Category Archives: politics

Ohio Teachers File Class-Action to Halt Compulsory Union Dues for Political Activism

With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, 15 public school teachers across the state filed a federal class-action lawsuit against the Ohio Education Association (OEA) and nine of its regional affiliates for violating their rights.

The group filed the class-action suit after the OEA union unlawfully overcharged the teachers – who have refrained from full-dues-paying union membership – for union “fees” taken from their paychecks, charging them for costs supporting the union’s political activism and electioneering. Per Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court precedent in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution nonmember teachers cannot be forced to pay dues or fees for union boss politics and other non-bargaining activities.

Additionally, the OEA union’s regional affiliates are collecting compulsory fees from non-members without providing the kind of independently-audited financial statements required by law. In the Foundation-won Supreme Court ruling in Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, the High Court ruled that public employees have due process rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to be notified how their forced union dues are spent, and how to prevent the spending of their dues for union political and other non-bargaining activities.

The teachers filed their lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, in Columbus, late Thursday. The teachers are employed at various school districts, including Marietta City Schools in Marietta; Green Local Schools in Green; the Western Brown School District in Mt. Orab; and the Trumbull County Joint Vocational School District in Warren.

The lawsuit focuses on unlawful union dues confiscations from Ohio teachers’ paychecks during the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school years and seeks to reclaim the teachers’ mandatory union fees spent illegally. The OEA is currently pouring money in support of a ballot measure to repeal the recently-passed Right to Work law, which makes union dues strictly voluntary for teachers and other public employees.

“OEA union officials have a long history of abusing teachers’ rights in the workplace to fund their political coffers,” said Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work. “It’s important to remember where the OEA union machine gets a large amount of its money as it gears up its efforts to defeat recent public-sector reforms in the Buckeye State – reforms that allow teachers to opt out of forced dues payments.”

The National Right to Work Foundation – the nation’s premier legal advocate for workers who suffer from the abuses of compulsory unionism – has established numerous precedents and protected legal rights at the U.S. Supreme Court for both private-sector and public-sector workers who wish to refrain from formal union membership and full union dues payment. Currently, the Foundation has a case pending with the Supreme Court brought for teachers in California forced to subsidize union boss political spending.

Huge Win for Free Speech!

Last week, a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit against Texas Gov. Rick Perry citing that the plaintiffs, Kay Staley and the Freedom from Religion Foundation, had no standing in the case. Staley claimed that Gov. Perry’s call for a day of prayer for the nation and his participation in the prayer rally, The Response, were unconstitutional because they violated the Establishment Clause.

Liberty Institute filed a motion to intervene and argued in court today on behalf of the American Family Association (AFA), which is planning and promoting The Response, scheduled to take place August 6 at Houston’s Reliant Stadium.

“The dismissal was a total and complete victory,” said Kelly Shackelford, Liberty Institute president and CEO. “The Freedom From Religion Foundation’s attempt to stifle free speech and religious liberty failed miserably. Today was a victory — for Gov. Perry, for AFA, and for the First Amendment.”

Early this year, the Freedom from Religion Foundation was dealt a heavy blow when the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed its lawsuit against the National Day of Prayer. The court’s ruling in the case, which used arguments Liberty Institute made in its amicus brief representing Dr. James Dobson, Citizenlink, and dozens of state family policy groups, proved invaluable in winning today’s case.

The Debt Ceiling and the PRA

By Michael Ramey,

You’re probably tired of hearing about the debt by now, but did you realize the proposed Parental Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution will help keep us out of worse trouble in the future?

The United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) has been used internationally to urge nations to spend more on their children’s programs, and the CRC Committee has in multiple instances faulted a country for not investing more of its gross domestic product (or GDP) in child aid programs. The Committee has held these nations to be out of compliance with the treaty’s demands – including Moldova, the poorest nation in Europe, which was urged in 2009 to “further increase budget allocations for the implementation of the rights recognized in the Convention.”

Such criticisms may fall on deaf ears elsewhere in the world, but if we were to ratify the CRC here, “the judges in every State [would be] bound thereby,” regardless of any law or state constitutional provisions to the contrary (U.S. Constitution, Article VI). That means our own courts would be constitutionally bound to correct whatever the Committee says is out of compliance with the treaty.

So imagine if we had ratified the CRC last year. Added to the already deafening clamor of voices demanding various expenditures not be touched by Congress, our courts would likely be demanding an increase in federal funding of children’s programs to fulfill treaty obligations under the CRC.

The Parental Rights Amendment will prevent ratification of that treaty and preserve our national sovereignty. At a time when our Congress has been spending way too much already, the last thing we need is the international community (backed by our own courts) demanding that they spend even more!

The national debt is indeed a huge concern, but let’s not lose sight of how vital our parental rights are as well, for the preservation of our nation, our heritage, and our homes.

Michael Ramey is Director of Communications at the Parental Rights organization. To learn more about their work and the Parental Rights amendment, go to www.parentalrights.org

Freedom Index, Which Congressional Representative Protects Your Freedom

On August 8, The New American published its Freedom Index. In it, researchers scored the votes of members of both he U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate based on ten bills of Constitutional significance. The ten bills included (1) H.R. 2 “Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act”, (2) H.R. 4 called “1099 Reporting Requirement Repeal” that was also part of Obamacare, and (3) H.C.R. 35 was a resolution to defund Obamacare.

The House passed all three bills but the Senate only approved because of its direct negative impact on business.

Because the Freedom Index is based on the founding legal view that freedom is protected by the strict limitation of Constitutional precept to all other federal law making, a vote for each of the three bills received a For Freedom score and a vote against each of them were given Against Freedom score.

So, how do Greene County, Ohio representatives measure up to protecting our freedoms?

Steve Austria scored 100% on the three bills and 70% on all ten bills.
Rob Portman also scored 100% on the three pro-Constitutional healthcare bills.

The scores of other notable Ohio politicians include:

Mike Turner (R-Dayton) who voted for all 3 bills (100%).
Dennis Kuninich (D) who received a score of 0 and only 1 out of the ten (Libya Troop Withdrawl bill)
Sherrod Brown (D) did vote for HR 4 “1099 Reporting Requirement Repeal” and the only other bill voted for was the Ethanol Subsides Repeal bill.

It is also worthy of mention that only the above republicans voted for legislation to end taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood’s abortion business.

To read the entire Freedom Index report, go to The New American website www.thenewamerican.com.

Raising Debt Limit Pushes Voters to Frustration Limit

By Gary Palmer

While Republicans and Democrats have thus far accomplished nothing in regard to the debt limit, one thing they have succeeded in doing is raising the frustration limit for millions of Americans.

American voters are accustomed to political drama and gamesmanship in Washington and, for the most part, have largely ignored it at election time. The emergence of the Tea Party movement in April 2009 was the first evidence that voters were fed up enough to organize against the political establishment in both parties. This new level of frustration among voters was displayed by the impact of the Tea Party in the 2010 election.

So while Congress and President Obama have failed to do anything about the debt limit, recent polls indicate they have certainly succeeded in raising the public’s frustration limit to an all-time high. New polling data now indicates that deadlock over the debt limit and the failure to enact sensible cuts in government spending have turned public opinion against Obama, as well as the Democrats and the Republicans in Congress.

The Pew Research Center poll released on July 28th reported that only 41 percent of all registered voters say they want Obama to be re-elected, a ten-point drop since May. Among critical independent voters, there has been a steep drop-off in support for him, with only 31 percent supporting his reelection. In fact, among independent voters, a generic Republican candidate holds an eight-point advantage.

Public frustration is even worse when it comes to Congress.

According to a July 27th Gallup daily tracking poll, 41 percent approve of the way Obama has handled the negotiations to raise the federal debt limit, while only 31 percent approve of the way Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner has handled it and only 23 percent approve of Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s efforts. In fact, the only good news for Republicans is that even at 48 percent, Boehner’s disapproval rate is lower than the 52 percent disapproval rating of the President and Harry Reid. Interestingly, only 36 percent of Democrats approve of Reid’s handling of the debt limit.

For most voters, there are two things on their minds-excessive government spending and jobs. The outcome of the debate over raising the debt limit affects both. If the debt limit is raised without spending cuts, the U.S. could see its AAA bond rating reduced. This will cost the federal government about $100 billion more in interest costs each year, plus it will also increase the interest costs for consumer credit and mortgages and inflict even more stress on our economy.

According to David Beers, Standard & Poor’s government credit ratings expert, there is a 50-50 chance of a downgrade in our bond rating if there is not a serious agreement on cutting spending. But Obama and the Democrats have thus far refused to agree to any debt limit increase that includes major spending cuts without a major tax increase along with the cuts. They want to add over a trillion dollars in taxes which will further undermine the ability of the economy to create new jobs.

In other words, the Democrats are holding the economy and the nation’s credit rating hostage until their demands for a massive tax increase are met. The problem for the Republicans is that they have been outmaneuvered and are in a lose-lose situation. If they don’t raise the debt limit, the economy will take a hit and the U.S. credit rating could be lowered. If they do raise the limit and don’t get substantial spending cuts in the deal, the economy and credit rating could still take a hit, and politically they will get hammered by their conservative base.

Thus, it appears that both parties and the President have put political gain ahead of what is best for the country despite potentially catastrophic consequences for the American people and even for the financial markets and economies of other nations. In the process, the unfavorable ratings for Obama and both the Democrats and Republicans in Congress are climbing higher by the day.

The truth is that this debacle is the fault of both parties. Both parties have recklessly spent not only our money, but borrowed money as well. And now the American people are reacting with a continuously level of frustration that may not reach its ceiling until the 2012 elections.

Politicians in both parties should take note that campaigning on the hope that voters are only slightly less fed up with your party than they are with the other party is not exactly something incumbent congressmen should hang their political hats on.

Gary Palmer is president of the Alabama Policy Institute, a non-partisan, non-profit research and education organization dedicated to the preservation of free markets, limited government and strong families, which are indispensable to a prosperous society.

NIA Exposes Debt Ceiling Truth

National Inflation Association (NIA) hasn’t written about the whole debt ceiling issue over the past few weeks because in our minds it is completely irrelevant. Our elected representatives in Washington along with the mainstream media have been wasting thousands of hours of time and hundreds of millions of dollars debating a topic that has no meaning at all. The President, Senate, and House of Representatives are putting on a show to make it look like they care about cutting spending and balancing the budget. Except for a select few elected representatives like Ron Paul who care about protecting the U.S. Constitution and preserving what little purchasing power the U.S. dollar still has left, every other politician in Washington is putting on a complete charade in order to trick their constituents into believing there is a difference between the proposals from the Republicans and Democrats.

While our incompetent and corrupt mainstream media has been proclaiming there are major differences between the two bills proposed by House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, NIA believes John Boehner might as well be a Democrat and Harry Reid could easily pass himself off as a Republican. There are absolutely no meaningful fundamental differences between Boehner’s plan that was approved by the House of Representatives yesterday evening, before being killed by the Senate two short hours later, and Reid’s bill, which was just rejected by the House today in a pre-emptive vote before the Senate even had a chance to vote on it.

Both bills are estimated to reduce the U.S. budget deficit by approximately $900 billion over the next 10 years. Of the $900 billion only about $750 billion are actual discretionary spending cuts with the rest being an expected reduction in interest payments on the national debt as a result of either bill passing. When you have an unstable fiat currency that is rapidly losing its purchasing power and could collapse at any time, it is impossible to accurately project what our budget deficits will be 5 or 6 years from now, let alone 9 or 10 years from today. As far as the next two fiscal years are concerned, both proposed bills from Boehner and Reid are estimated to only cut spending by a total of about $70 billion in fiscal years 2012 and 2013 combined. Continue reading

UN Youth Conference Pays Lip Service to Youth Concerns

By Nicholas Dunn

NEW YORK (C-FAM)   When a young person attending this week’s UN Youth Conference stood to ask a question and identified himself with a pro-life NGO, the moderator of the side event informed him that the panel was not interested in hearing his perspective. Such disinterest in discussion with youth characterized the closing meeting for the UN’s International Year of Youth, themed “Dialogue and Mutual Understanding.”

Weeks before the conference, organizers forced NGOs to limit themselves to sending five young people, despite the fact that many young people had already received their confirmation letter and made travel arrangements. A representative from the UN Program for Youth told the Friday Fax that because over 1,200 young people had registered for the conference, conference planners had to limit attendance and participation due to a lack of space and security reasons.

On the first morning of the conference, many young people showed up to register, confirmation letters in hand, only to be turned away. What is worse, the hall of the General Assembly was empty for most of the conference. Many of the young people who attended the conference were puzzled at the lack of attendance and participation from youth. In his opening address, Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon asked those in attendance whether more could be done for youth. His question was met with a resounding “yes” from the crowd. Yet many felt as if the UN was merely paying lip service to youth.

Often, moderators of side events allowed no time for interaction between the panelists and the young people in the crowd. In one side event on the subject of HIV/AIDS, entitled “Crossfire: a dialogue between young leaders and policy decision-makers,” five young people were pre-selected and given scripted questions. At many meetings, only ministers and heads of state spoke, while the youth in attendance listened.

Of the youth issues that were discussed at the conference, most concerned the “sexual and reproductive health and rights” (SRHR) agenda. UNFPA sponsored nine side events, many of which focused on promoting young people’s “sexual rights,” such as comprehensive sex education, the abolition of parental consent laws, as well as contraception and the decriminalization of abortion.

When SRHR advocates were confronted with questions from conservative and pro-life young people, they simply ignored them. At a meeting sponsored by Y-PEER, the youth arm of UNFPA, a young person in attendance cited data from the World Health Organization (WHO), which shows a 190% increased risk of breast cancer in women who use oral contraceptives for at least two years before the age of twenty-five. Panelists reacted with frustration at his use of statistics and discredited the information.

In stark contrast to the SRHR agenda promoted by UN officials at the conference was the overwhelming presence of pro-life and pro-family young people. The International Youth Coalition (IYc), formed at last year’s World Youth Conference in Leon, Mexico, issued a “Statement of Youth to the U.N. and the World,” which was presented to the UN General Assembly during a high level thematic panel discussion.

Nicholas Dunn writes for C-FAM. This article first appeared in the Friday Fax, an internet report published weekly by C-FAM (Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute), a New York and Washington DC-based research institute (http://www.c-fam.org/). This article appears with permission.

Young Voices Speak the Truth about Human Life to United Nations

By Lauren Funk

NEW YORK, July 28 (C-FAM) The enthusiastic voices of pro-life youth from around the world dominated the events of this week’s High Level Meeting on Youth at the United Nations, drawing the attention of UN bureaucrats and delegates alike.

“I keep running into all these pro-lifers, they’re everywhere…in fact most of the people I’ve interviewed are pro-life,” a young woman working for UNFPA told a member of the International Youth Coalition as she interviewed conference attendees.

“We [members of the International Youth Coalition] were half, if not more, of the young people actually at the conference,” a participant from the International Youth Coalition told the Friday Fax. “And any people who spoke against us [and our message about human life] were adults, not youth.”

The International Youth Coalition’s “Statement of Youth to the UN and the World” was presented to the General Assembly’s session on Monday. The statement, which outlines eight principles based on the dignity of the person, was received with applause by the youth in the NGO gallery.

In addition to participating in the official events of the UN’s High Level Meeting on youth, the members of the International Youth Coalition hosted a “Youth Formation Day” led by a group of nationally renowned speakers, many of whom were youth, who presented to an audience of over 100 youth and members of non-governmental organizations.

“The pro-life youth who participated in the conferences’ interactive panels and discussions spoke with such passion, not staring at a paper, but looking at us, at the audience. The others [those who worked for UN agencies or related organizations] looked bored, like they wanted to leave and be done with it… they were not totally engaged,” another youth participant explained to the Friday Fax.

The International Youth Coalition also sponsored an event hosted by the Holy See Mission to the UN, which presented a view of youth that centered on dignity and living life in true freedom, instead of a life guided by selfish passions.

“Youth have a lot more on their minds than sex. Our youth are in need of a challenge to a life of true greatness,” explained one of the presenters, former America’s Next Top Model contestant Leah Darrow. Darrow’s challenge to the youth and delegates alike joined with those of Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life of America, Meghan Knighton of the Catholic Near East Welfare Association, and Jeffrey Azize and Michael Campo, producers of the critically acclaimed documentary, “The Human Experience.”

The presenters criticized those who painted youth’s future with bleak brushstrokes, insisting that the key to realizing human dignity is to challenge youth and all of society to live a life of virtue.

Archbishop Francis Chullikatt told the Friday Fax, “The young panelists beautifully manifested the important role of young people in transforming today’s society and culture through Gospel values. Their personal witness to Christian life is the kind of legacy that needs to be left for future generations.”

Laura Funk writes for C-FAM. This article first appeared in the Friday Fax, an internet report published weekly by C-FAM (Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute), a New York and Washington DC-based research institute (http://www.c-fam.org/). This article appears with permission.

A Responsible and Innovative Budget for Ohio

By State Representative Jarrod Martin

With a budget gap of $8 billion this year, the Ohio House has fought to put Ohio on more stable financial footing by crafting a sustainable, responsible budget. With innovative solutions that will lead to long-term stability for our state, we reexamined the size and scope of state government, invested in the things that matter, and did not raise taxes on Ohioans.

One of the priorities in this budget was Ohio’s education system. Nothing affects the future stability of a state as much as the education of its young people. We significantly expanded options for parents regarding which schools their children can attend. Additionally, the General Assembly has ensured that all school districts in Ohio receive at least what they received in state aid last year, which will maintain a quality educational structure for our children.

We also ensured that more Ohioans have access to our state’s higher education institutions as well. The Legislature fought to keep tuition at a more affordable level by capping the annual increases at 3.5 percent. We also included a provision to allow our state’s high school graduates who leave Ohio to return within a set time frame and receive in-state tuition.

An ongoing priority for the Ohio House is job creation and Ohio’s business climate, and this was reflected in the biennial budget. We aimed to attract more people to Ohio by eliminating the state’s death tax starting in 2013. This unfair and unnecessary double tax has compelled Ohioans to flee to other states to retire, farm and build their businesses without the hindrance of the state taking more from them. It also has contributed to Ohio’s notoriously burdensome and anti-business tax climate, which this Legislature is committed to rectifying during this General Assembly.

We also worked to strengthen Ohio’s businesses through the creation of InvestOhio, which allows Ohioans who make an investment in one of Ohio’s small businesses for two years to receive a tax credit of 10 percent. Not only does this encourage up to $1 billion in new, job-creating investments for the next two years, but it also encourages additional investment down the road. With healthy businesses in Ohio, there are more jobs for our communities.

To protect the most vulnerable in our communities, the Legislature allocated $31.3 million in fiscal year 2012 and $63 million in fiscal year 2013 over the executive budget for PASSPORT, which provides a home-care option for seniors. We also allocated an additional $7.5 million for mental health services.

This General Assembly has been entirely focused on getting our state in order and providing a brighter future for all Ohioans. Your phone calls, e-mails and letters continue to help my work in the Statehouse by keeping me informed and guiding my decision-making in Columbus. If you have other ideas for getting Ohio back on track, I may be reached by calling (614) 644-6020, e-mailing District70@ohr.state.oh.us, or writing to State Rep. Jarrod Martin, 77 South High Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215

Stop Gov. Kaisch from Selling Roads to the Highest Bidder

Don’t let Governor Kasich sell or lease the Ohio turnpike. Why should we pay foreigners for the privilege of riding on our own money-generating highway system that we built and paid for? It is currently earning approximately $250 million a year for Ohio. We would only gain a one-time infusion of additional money to pay current bills that your kids and future generations will be paying for many years to come.

This sale has major functional problems. Previous sales in other states have lessened their ability maintain and care for their roads and has prevented them from implementing needed expansion. This has also curtailed their ability to make proper decisions that affect local businesses.

We will have inadequate control of future toll increases. Indiana mistakenly sold their toll road system to a foreign company. Drivers complain that the prices have doubled over 5 years. The cost to travel the Ohio turnpike today is $15; in just 5 years time your cost could be $30 or more!

Tell Governor Kasich Ohio is NOT for sale!