take up the cause, whether it be at a local, state or congressional level.

    The women of the Ohio legislature emphasized the need for anyone seeking the job of representing their community to meet with those constituents, whether at campaign events or at the residents’ front doors.

     State Rep. Beth Liston, D-Dublin, speaks at a rally to protect abortion rights. (Photo from General Assembly website.)

    “When you run for office, you’re often running to represent specific values, and you definitely learn the values of your constituents when you knock on doors,” said state Rep. Dr. Beth Liston, D-Dublin.

    Not only do you get to hear what the community needs from their legislators, but candidates get to explain their “why” when it comes to running.

    “I know because of the sacrifices that I’ve made to be in this position that some lives are better and people’s voices get heard because of the work that I do, and that gets me up and going everyday,” Sweeney said.

    Russo, Ray, Sweeney, Baker, Piccolantonio and Liston are all running for reelection to their districts in the November general election.

    And while the differences may be the focal point of campaigns against candidates in a political climate the public officials acknowledged is divisive and “terrifying” in some ways, those differences are reason enough for women to enter races.

    “I don’t think differences are deficiencies,” Hicks-Hudson said. “I think they add flavor.”

    It’s those who already hold office that can make the difference in whether or not more women come into the political space, too, according to Antonio.

    “I think it’s important for those of us who are in office to encourage it,” the minority leader said. “You have to reach back as you climb, and bring folks with you.”

    Comments like Vance’s “childless cat ladies” statement only serve as motivation for officials like Sweeney who see more women in office as the way to “change the world.”

    “To say that I have no stake in America, that I can’t contribute … (Vance) clearly hasn’t been around a lot of women and doesn’t respect them,” Sweeney said.

    Parsing through the messaging

    Throughout the next three months (and already this election cycle), voters will go through the process of making decisions about who and what they want to choose in the general election. That means parsing through the heavy load of information coming from all sides about how to feel about those candidates and issues.

    As elected officials who have read and distributed their fair share of campaign info, the legislators said it’s important to form opinions based on resources voters trust, and nonpartisan research like voting guides from the League of Women Voters of Ohio.

    But it’s also just as important to base decisions on the issues and values that matter most to each voter, and vet each candidate based on those specific values.

    “I personally think the voters should be able to interact with the people that are wanting to represent them,” Piccolantonio said.

    When it comes to the presidential race, self-reflection and a vision for the future come right along with diligent research.

    We are at a critical time for finding out what the integrity of candidates are. As we go forward with this presidential election, let’s look at what does this country need, what should we be looking for when it comes to our next leader.

    – State Sen. Paula Hicks-Hudson, D-Toledo

    While some people might be looking for parity in representation, Antonio said she thinks some are ready “for a majority of women to be running things to right the ship.”

    Right before Biden announced he would be abandoning his reelection bid, Antonio said she was pulled aside by a man who said, “Look, it’s time, can the women just … I know we’ve made a mess of this, could you just fix this for us?”

    The Senate minority leader said she smiled.

    “I looked at him and I said, ‘We’re working on it.”

    ______________

    Susan Tebben
    Susan Tebben

    Susan Tebben is an award-winning journalist with a decade of experience covering Ohio news, including courts and crime, Appalachian social issues, government, education, diversity and culture. She has worked for The Newark Advocate, The Glasgow (KY) Daily Times, The Athens Messenger, and WOUB Public Media. She has also had work featured on National Public Radio.

    Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

    MORE FROM AUTHOR