Guess this takes a little heat off Noe.
This latest revelation borders on insanity. Most people who "lose" that kind of money go to prison.
From $225 million to $10 million in a hedge fund? And the person in charge of the BWC investment portfolio kept drawing a paycheck until today, even though the agency learned of the losses last September.
Oh - best part - Jim McLean is on "paid administrative leave today pending a management review of the situation."
With the BWC doing the reviewing, McLean is liable to get a raise and a promotion following this debacle.
posted by historymike at 09:41 P.M. EST on Tue Jun 07, 2005 #
Oh oh oh, historymike. The latest news is that shady dealer in Colorado may have spent Ohio's money on something like 3500 bottles of wine.
AND 265 ILLEGAL CUBAN CIGARS!!!
Why does the GOP hate America? Why'd they let state money fund Communism?
posted by anonymouscoward at 11:32 P.M. EST on Tue Jun 07, 2005 #
Ah - there it is again.
The ever-present spectre of "creeping socialism." It has even infected the poor Republicans in their efforts to fleece the coffers of the BWC.
Now we see their true colors: RED! Now I understand why they keep referring the states leaning Republican as "red states."
Oh, the humanity! How could I have not seen this RED MENACE? Where is Joe McCarthy when you need him?
Oh wait. I remember where he is.
He is in Hell, with that RED-faced Satan! Everywhere RED!!! Help us, Lord, to protect this land and this flag, the glorious....
No. Oh no!
RED, white and blue....sob...even our very flag has been tainted with the RED of creeping socialism...sob...
posted by historymike at 06:36 A.M. EST on Wed Jun 08, 2005 #
All the more reason to privatize BWC! well, if you think it's got a problem!!
I'm sure "The Blade" will be calling for this any minute now.
swd
posted by swd at 01:48 P.M. EST on Wed Jun 08, 2005 #
"A costly investment fiasco in Ohio over missing rare coins has reached the foothills of Colorado. Jefferson County sheriff's officials raided the Evergreen home of Michael Storeim and confiscated computers, invoices, documents, hundreds of rare coins, 260 Cuban cigars and 3,500 bottles of wine Friday. Investigators believe Storeim could have sold the [missing] coins to himself at the price of 1 cent."
"Losses by the Pittsburgh-based MDL Capital Management dwarf the estimated $10 million to $13 million missing from BWC's rare-coin investments and raise new questions about the abilities of former bureau administrator Jim Conrad, who initially soft-pedaledinformation that surfaced about the losing investments."
"MDL has been fired, and investigators are inquiring about the firm's human resources manager, Mildred "Mimi" Forbes, daughter of Bureau of Workers' Compensation Oversight Board member George Forbes. The panel approves all BWC investments."
"The current commission is composed of:
William Sopko (chairman), president of STAMCO Industries Inc., Cleveland.
Thomas Bainbridge Jr., partner in the law firm of Ward, Kaps, Bainbridge, Maurer & Melvin, Columbus.
William Burga, president of the Ohio AFL-CIO, Columbus.
George Forbes, partner in the law firm of Forbes, Fields and Associates, Cleveland.
Mary Beth Carroll, vice president of FirstEnergy, Akron.
"The commission is responsible for being the check and balance for BWC executive investment decisions."
"Our point is that it appears a lot of people on both sides of the aisle were snoozing while the coin investment deal was on the books. Since this thing stretches back to 1997, no one can claim they were taken by surprise."
"So, now the question is, are members of the BWC Commission helping behind the scenes to get to the bottom of Coingate, or are they attempting to cover their ass?"
posted by jr at 03:25 P.M. EST on Wed Jun 08, 2005 #
I posted earlier that I thought the state officials would now be kept in check with the intense media attention.
However, yesterday's reveations show that they are still in coverup mode.
Did Taft and Co. think that the media would not find out about the lost $215 million?
They would have looked a lot more convincing had they been forthcoming with a full accounting early on.
Now Taft and his administration look like they have been hiding the truth. Worse yet, they insult both Democrats and Republicans with the paid administrative leave that Jim McLean gets.
How many private sector jobs can a person oversee the loss $215 million worth of investment dollars (almost 96% of the principal) and get rewarded with a vacation?
This scandal will, in my opinion, have extensive fallout.
posted by historymike at 05:46 P.M. EST on Wed Jun 08, 2005 #
And still no repercussions for those individuals charged with overseeing the BWC's investments...
One person "taking the hit" just doesn't get it.
posted by Hooda_Thunkit at 06:36 P.M. EST on Wed Jun 08, 2005 #
In more high risk activity, last summer the BWC invested $30 million in 7 different VC firms. I wonder how that investment is performing. Maybe it will be the next we hear about.
posted by babbleman at 07:54 P.M. EST on Wed Jun 08, 2005 #
All the more reason to privatize BWC!
Absolutely. Shut the damn thing down and let private insurance handle it. The less government we have the less there is to mismanage.
I say transition from monopolistic to competitive by 2010 and completely private by 2015.
posted by babbleman at 08:11 P.M. EST on Wed Jun 08, 2005 #
The argument on this site seems to be going towards privatizing this fund. I want to bring up another point.
Should the citizens of Ohio look at recalling Gov. Taft similar to what California did a few years ago with Gray Davis? This state has gone backward since he has been in office and how can he possibly have no clue about these ridiculous investment deals (seriously Cuban cigars, rare coins, and wine!!). If there is a petition or something for this out there, let me know, I'll gladly sign it. Let the heads roll from the top.
posted by Kevin at 12:14 A.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
I wonder if there's more to this George Forbes character?
"In Ohio, eyebrows were raised by the fact that MDL Capital Chief Compliance Officer Mildred Forbes is the daughter of Cleveland NAACP President George Forbes, who is a member of the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation oversight board. Mr. Forbes said yesterday he will step down."
Why step down now? Why not earlier? Get out while the gettin' is good, I guess.
"MDL's chief executive officer insists Forbes played no role in the investment firm's hiring of Mimi Forbes."
More from the Blade story about MDL:
"Mark Lay built his MDL Capital Management into the fourth-largest minority-owned asset management firm in the country. Mr. Lay [was] named one of the Top 50 African-Americans on Wall Street by Black Enterprise Magazine."
"In the pension-fund business, political ties frequently open doors to business, and Mr. Lay had his share."
"Last year, House Democratic Leader Bill DeWeese named Mr. Lay to the state's new Commonwealth Financing Authority, which administers a $1 billion fund that finances state economic stimulus programs. Mr. Lay "is nonpareil in his knowledge of the financial management world," Mr. DeWeese said at the time."
"The Retirement Board of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, has not found that to be the case. MDL is the poorest performing of the four bond-fund managers the pension plan uses. The MDL Broad Market Fixed Income Fund has underperformed bond market indexes for 13 consecutive quarters. One investment service ranks it 501st over the last five years out of 549 funds in its category."
Another tidbit about Lay: "... Pittsburgh businessman Mark D. Lay, who has contributed to Gov. Bob Taft's campaign, and other candidates, including some Democrats."
Another story from the Blade:
"Gov. Bob Taft’s office learned seven months ago — not this week — that the Ohio Bureau of Workers’ Compensation had lost $225 million in a high-risk investment."
"In an Oct. 26, 2004, e-mail to Taft aide James Samuel, the bureau’s administrator-CEO, James Conrad, wrote that the “entire value” of the portfolio managed by MDL Capital Management was down about $225 million. Mr. Conrad also alerted the governor’s office that the bureau had rejected MDL’s request for another $25 million and the firm was in danger of collapsing, which he said would be “likely to make national news.” "
Maybe Conrad was made a scapegoat and that's why he resigned.
"As the scandal over the bureau’s investments deepened, the Ohio Ethics Commission and the inspector general’s office are examining what role George Forbes, a member of the bureau’s Oversight Commission, played in the state choosing MDL to manage part of the bureau’s portfolio."
"Although he is a Democrat, Mr. Forbes as president of Cleveland city council in the 1980s worked closely with then-Mayor George Voinovich, a Republican. Mr. Voinovich, now a U.S. senator, appointed Mr. Forbes to the bureau’s Oversight Commission in 1995."
"The lobbyist for MDL is Jerry Hammond, a Democrat and former Columbus city council president who has worked with Mr. Tipps [a former Ohio Democratic Party chairman.]"
Below are a few bits from a Plain Dealer timeline. "Here's what the major players have to say about when and how they found out that MDL Capital Management had lost more than $215 million in state money:"
"Mid-August: Jim McLean, chief investment officer for the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation, discovers that an MDL fund is worthless."
"Fall 2004: Jim Conrad tells Bill Sopko about the MDL losses in a phone conversation."
"Oct. 8, 2004: The BWC asks Attorney General Jim Petro to name a special counsel to review MDL's activities. But Petro said he did not know the extent of the losses until this week."
"October 26, 2004: Conrad sends an e-mail to Jim Samuel, Gov. Bob Taft's executive assistant, stating that MDL "has lost significant amounts of money" and the value of the state's investment "is down approximately $225 million on a total investment of $350 million." Samuel didn't pass on the news to the governor or his chief of staff, said Taft spokesman Mark Rickel."
Plausible deniability? Maybe Taft wanted to remain in the dark to protect himself.
"June 2: George Forbes, a member of the Oversight Commission, learns that more than $200 million was missing during a lunch with commission chairman Sopko, Forbes said. Sopko disagrees with Forbes' recollection, saying he spoke with him but did not know the exact amount until reading Wednesday's newspaper."
posted by jr at 09:42 A.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
...Mildred Forbes is the daughter of Cleveland NAACP President George Forbes...
...House Democratic Leader Bill DeWeese named Mr. Lay to...
Wait a minute.
I thought this was all caused by one party having too much control. According to the Democrats, they have no control and thus no involvement. And, besides that, the Democrats invented ehtics, so they are obviously immune to any violations of them.
What do Chris Redfern and Mark Dann have to say about this?
posted by babbleman at 10:07 A.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
Just as Redfern and Dann predicted, the scandal is spreading. Let's see, Republicans 10 (million), Democrats 215 (million). Looks like the liberals are winning!
posted by babbleman at 10:11 A.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
Both the Democrats and Republicans are corrupt. It does not matter which of the two are in power.
As I have perviously argued, the solution is to have more parties and relatively frequent turnover in power. This reduces the ability of entrenched politicians to build up these cozy schemes.
Mark Lay knows how the game is played. Throw around money to people with access to power, and good things will come your way.
As far as the Dems being responsible for the missing $215 million, babbleman, that is a real stretch. Lay tossed around money to everyone. The Republicans appointed Conrad and his staff. The Democrats were sideline players; their influence was pretty limited.
The Dems are still a part of the systemic corruption, though. Forbes is a good example of the idea that the label of Democrat or Republican is pretty meaningless when it comes to the proverbial pigs feeding at the trough. Members of both parties line right up, stick in their snouts, and gorge on the public's money.
There were just more Republican piggies this time.
posted by historymike at 10:33 A.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
Lay tossed around money to everyone
Eh, maybe. But given his connection with the president of the Cleveland NAACP and his appointment by the House Democratic Leader, I think it is fairly clear as to what his primary affiliation is.
...Dems being responsible for the missing $215 million...is a real stretch...The Republicans appointed Conrad and his staff...
Conrad is responsible for everything on his watch - I'll go for that. But liberals are absolutely giddy about the person at the bottom of Coingate being a Republican leader. Consequently, that has been the focus from the Blade, if not their ultimate motivation: the destruction and exploitation of the guy at the bottom because of his political affiliation. In an attempt to avoid double standards, I am simply applying the same rules.
posted by babbleman at 11:02 A.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
babbleman, the Race Card is not accepted here. Being a member of the NAACP doesn't automatically make one a liberal or a Democrat. If you wish to argue that being a member of the NAACP makes one a liberal or a Democrat automatically, then I'm going to go to church and become a Christian by that kind of logic.
Mr. Lay contributes to some Democrats, and that automatically makes him 100% pure Democrat?
Neither party is immune from "pay for influence/benefits". Some of the individual members probably are, but my guess is the vast majority of the party members, and the party officials themselves, would sell their own grandmothers to the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal for the right amount.
posted by anonymouscoward at 11:30 A.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
babbleman, the Race Card is not accepted here.
Good, then don't bring it up.
Being a member of the NAACP doesn't automatically make one a liberal...
Cut the crap, AC. The NAACP, like organized labor, is a fixture in the Democratic party's culture. From Julian Bond to Kweisi Mfume to the membership, we are talking about an overwhelmingly Democratic organization. And, specifically, we are not even talking about a member, we are talking about the president of a chapter of a large metropolitan city.
I'm not sure if you're trying to confuse people with theoreticals but, as usual, you argument hinges on a thinly veiled rose.
Look, as the scandal unfolds, money handlers brought in by Democrats have lost more than 20 times the money than those brought in by Republicans.
Get over it.
posted by babbleman at 12:34 P.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
babbleman, please quit whatever it is you've been smoking.
You're the one who brought up the NAACP. You played the race card.
You're the one who is trying to pin this solely on the Democrats because this Lay character happened to pay a few of them off.
This happened, again, under a Republican-dominated administration. So we can argue that the Republicans are incompetent, or ignorant, or *gasp* WERE PAID OFF (hey let's remember that this guy paid off Republicans as well). Or maybe your Republican crooks were too busy buying and selling influence to pay attention.
Unlike you, however, I will admit that "my" (yeah right sure as if, lesser of two evils) party, the Democrats, are talking out of their asses again, like normal. HOWEVER, you lack the testicles to admit that YOUR party permitted this to go on, that YOUR party is guilty as sin of being corrupt and buying and selling influence, and that YOUR party is claiming that the people THEY appointed and/or trusted to tell them didn't.
Before you try to pin everything solely on the Democrats:
The bureau hired MDL in 1998 and invested $355 million in a long-bond fund with the firm. But in 2003, the bureau agreed to MDL’s proposal to create an “active duration fund,” which would act like a hedge fund.
1998. Same year the Coingate investments started. WHO WAS IN CHARGE THEN, BABBLEMAN?
Mr. Taft said he did not learn about the state’s failed investment in rare coins until he read The Blade’s April 3 story, which uncovered that the bureau had invested $50 million with Toledo-area coin dealer Tom Noe. He said bureau officials then told him the investment was “not only profitable, but safe.”
But in a March 18 memo, Mr. Conrad informed two Taft aides — chief of staff Jon Allison and Mr. Samuel — about The Blade inquiring about the investment contract with Mr. Noe’s Capital Coin.
ANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNND:
COLUMBUS — Gov. Bob Taft’s office was informed in October — not this week — of a massive investment loss from the head of Ohio’s insurance fund for injured workers.
It is unclear if the news was passed on to the governor.
James Conrad, former administrator of the Ohio Bureau of Workers’ Compensation, told Mr. Taft’s top business aide on Oct. 26 of a $225 million loss in a fund managed by MDL Capital Management of Pittsburgh. The total loss was about $215 million after MDL recovered some of the investment.
“In sum, the entire value of MDL’s portfolio is down approximately $225 million on a total investment of $350 million,” Mr. Conrad wrote in an e-mail to James Samuel, the governor's executive assistant for business and industry.
Come on, babbleman. Grow a pair and confront the issues. Stop blaming the NAACP and Democrats and any other convenient scapegoat and stop diverting attention away from the fact that something is very wrong with the way Republicans are running things down in Columbus.
I, frankly, am terrified, because what's going on down there is near exactly what I think goes on with Dubya in D.C. Dubya's puppet-masters tell him only what they want him to know, with a dash of lies and misinformation carefully crafted to manipulate him into approving what they want, while enabling him to claim plausible deniability as to anything else going on. Just like Bob Taft's staff apparently doesn't tell ol' Bob anything except what they want him to know. The burning question in my mind is if Bob and Dubya actually know/encourage things to be this way, or if this is engineered by someone behind the curtain, or, God forbid, that they REALLY ARE THAT STUPID.
posted by anonymouscoward at 01:53 P.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
babbleman...{and 607 other words}
None of which changes the fact that favor brokering between Democrats resulted in $225 million of missing funds and that from Republicans resulted in $10 million missing.
I'm just keeping count. It's just numbers and there is nothing I can do to change them. Why are you so upset AC?
And regarding race - I was discussing the political affiliation of an organization. I don't give a flying *!^% if the organization represents blacks, reds, greens, trekkies or breeders of Alaskan Malamutes.
A liberal affiliated organization is just that - you can turn off your race radar - it is irrelevalent and I didn't even mention it.
posted by babbleman at 02:15 P.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
At Newsmeat, we can see the Noe's political contributions.
Mark Lay is an Aliquippa native and still lives there. The site lists a few contributions by a Mark D. Lay of Aliquippa and MDL. Lay gave $1000 to John Kerry in 2001, $5000 in 2001 to the Dedicated Americans for the Senate and the House, which is or was a Democrat PAC, and $1000 to Bill Clinton back in 1995.
Is there a better site than Newsmeat for finding out political contributions?
posted by jr at 04:15 P.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
Look, babbleman:
1. Most of the people involved in the MLD fiasco were Republicans.
2. Forbes could be a Democrat, but Republican George Voinovich appointed him to the Oversight Commission.
3. Day could be from any party. He is all about the green.
I think getting distracted about which weasels belong to which party is a waste of time.
Corruption is corruption is corruption.
If it is the Republicans this time, it will be the Democrats next time. The party out of power has fewer corruption opportunities, that's all.
Until we boot both of them out by getting rid of the ridiculously unfair third-party entry rules (and fees) - thus getting something like real democracy - we will be stuck with one or both parties fleecing us.
posted by historymike at 04:17 P.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
Searching Newsmeat for Forbes, it lists contributions by a George L. Forbes of Cleveland and Forbes Fields and Associates:
George Voinovich - $2000 - Oct 22, 2004.
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee - $2500 - Oct 22, 2004.
Ohio Democratic Committee - $5000 - in 2000.
And so on. He has made several contributions over the years.
posted by jr at 04:23 P.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
According to the Blade, Forbes is a Democrat.
"Although he is a Democrat, Mr. Forbes as president of Cleveland city council in the 1980s worked closely with then-Mayor George Voinovich, a Republican. Mr. Voinovich, now a U.S. senator, appointed Mr. Forbes to the bureau’s Oversight Commission in 1995."
Forbes formed close ties with Voiny many years ago, and that's probably why Forbes contributes money to Voiny's campaigns.
posted by jr at 04:28 P.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
Marcy Kaptur and Sherrod Brown are trying to make political hay with this whole BWC problem.
May 29 Blade story:
"U.S. Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D., Toledo) said she is confident the scandal will hurt Republican candidates, especially in Ohio."
Why only Republicans? Why not any politician affiliated with the BWC?
June 9 Blade story:
"Democrats such as Miss Kaptur and U.S. Rep. Sherrod Brown of Lorain say the latest scandals mirror problems in Washington and even call into question the results of the 2004 presidential election."
"Mr. Brown said state government leaders have been "inept" and "incompetent" for a decade and the "depth of corruption in Ohio might set national records." Mr. Brown called out Governor Taft, as well as GOP gubernatorial candidates Attorney General Jim Petro, State Auditor Betty Montgomery, and Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell."
"Mr. Brown, a former Ohio secretary of state, said the situation in Ohio mirrors problems in Washington."
"Dan Allen, a spokesman for Mr. DeLay, responded yesterday: "The Democrats would like nothing more than to focus on these partisan attacks and ignore the fact that they have become the party of no ideas, no solutions, and no agenda." "
posted by jr at 04:59 P.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
I guess I'm just frustrated at the whole thing...the Republican governor screwed up - big time. But the Dems are using rather inflamatory language to describe this...wonder how they'd feel if we used their words about the "culture of corruption under one-party control" to refer to politics in Lucas County/Toledo?
They're a bunch of hypocrites - trying to say it's wrong in Columbus but okay here.
posted by intrepid at 05:56 P.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
I guess I'm just frustrated at the whole thing...the Republican governor screwed up - big time. But the Dems are using rather inflamatory language to describe this...wonder how they'd feel if we used their words about the "culture of corruption under one-party control" to refer to politics in Lucas County/Toledo?
As a non-resident I'm not qualified to say much but I'm waiting for the scandals to come out up there in full.
As well as the scandals to come out in Ottawa and Erie counties as well... assuming Baumgartner isn't a crackpot or blowing them out of proportion.
The irony is that the GOP got in in 1992 by screaming about the Dems and their deals and how they would enforce ethics and clean up Washington... yet by the time ten years had passed, they were already on shaky ground between Florida elections, Iraq, and the energy policy. Add to that ANWR, more Iraq, Gitmo, Ohio elections, gay marriage, Halliburton, campaign donations, and more. Tom DeLay is suspect, and they conveniently changed the ethics rules to protect him.
The Dems will be elected in again in the fullness of time, and eventually they'll get caught with their hands in the cookie jar again.
posted by anonymouscoward at 06:59 P.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
> Florida elections, Iraq, and the energy policy. Add to that ANWR, more Iraq, Gitmo, Ohio elections, gay marriage, Halliburton, campaign donations, and more. Tom DeLay is suspect ....
Ha! Pure fantasy and paranoia!! And not in the least connected to coins, bad investments or whether BWC should be privatized.
swd
posted by swd at 07:54 P.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
swd, allow me to present you with the award for Taking Things Out of Context Award.
posted by anonymouscoward at 09:44 P.M. EST on Thu Jun 09, 2005 #
I'm thinking there might be some merit to that comment made by DeLay's spokesman about Democrats: " ... they have become the party of no ideas, no solutions, and no agenda."
I'm thinking that the Democrats' strategy is to hope like hell that when the sun rises each day, somewhere in the news is a scandal involving Republicans.
No ideas, no solutions, and no agenda, but please, please, please let there be at least the hint of a Republican scandal out there to exploit.
June 10 Blade story titled "Democrats pile on GOP with statewide attacks." If it was the other way around, we'd probably be getting the same thing from Republicans or whomever. Politics as usual. A waste of time. No one's paying attention.
Anyway, the subtitle to this Blade story is: "Party hoping to turn fallout to its advantage."
No ideas, no solutions, and no agenda, but the hope of a Republican scandal.
"Sensing an opportunity to overturn 16 years of Republican dominance of Ohio government and deliver the state to the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008, Democrats yesterday launched coordinated attacks across Ohio."
No ideas, no solutions, and no agenda, but the hope of a scandal that leads to an opportunity to launch a statewide kindergarten-like show-and-tell program.
Who attended these dog-and-pony shows? Did thousands of citizens leave work to hear what these people had to say? What did these Democrats offer that hasn't already appeared in the media? Did they have something that we didn't already know? What was the point? Politics, that's what it is all about. Gaining power. Or regaining power.
Our state rep Peter Ujvagi represented us well with this piece of original thinking when he said:
"What did they [Republicans] know and when did they know it?"
No ideas, no solutions, and no agenda, but a kettle full of hollow worn-out phrases.
Wait, our other rep Teresa Fedor topped Ujvagi in the uniqueness category when she said:
"Follow the money."
Wow, thousands of people left work to hear these politicians' words of wisdom. These are the words of hope and a promise for a better future not just in our great state of Ohio but across the entire country. Lead us Teresa and Peter.
It's interesting where these Democrat grandstanding stunts took place: Toledo, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Youngstown, and Columbus. Play the game Which One Doesn't Belong. Look at the list of cities and what's in common with all of them except for one?
They're all Democrat strongholds except for Cincy. Look at the map of Ohio for the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections where the results are broken down by county. The counties with the big cities went to Gore and Kerry except for Hamiliton county. The Democrats went on tour yesterday and preached to the choir.
No ideas, no solutions, no agenda, and no strategy.
Democrats own Toledo, Cleveland, Youngstown, Akron, Columbus, Dayton, and Springfield and a county here and there in eastern Ohio (old coal and steel country.)
If the Democrats aren't going to have any ideas or solutions, at the very least they can do is get whatever message they have out to the places that traditionally vote Republican: the rural areas.
In the June 8 - 14 Toledo City Paper, Paula Ross says in her column:
"The Democratic message of the year (and probably 2006 as well) will be: 'Tom Noe never gave me any money. I never stayed at Tom Noe's house. I was never associated in any way with Tom Noe.' "
When I read that, I assume Paula was making a lame Wilkowski-like joke, but I think she was serious based on her next sentence:
"As a Democrat, I look forward to seeing that message help local candidates in 2005 and help restore balance to our state government next year."
No ideas, no solutions, and no agenda, but I was never associated in any way with Tom Noe. That's the Democrats' message. Their solution. Their idea for solving problems and getting elected.
Although Ross did add:
"But I need qualified candidates to step forward so I have someone to vote for."
That's a good start. I assume a qualified candidate would have ideas, solutions, and an agenda for improving the state.
posted by jr at 04:14 P.M. EST on Fri Jun 10, 2005 #
I agree, jr.
As much as I have been irritated at chunks of the Republican agenda (slashing education support, tax cuts designed to benefit the wealthy, et al), I have been even more disappointed with the Democrats.
What, exactly, is the Democratic party, and what does it stand for?
I am not looking for the usual far-right flippant answers ("tax-and-spend," "closet socialists," and the like). I might be willing to get enthusiastic about Democratic candidates, and the party in general, if they actually stood for something.
I think that part of the problem can be found in the consultants and focus groups whose input waters down what gets presented to the public.
I cannot, however, get motivated to vote for lightweights like Teresa Fedor and Peter Ujvagi. I believe that Fedor is angling for a national office, for which she is out of her league; Ujvagi has never shown an iota of original thought, and is only good at the sort of city council-esque "Sure, I'll make sure they get that trash picked up, ma'am" constituent butt-kissing.
I once sat at a table at Beaners on Central, and Fedor was two tables over. Even in a private setting, her conversation consisted entirely of wonkish non-speak ("paradigm shifts," "task forces," and the like).
I have been unenthusiastic about Ujvagi since hearing him (with my own ears) promise to lend support to a cause with which I was involved, only to find the promised help of volunteers and his personal presence to never materialize. I imagine that he stuck a wet finger in the wind, and assessed the underwhelming political value of our small group. This no-show occurred despite the fact that the people involved were in his district, and that there was a larger humanitarian motivation.
Typical soulless politicos, I know, but I fail to be impresssed with either Fedor or Ujvagi.
And this is just the state Democrats.
At the national level, you have the tug-of-war between the Republican wannabes of the DLC and the Howard Dean-led DNC (heck, even the DNC is split within itself). The resultant discord is a party built on indecision that will never win a national presidential election.
Until the Republicrat chokehold on access to the ballot is broken, we will continue to get more of the same: rampant corruption, political aristocracy, and a slow decline of the once-healthy United States.
posted by historymike at 05:47 P.M. EST on Fri Jun 10, 2005 #
Until the Republicrat chokehold on access to the ballot is broken, we will continue to get more of the same: rampant corruption, political aristocracy, and a slow decline of the once-healthy United States.
So, historymike, when are we going to start the process to amend Ohio's constitution in a way that removes the restrictions and/or disparity on ballot access in Ohio?
posted by anonymouscoward at 07:23 P.M. EST on Fri Jun 10, 2005 #
Unfortunately, not until enough people get angry.
It would make a great Capra-like story for a/c, me, and a busload of agitators to trek to Columbus, but we wouldn't even have enough cash to get the bus there and back.
But who knows, maybe I am just getting jaded and cynical. Maybe I will live long enough to see that day.
Or at least long enough to see the next implosion of one of the bigs. Looks now like the Democrats, but the Republicans have only held the Bible belters since Reagan (OK, maybe it started with Nixon, but they used to be huge for the Democrats before the civil rights movement went full swing in the 1960s).
If you had told a southern Democrat in 1960 that the Republicans would one day rule the South, he would have taken you for a madman.
And if you spoke in 2004 at an NAACP conference about the Republicans having some great civil rights accomplishments, they might have booed you off the stage before you got to remind them about the 13th through 15th Amendments and Reconstruction.
posted by historymike at 09:56 P.M. EST on Fri Jun 10, 2005 #
Republicans having some great civil rights accomplishments
The USA PATRIOT Act?
posted by anonymouscoward at 10:24 P.M. EST on Fri Jun 10, 2005 #
"... when are we going to start the process to amend Ohio's constitution in a way that removes the restrictions and/or disparity on ballot access in Ohio?"
I'm clueless about these restrictions and ballot access problems you speak of. Help out a brother. What are they? What problems do they cause? Why do they exist? How and when did they get implemented? What's the upside if they're eliminated?
posted by jr at 11:04 P.M. EST on Fri Jun 10, 2005 #
Oh lord, jr, I did that discussion on here earlier... see the "Top 10 Filibuster Falsehoods" comments: http://www.toledotalk.com/cgi-bin/comments.pl/16/1106#3507
It's laid out right in Ohio law that the two parties get preferential treatment in ballot access (by way of # of signatures they need on the nominating petition) and that it's basically impossible to organize and keep a third party alive in Ohio. Yes, if you insist, a "minor party" candidate has it even easier, but organizing such an entity requires getting a number of qualified people >= 1% of the number of votes for governor in the last election to sign a petition, and then that party has to draw >5% of the vote in every subsequent election to stay around.
The simple solutions, to me, involve either not recoginzing political parties (something like Louisiana), or equalizing the requirements (both party candidates and independents must get the same number of nominating signatures), or, my personal favorite, California Recall Rules (65 signatures and a $3500 filing fee or 10,000 signatures in lieu of the filing fee, with the filing fee pro-rated per signature).
I figure that $3500 filing fee ought to help keep the not-serious party nutjobs from blowing taxpayer dollars on pointless primary elections (which I don't understand anyway, why do Dems and Republicans and independents have to pay for a popularity contest for people they don't like, and can't pick between without either being forced to choose a or switch party affiliation?).
posted by anonymouscoward at 10:02 A.M. EST on Sat Jun 11, 2005 #
A possible solution?
"Sadly, the Ohio Legislature just recently [last December] passed a Republican led "Campaign Finance Reform Bill" that raises the contribution limits 400 percent and allows wealthy Ohioans to give up to $10,000 per election cycle to an individual candidate or a Political Action Committee."
"In the wake of Coingate, this bill should be repealed and a clean election system implemented in which the public would fund candidates who agree to limit their spending and reject private contributions."
"The public benefits by lowering the costs of campaigns, allowing the legislature to concentrate on legislating instead of incessant fund raising, leveling the playing field for new candidates, and reducing the influence of special interests and the wealthy on policy making."
posted by jr at 10:09 A.M. EST on Sat Jun 11, 2005 #
Quoting from above, the following people are commisioners of BWC:
William Sopko (chairman), president of STAMCO Industries Inc., Cleveland.
Thomas Bainbridge Jr., partner in the law firm of Ward, Kaps, Bainbridge, Maurer & Melvin, Columbus.
William Burga, president of the Ohio AFL-CIO, Columbus.
George Forbes, partner in the law firm of Forbes, Fields and Associates, Cleveland.
Mary Beth Carroll, vice president of FirstEnergy, Akron
Now, if I read the above postings correctly, it looks like at least 2 of the 5 are Democrats. Collectively they all are responsible for how the Commision is run, right? Now this latest lossage (1/4 billion) seems to implicate a conflict of interest with Forbes, a Democrat, right?
If Noe's putative loss of ~10 million is a scandal, shouldn't actual loss of ~250 million be an even bigger scandal?
Seems to me the commisioners should be bearing the brunt of these decisions, they made them, didn't they?
Indeed, if anything, the above would all be evidence for privatizing BWC if these losses are 1) outside the range of those typically encountered and/or 2) implicate conflicts of interest.
swd, who isn't paying much attention to this yet since much of the information presented to date seems more, ahem, speculative (especially when it comes to "The Blade,") than factual.
posted by swd at 01:56 P.M. EST on Sat Jun 11, 2005 #
Yes, I love the irony of calling it "Campaign Finance Reform" while quintupling the individual donation limit.
Real reform would reduce individual contributions to candidates, parties, and shams like the thinly-veiled special interest groups that work as 527s, and would reduce or eliminate the power of special-interest groups to control elections and public policy.
Until the money grab ends, we will have more of the same. A way must be found to take the power of money out of the election equation.
Thinking out loud here; I make no claim to all the answers:
Strategy #1: Publicly financed elections: Some call for publicly financed elections; I remain skeptical. I believe the net result of that would just be more bureaucracy. However, I admit that there is a certain logic in having the government be the final arbiter in a civil society.
Strategy #2: Eliminate the Republicrat duopoly. More parties means the money is distributed among a greater number of recipients, thus lessening the influence of any one party. To get here we must follow a/c's lead, which is to simplify and equalize the process of getting on the ballot.
Strategy #3: Real reform means stringent limits on individual and group contributions. While I like some of what George Soros has to say, he can pour almost unlimited money into causes that he supports. Ostensibly, should his vote be worth more than mine just because he is loaded? (note to board: I specifically chose Soros for my conservative friends on this board to keep reading). I am as disgusted with labor's politician-buying as I am with that of the business world.
We bill ourselves as protectors of democracy, but we practice a sort of self-perpetuating and PAC-financed aristocacy.
posted by historymike at 02:11 P.M. EST on Sat Jun 11, 2005 #
Historymike writes: "However, I admit that there is a certain logic in having the government be the final arbiter in a civil society."
Somehow I thought that the people were the final arbiters in our republic...
Making it possible for more parties to be on the ballot - as easy as it is for the 2 major ones - also makes sense, but then I'm one of those people who signs petitions for anyone - regardless of party. I figure that if a person is willing to go to the effort of running, they deserve to have enough signatures to actually be on the ballot.
But the strategy #3 which limits, as the courts have ruled, a right of free speech just doesn't make sense.
I don't believe the solution is to put government in control and then limit how much we can give...but rather, unlimited contributions (or larger limits) BUT ONLY if matched by immediate disclosure. In this day and age of technology, there's no reason why we can't know, within several days, who's given to whom and how much.
posted by intrepid at 06:50 A.M. EST on Sun Jun 12, 2005 #
"Oh lord, jr, I did that discussion on here earlier ..."
So the party name not being on the ballot is what you're talking about? That's all it is? I'm underwhelmed. I thought there was some kind of major obstruction that was preventing a candidate's personal name from getting on the ballot.
What a waste of time and energy trying to get the party name on the ballot. Big deal. How about trying to get the candidate's personal name known to the public? Besides, I thought we're suppose to vote for the candidate and not the party.
The Democrats and the media are giddy over the BWC blunder. They see this as an opportunity to "Take back Ohio." Fantasy talk. By the way, enough with the "one party rule" speak. That's so boring. Get some new material. It's only a problem because it's the Democrats who are on the outside looking in.
Do you think the Democrats would be complaining about one party rule if they were in power? Do you think Democrats would say, "Gee, we need to give up some House and Senate seats and maybe the governor's spot to balance things out." The political party that's on the outs will always be bitching and moaning.
Instead of viewing the BWC blowup as an opportunity for Democrats to do something, why isn't it viewed as a giant chance for a third party candidate to step in and not just take votes away from the other candidates but actually win the governorship? The timing is good. If we're going to have fantasy talk, at least make it ineresting.
The Republicans' actions and the Democrats' inactions can be used against those parties. Voting for them is advancing the status quo. It's the same thing with a different label. Isn't there some prominent Ohio businessperson or public figure that's done a lot of good in the state that can be recruited or approached to run for governor under the "no name" party? And focus on jobs and education. That's it.
posted by jr at 07:31 A.M. EST on Sun Jun 12, 2005 #
intrepid said:
Making it possible for more parties to be on the ballot - as easy as it is for the 2 major ones - also makes sense, but then I'm one of those people who signs petitions for anyone - regardless of party. I figure that if a person is willing to go to the effort of running, they deserve to have enough signatures to actually be on the ballot.
Nice sentiment, but the Ds and Rs need only 50 signatures in most cases, while the number that Independents need is based off some percentage of the # of people that voted in the last election, which came out to be something like 1800+ in the case of taking Marcy Kaptur on.
jr said:
So the party name not being on the ballot is what you're talking about? That's all it is? I'm underwhelmed. I thought there was some kind of major obstruction that was preventing a candidate's personal name from getting on the ballot.
jr, quit acting like swd and babbleman and actually read the nice post I linked to. Here, I'll quote the relevant parts to save you the burden of having to click a link:
---
# of valid signatures needed on nominating petition in order to appear on the ballot (this has nothing to do with getting the party name on the ballot and everything to do with getting the individual on the ballot):
Senate:
Major party candidate: 1000
Minor party candidate: 500
Independent candidate: 5000
U.S. Representative:
Major party: 50
Minor party: 25
Independent: Based on the number of votes cast in the congressional district for governor during the last election for that office --
Fewer than 5000: 25 or 5% of the vote (whichever is less)
5000 and greater: 1% of vote
Ohio Senate or Representative or County Offices
Same as U.S. Representative, except the requirements for independent candidates are measured by their Ohio Senate or Representative district, or county for county offices.
---
Ain't that just peachy?
And of course in Ohio, you become a de facto party member if you vote on a party ballot in a primary. So faced with a choice of Jeb Bush and John McCain in 2008, I'm f**ked if I want to try to keep Jebby out because I'll become a de facto Republican if I vote in a primary for McCain.
A slight digression, though: Presidential primaries are a joke, particularly in Ohio because ours comes so late when someone's more or less got the party nomination tied up. And if the Party picks whomever they want, what is the point of blowing taxpayer dollars on a primary in the first place? Why are the states responsible for running a popularity contest?
Can YOU, jr, show me how having two or three or seven Republicans and Democrats on the ballot in November for one office is bad?
Now, why can't we have equalization of ballot access requirements. All candidates, be they independent or party, have to turn in the same number of signatures and pay the same fee.
Why can't we eliminate primaries? If the party ultimately gives someone the nod, they can do it without making taxpayers pay for it.
posted by anonymouscoward at 11:57 A.M. EST on Mon Jun 13, 2005 #
The primaries are also pointless because it is the money that matters. If the party committees throw more - or all - of the money behind Candidate A, then Candidates B,C and so forth fight a doomed battle. Also, if a candidate raises a ton of cash in the months before the primary, the collected cash becomes a magnet for even more money.
Who wants to back a losing horse?
Plus, candidates want to avoid getting targeted as mavericks who will not support party unity. This hurts future chances for party support, so most parties see a winnowing process where candidates bow out gracefully.
The results are usually well in hand before the primary.
There are occasional surprises in places such as Iowa and New Hampshire, like McCain's early upset of George W. in 2000. However, the cash king GWB, who held a monumental money edge years before the primary, eventually wore down the poorly-financed McCain campaign.
posted by historymike at 12:24 P.M. EST on Mon Jun 13, 2005 #
"Can YOU, jr, show me how having two or three or seven Republicans and Democrats on the ballot in November for one office is bad?"
What's the matter, you hooked on boldonics? Seven Republicans and Democrats on the ballot, eh? So if the winner has 22% of the vote, is that good? Why don't you tell me what's wrong with having an independent that people know about instead of just being a token entry on the ballot?
"jr, quit acting like swd and babbleman and actually read the nice post I linked to. Here, I'll quote the relevant parts to save you the burden of having to click a link:"
AC, did you go for training to become a smart-ass punk or does that come naturally to you? I'm guessing the latter.
posted by jr at 10:21 P.M. EST on Mon Jun 13, 2005 #
So if the winner has 22% of the vote, is that good?
In my continuing smart-ass punk way, let me tell you to quit being obtuse and consider that you're persisting in thinking in terms of silly traditions. Plus, there ARE elections where there's three people running and nobody gets >50% of the vote, you know. Doesn't happen much here in Ohio, because generally there's only two names on the ballot (a Democrat and a Republican), but sometimes this amazing thing happens when someone draws enough votes away that no one candidate has >50% of the vote.
There's this AMAZING SOLUTION to that very "problem" you think exists, and it's even used here in the United States!
(blatant boldonics)INSTANT RUNOFF VOTING!
Now, for an AMAZING FLASH DEMO, you can visit http://www.chrisgates.net/irv/votesequence.html
to see how it works.
Everyone gets to vote their conscience instead of a "protest vote".
So, jr, now that I burned your little straw man, "Can YOU, jr, show me how having two or three or seven Republicans and Democrats on the ballot in November for one office is bad?"
Why don't you tell me what's wrong with having an independent that people know about instead of just being a token entry on the ballot?
What do you mean, an independent that people know about? How many independents did you see during the debates? I can count that number on the fingers of one head. Zero. In fact, Badnarik (Libertarian) and Cobb (Green) got arrested for trying to participate. In fact, the blatantly partisan "Commission on Presidential Debates" did everything they could to not be served papers by Cobb and Badnarik. Go take a Google. The MSM doesn't cover any third party unless it's popular or controversial enough -- a Catch-22 sort of scenario. You can't be known without getting in the news (or buying a chunk of it). Good ol' H. Ross Perot bought his way in and the media played up everything. Nader has name recognition and everyone wondered how he'd factor in. But you don't hear jack about Libertarian party. You hear about the Democratic and Republican candidates, even if they're relative nobodys because the party name recognition and power is so strong.
In any case, with IRV, token entries don't exist.
posted by anonymouscoward at 01:15 A.M. EST on Wed Jun 15, 2005 #
Paul Krugman writes in the June 17 New York Times:
"The Toledo Blade's reports on Coingate - the unfolding tale of how Ohio's Bureau of Workers' Compensation misused funds - deserve much more national attention than they have received so far. For one thing, it's an entertaining story that seems to get weirder by the week. More important, it's an object lesson in what happens when you have one-party rule untrammeled by any quaint notions of independent oversight."
"Ohio's state government today is a lot like Boss Tweed's New York. Unfortunately, a lot of other state governments look similar - and so does Washington. The message from Ohio is that long-term dominance by a political machine leads to corruption, regardless of the policies that machine follows or the ideology it claims to represent."
Yes, and that message can certainly apply to Toledo and Lucas County with its one-party rule. Do we hear our local media describe Toledo as one-party rule?
From a June 19 Blade op-ed:
"Ohio businesses big and small, most of whom would consider themselves aligned with the Republican Party and Republican values, are being penalized by the arrogance that grows out of long-term one-party rule by the GOP."
Such a fashionable phrase right now. I bet parents of newborns are naming their kids "One-Party-Rule." Has to be music band out there named One-Party-Rule. How about a line of clothing called One-Party-Rule, which would feature navy blue suits, white shirts, and red ties.
I assume the Blade and the unions will be 100% supportive of the Republican challenger for mayor of Toledo to end one-party rule in this town.
posted by jr at 02:58 P.M. EST on Sun Jun 19, 2005 #
"Before the state agreed to invest in rare coins, [Tom Noe] told the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation there would be no way to check how much the investment was worth. [Tom] also told the bureau that no independent party would evaluate coin deals and that his business could profit by selling coins back to the state. Former bureau administrator James Conrad approved the agreement with Noe. Conrad resigned in May after learning that money was missing from the coin fund."
posted by jr at 12:16 A.M. EST on Tue Jun 21, 2005 #
Noe and BWC got slagged by investment specialists interviewed by the Cleveland Plain Dealer.
The great quote: "The most inexperienced investment officer would run away from this investment as fast as possible."
This from Terry Fergus, a CPA interviewed by the Plain Dealer. Fergus' next best quote about Noe's BWC-Capital Coin prospectus: "He said he was going to screw you, and he screwed you."
http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/1119259923315493.xml&coll=2#continue
As jr pointed out, Noe got the best of all possible worlds with this deal: $50 million to play with, no required outside audits, his managers had carte blanche, and (best of all) Noe's companies could sell coins to Capital Coin funds at a profit.
One other sweetheart arrangement: Noe and associates could buy uncertified coins with BWC money, get them certified, and profit from any upgrading done by firms like NGC (in which Noe was a big investor).
posted by historymike at 09:28 A.M. EST on Tue Jun 21, 2005 #
An NRO columnist responds to Krugman's column.
"There’s no limit to the New York Times’s willingness to embarrass itself by printing yet another hilarious error-filled column by America’s most dangerous liberal pundit. what Krugman doesn’t seem to know is that many of the politicians he’s talking about are Democrats!"
"[Mark D.] Lay has been a heavy contributor to Democratic Pennsylvania politicians, according to the the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. (Recipients include Pennsylvania House minority leader Bill DeWeese, who recently nominated Lay to a position on the state’s Commonwealth Financing Authority)."
"MDL and Lay were marketed to Ohio’s public investment funds in the late 1990s by Democrat lobbyist Jerry Hammond, formerly president of the Columbus City Council, according to the Dispatch. MDL paid Hammond $3,000 a month to introduce the firm to Ohio politicians."
"At BWC, Hammond introduced MDL to oversight commission members, including George Forbes, the late Neal H. Schultz, and William A. Burga. I can’t say as to Schultz’s political leanings, but Forbes is a Democrat and so is Burga. In fact, Burga is a member of the Democratic National Committee and the Ohio Democratic Party Executive Committee, and is also president of the Ohio AFL-CIO."
"Michael Meckler points out on his Red-State.com blog that the case has been assigned to a Democratic judge who is running for Ohio secretary of state in the next election. Meckler says, “with both ‘prosecutor’ and judge eyeing statewide election next year, there is the strong likelihood the case could turn into even more of a political circus.” So much for Krugman’s thesis of “one-party rule.” "
"By comparing Republicans to Tweed and Daley, he’s saying that they’re as bad as … Democrats!"
And on another blog, 'Krugman decoded.'
posted by jr at 07:59 P.M. EST on Tue Jun 21, 2005 #
The focus on Republican and Democrat in the Coingate saga takes attention away from the real culture of corruption that exists in most governmental structures. While the National Review Online piece correctly addresses the issue of the New York Times and their convenient ignorance of party affiliation, NRO misses the bigger point.
It does not matter which of the two parties the greedy manipulators of taxpayer revenue belong. Once in power, most politicians play the game of grab.
Sure, they put on serious ideological faces for the cameras. However, in the smoke-free backrooms of government (hey, they outlawed tobacco in public buildings), the deals get made, and the Benjamins make the decisions.
Mark D. Lay is the consummate insider. He is as cozy with Democrats as he is with Republicans. He does not care for a moment what the politics are of his acquaintances, as long as they have access to investment funds.
And as long as they play the game.
From Mark Lay to Mimi Forbes to George Forbes to the BWC Oversight Committee to a lost $215 million. Forget about the Ds and Rs, people. This is about money and access.
Focus on the green. The green that is missing from the BWC porfolio, the green that buys political favors, the green that acts as a systemic lubricant, the green that helps bypass open bidding processes, and the green that is missing from the pockets of taxpayers.
Until we stop allowing ourselves to be sidetracked by the party rhetoric, we will continue to get fleeced by the entrenched political elites, regardless of their political affiliation.
posted by historymike at 08:35 P.M. EST on Tue Jun 21, 2005 #
Mr. Noe served on the Ohio Board of Regents until this past May when he 'stepped down suddenly' - ironic thing is,OIG (Ohio Instructional Grants) has not paid out for the spring quarter (our tuition) and it doesn't appear that they will be paying for the summer quarter either, which started quite some time ago. When you call the Ohio Board of Regents, they feed you a huge line of BS and avoid the original question which is "why arent you paying our tuition"?? If anyone can get answers for 'the little man', there are thousands of us in SE Ohio sitting here worrying how we are going to pay back every tom, dick and harry for letting us borrow the money just so that we can go to school, all because OIG is sitting there with their thumbs up their asses!!
posted by the_little_man at 01:59 P.M. EST on Fri Jul 08, 2005 #
"Governor Bob Taft has released the weekly reports and records from the former Ohio Bureau of Workers Compensation Administrator James Conrad and Taft employe James Samuel. The docuements had been sought by State Senator Marc Dann in a lawsuit against Taft which was filed before the Ohio Supreme Court this month. Sen. Dann says the records will allow him to begin the process of finding out how what he calls a pay-to-steal system was created within the bureau."
Lt. Dann and company created a Typepad blog last month, and apparently, he will make these documents available at Coins For Change.
posted by jr at 04:53 A.M. EST on Thu Jul 21, 2005 #
"Petro says financial documents from coin dealer Tom Noe show he improperly used $4 million from the state to pay himself and his coin collection business. Petro also questions whether $2 million worth of Noe's homes, boats and cars were bought with state money."
posted by jr at 09:24 P.M. EST on Thu Jul 21, 2005 #
Regarding the_little_man's question: Are you sure there isn't some other problem with your OIG grant? We had no problem with it paying out in spring, and it's already credited to my son's tuition account for this fall.
posted by valbee at 09:22 A.M. EST on Fri Jul 22, 2005 #
Valbee, I'd be interested to know what school your son attends - a reporter with The Dispatch is looking into our complaint and im sure they would like to know as well.
posted by the_little_man at 09:49 P.M. EST on Sun Jul 24, 2005 #
btw: there are hundreds of us down here in SE Ohio who have not received their spring and summer OIG grants and yes, we did receive paperwork from them that we were eligible and would be awarded the grants - they just cant seem to follow through.
posted by the_little_man at 09:50 P.M. EST on Sun Jul 24, 2005 #
Syndicate ToledoTalk
