Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Voters repeal Issue 2; 'the people have spoken'

stemen.66@osu.edu

Published: Tuesday, November 8, 2011

Updated: Friday, June 15, 2012 23:06

Ohioans struck down Senate Bill 5 Tuesday night when Issue 2 lost on the ballot by a percentage of 62-38. A supporter and backer of SB5, Gov. John Kasich, offered his congratulations to the victors.

"When you get beat, you have to admit it and shake hands of those who prevailed," Kasich said.

Kasich said that the opposition to Issue 2 was a voice of the people.

"It is clear the people have spoken," Kasich said. "I have heard their voices, I understand their decision, and frankly, I respect what people have to say."

Many experts are now speculating what its rejection means for Ohio and the nation.

SB5 would have limited public employees' right to collectively bargain for anything except wages. This would have affected government officials, teachers, firefighters and nurses. Being that voters chose to appeal SB5, all of these employees will be able to keep their rights to collective bargain for whatever they please, including benefits.

Gov. Kasich signed SB5 into law on March 31, and it was appealed Tuesday night, making its life less than 8 months long.

Ohio State law professor, Daniel Tokaji, told The Lantern the loss will be heavy on the current administration.

"Obviously this is a huge black eye for Gov. Kasich, who has made this the cornerstone of his administration so far," Tokaji said.

David Stebenne, an OSU law and history professor, told The Lantern, he thinks the administration will go for a more moderate approach.

"Issue 2 was the most extreme situation," he said. "We can't know for sure, but its rejection would hopefully mean all of its proponents, like Kasich, would regroup and propose something less drastic."

Kasich did not offer future plans on Tuesday night, but said this gives him a chance to catch his breath and gather his thoughts.

Tokaji said the Issue 2 protestors are so proactive that it may affect the upcoming presidential elections.

"Issue 2 has mobilized its progressives in the opposite direction," he said. "This could have major consequences for the 2012 presidential elections."

Stebenne said he had similar thoughts.

"Everyone is looking to see what Ohio does in this election," Stebenne said. "The win is big for Obama. There has not been a Republican president to be re-elected who has not won Ohio."

Tokaji said the loss will affect Republicans greatly.

"What we saw tonight is Democrats used the ballot box to fight back against the Republicans who now dominate the legislature and the governor's office," he said. "They were able to rally up some people who felt very strongly about the issue and used it to their advantage."

Kasich indicated that times will be tough, and that local governments will be affected by this decision.

"We'll work with them to help (local governments) over come their challenges," Kasich said. "We have to be very careful with our money because these are very tough economic times."

Kasich offered his parting thoughts.

"I'm anxious to get back to work," Kasich said. "And I look forward to a brighter tomorrow."

Thomas Bradley contributed to this story.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

25 comments

Heading To Greener Pastures
Thu Nov 10 2011 13:10
Yeah, I'm going South myself (NC or SC). Life on the beach will be a welcome change from cold, dreary weather, and liberal poltics. You people can vote yourselves more taxes and more spending. I hope you go broke (And you will, the cards are already on the table. Check the lack of economic growth going back to the 1970s.)
Just too bad
Thu Nov 10 2011 12:15
The rich pay a disproportionate amount of income taxes while 47% of folks don't pay any income taxes. This crap that they are not paying enough is just wrong. Ohio voters have spoken and this will be the new law, life is nothing but choices and the consequences of those choices. I am happy I moved to Florida.
Everyone Pays Something
Wed Nov 9 2011 15:32
OSU employees have always paid for part of the cost of their benefits. For pensions, it was 10%. For health care, it depended on what plan you selected, but it was something. The beef was really with those public employees who paid nothing from their salaries towards offsetting some of the cost of their benefits package. You want to talk about fairness, how about this: everyone pays at least something towards their benefits package? What could be fairer than that?
Anonymous
Wed Nov 9 2011 15:15
Is everyone too young to remember when no one wanted the low paying civil service jobs in spite of the benefits? I started working for OSU in 1973 for $2.55 an hour being reminded regularly that the benefit package was part of my pay. Now I'm told my benefits are bankrupting the state. I'll bet the average student pisses away more than my pension check.
Spending Like Drunken Sailors
Wed Nov 9 2011 14:40
The USSR was simply in an unsustainable mode. It had a inherently inefficient economy and was trying to sustain a massive military apparatus in competition with a more economically efficient Western alliance that could (albeit barely) manage military expenditures while maintaining reasonably prosperous economies.

Look at the evolving situation in Europe as a precautionary tale for what awaits this country if the massive expenditures on failed and inefficient social programs continues. The massive entitlement/welfare state is playing the role of the Soviet military as a drain on the economic lifeblood of the countries that are drowning in debt.

OSU Econ Guy
Wed Nov 9 2011 14:21
USSR didn't dissolve on account of bounced checks. Gorbachev loosened up a lot of government controls, giving more autonomous power to factions within the union. Factions then used this opportunity to overthrow the whole thing - resulting in whatever you want to call the current government there.
Spending Ourselves Into The Poor House
Wed Nov 9 2011 13:48
Yeah, well, you can just take your class warfare demagoguery back to the USSR. Oops, sorry, they aren't around anymore. Guess why? They went broke. Socialism always fails when you run out of other peoples' money to spend.
Anonymous
Wed Nov 9 2011 13:46
This was NOT a R/D issue. "The People Spoke" because the law targeted the working class public servants and left alone the elected officials, the high level bureaucrats, and administrators. The bureaucracies are the greatest wasters of our limited resources. Lastly, don't count on "the people have spoken." In Arizona, "the People" approved medical marijuana and the governor simply refuses to allow its implementation. BigMoney talks and we know where that comes from.
Anonymous
Wed Nov 9 2011 13:42
The time has come for the extreme right wing of the republican party to back off its "screw the middle class agenda all in the interests of protecting the wealth of the upper class". Limiting government expenses in a meaningful and reasonable manner is acceptable. However, no tax increases for the upper class (250K/yr or greater) is unacceptable and any effort to balance budgets without such a tax increase is an effort to do so solely on the backs of the people who at the same time are expected to breathe life back into a battered economy by spending money they don't have - the middle class.
Anonymous
Wed Nov 9 2011 13:32
The only bailouts you'll be paying for are local governments who will not be getting any more state assistance than they have now, but will have to meet the higher wage and benefit demands from the unions. The voters aren't going to approve any more tax increases. Businesses are fleeing the state in droves, so you can't milk that cow any more. So they'll come crawling to the state government for a bailout, but, guess what, the state is broke, too, so they won't get it. That means layoffs of public employees, exactly the opposite of what the anti-Issue 2 dummies were saying would happen (i.e., "Protect our heroic firefighters and police!"). See how you like your union when they put you on the unemployment line.

Of course, you can always go "on strike". But what good is that? You'll still be out of a job, the governments will still be broke. You children need to learn basic arithmetic. The pie is only so big. That means a few people can have big pieces, or more people can have smaller pieces. The anti-Issue 2 people have forced the former choice upon us. Well, you made your bed, now lie in it. Find your hopenchange on the unemployment line.

Anonymous
Wed Nov 9 2011 13:27
Sneak it in another way later.
NO means NO
Wed Nov 9 2011 12:33
Wake up, stop wallowing in sour grapes and accept that NO means NO. You'll not pay for bailouts and government waste on the backs of the working and middle class.
Let's Go Broke!
Wed Nov 9 2011 12:13
Reading these 10 comments is interesting. First thing I think of is the fact 8 of them are written by the "Yes SB5" crowd, one was written by a "No SB5" person and one was neutral. What this says to me is that the "No SB5" crowd probably cannot read they are so busy taking as much as they possibly can from our government while they can.

Agruments on both sides were extreme. Kasich did not defend the law well enough and those against spent $30 million to defeat.

No wonder companies are fleeing this state at record levels. Ohio is a microcosm of the USA. We are going down with the entitlement mentality the majority now possess.

Grow up
Wed Nov 9 2011 10:55
Wow, talk about sour grapes. At least the governer spoke like a responsible adult and was magnanimous about the defeat of Senate bill 5.
Anonymous
Wed Nov 9 2011 10:24
This is bad for Ohio in the long run. I'm glad I not longer live there.
Anonymous
Wed Nov 9 2011 09:24
Party hearty, guys, because reality has a way of coming back around to slap you upside your heads. While you were voting for more union ionfluence, the voters in my district were defeating another tax levy, and, guess what, layoffs, the ones you said defeating issue 2 would avoid, are being planned as we speak. What good is your union now? The government teat is limited in size. You want more for individuals, fewer total will be sucking that teat. Simple arithmetic. But evidently beyond the ability of the unions and Democrat voters.
Michael - Lantern Columnist
Wed Nov 9 2011 09:04
The "repeal" of "Obamacare" that Buckeye in Florida brings up isnt being treated as relevant because everyone here knows that issue will be decided in the Supreme Court not here in Ohio. That vote, no matter how it went, was always going to be cosmetic and nothing more. The Supreme Court will rule on that. Issue 2 was anything but cosmetic and it was the cornerstone of Governor Kasich's early administration and a whopping rebuke of his policy. That is a big deal and no use of evil scary sounding words like "socialism" will change the facts.
Buckeye in Florida
Wed Nov 9 2011 08:45
I see that once again a socialist victory gets great coverage but a socialist defeat by an even greater margin, the repeal of Obamacare merits only an inclusion in a chart.
Anonymous
Wed Nov 9 2011 08:34
More voters came out to vote against Issue2-SB5 then voted Kasich in office. So one can assume that if more people would have come out for the vote for governor in 2010, none of this would happened. Baby steps would have been taken by Strickland, instead of one bold swoop to repeal 25 years of collective bargaining. Usually seems like a waste of resources when you loose.
Opponent of Extremism
Wed Nov 9 2011 08:16
This is a victory for the opponents of extremism. Extremists = Aitch and Jimmy




log out