Badin vs. Fredericktown
Miamisburg graduation 2012
Valley View vs. Greenville
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2010 > March > 19
Friday, March 19, 2010
Editorial: Brown wrong about stopping wind grants
Last month an operation called the Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University in Washington complained that “Money from the 2009 stimulus bill to help support the renewable energy industry continues to flow overseas.” Almost $2 billion.
This prompted several Democratic senators, including Ohio’s Sherrod Brown, to call for a fix in the law “so that funds only flow to projects that will create jobs in the United States,” as opposed, most specifically, to China.
The senators called upon the Obama administration to suspend the energy-grant program until the change can be made.
Sen. Brown’s involvement is consistent with his view that Washington is a pushover in trade relations with other countries and that it needs to be more aggressive about protecting American jobs.
His critics say — correctly — that Sen. Brown’s general posture invites foreign countries to discriminate against American companies, thus undermining the jobs of Americans involved in exporting, one of the few bright spots in the Ohio economy.
Of course, even Sen. Brown’s critics must acknowledge that, when taxpayer dollars are involved, that’s a special situation, especially when the money is supposed to create American jobs.
However, the Obama administration rejects the findings of the report that prompted the Brown proposal. Officials say that the bulk of the jobs being created are in the United States, no matter where the companies are owned.
They also say that Americans who want to develop wind energy (which is involved in most of the deals in dispute) sometimes have no choice but to deal with foreign companies, because they are the ones with certain abilities.
And it would be a shame to shut down or delay American green energy projects that can provide jobs now.
Also rejecting the Brown proposal is Gov. Ted Strickland, who, when he was in Congress, had the same protectionist-tinged concerns as Sen. Brown.
Gov. Strickland doesn’t want to jeopardize the hundreds of Ohio jobs that foreign companies can help Ohio develop through the creation of wind farms.
The Brown side responds, in part, that the American jobs that have been created have been temporary.
The charges and counter-charges don’t shed much light. The argument has been conducted largely through press releases, press conferences and blogs. (On the Web, investigativereportingworkshop.org has the initial report and a link to a response from the American wind industry.)
The initial report deserves attention. But the Obama administration could not possibly justify suspending the program on the basis of it alone. The Energy Department says suspending the program could cost thousands of American jobs.
If the senators want to submit legislation and hold hearings on it, fine. Being in the majority party, they can do that. Let the debate be complete.
The Brown side says that other countries have rules favoring their own companies. It also says this country has such a rule where government money is involved, though the rule doesn’t happen to apply to the wind program.
The Brown side also insists that, under the rule, if a foreign company is the only good option in a specific case, the government could allow a waiver. But some businesses say that would make the process slow and bureaucratic.
If, indeed, there are ways to undertake the most advanced, desirable wind projects while keeping more jobs in this county, Congress has a right to ask why taxpayer money isn’t fostering that.
In the end, however, the benefit of any doubt should go to those who want to minimize the barriers between countries. If American contractors need to work with foreign companies to quickly get what the country needs, government regulations shouldn’t interfere.
Permalink | Comments (2) | Post your comment | Categories: Economy, Editorials, Locals in national affairs, Martin Gottlieb, National government
Martin Gottlieb: State auditor primary offers relief from aging D vs. R show
Here’s a refreshing change of pace: politicians in the same party saying nasty things about each other publicly.
Not only the same party, but the same wing of the party.
In service of all those who have grown tired of interparty sniping, some conservative Republicans have decided to go intra.
It’s not unheard of, of course, especially during primary election campaigns. But there haven’t been many juicy primaries lately. (Partly leaders discourage them.) And party unity has been such an obsession of the politicians lately that you had to start to wonder.
So here we have state Sen. Gary Cates, who represents most of Butler County, writing a letter to state Rep. Seth Morgan, of Huber Heights. Morgan is running for state auditor in the primary. He’s challenging Delaware County Prosecutor Dave Yost, the choice of state party headquarters . Says Cates (a Yost supporter) to Morgan, “After recently reading an error-filled smear you promulgated against a private citizen, I was ashamed of your tactics…. I would be hard-pressed to name another fellow GOP candidate who has run as poorly executed and questionable campaign as you.”
Cates was referring partly to Morgan’s complaint that a Yost aide “admitted to public corruption charges,” which, in fact, news outlets have reported. Yost responded that the case was ‘thrown out by a judge and even the record that it was filed was sealed.”
And Yost said the case in question was part of a politically motivated pursuit of former Republican state Treasurer Joe Deters, for whom the Yost aide then worked. In other words, shame on a Republican for bringing it up.
But the immediate prompt of the Cates letter was another squabble. It was over Morgan’s claim that he has the endorsement of Montgomery County Republican Chairman Greg Gantt.
After Morgan made that claim, Gantt asked him not to say it anymore. After that was revealed, Morgan put out a transcript of what Gantt said on the occasion of Morgan’s announcement of his candidacy:
“I certainly know you would make an excellent candidate and encourage you to pursue that option and go for it…. Myself and others are going to stand behind you and support you and encourage you to go for the auditor’s position…. I’m very excited, and very honored to be a part of this.”
Gantt also said he was happy to see Morgan “now moving up to the state level … I’m behind you 100 percent.”
Morgan responded with thanks to Gantt for “joining us…. Your support is important.”
Actually, Gantt’s statement sounds like an endorsement of Morgan’s decision to run, not an endorsement of him over Yost. Whether Morgan should run was the issue at the time: Given that the state party organization had already endorsed somebody else, should a young, first-term legislator challenge him?
Morgan still claims he had reason, based on public and private comments by Gantt, to claim the endorsement. And maybe he did. But it’s strange that the transcript he first put out doesn’t support the claim.
Eventually Gantt tried to diffuse the issue, which is the job of a party chairman. He said, “The last couple of days we’ve been twisted up in words, in silliness.”
This is what happens in certain kinds of races. With neither candidate having a record as state auditor, there isn’t much to fight about that’s relevant to the job. People look for every tiny angle, and it eventually becomes personal.
One of the funnier angles: Morgan is running as the only certified public accountant in the race. Yost is running as the only one who’s actually been an auditor, a job he held in Delaware County for a term.
Morgan took offense at Yost’s claim about being the only auditor, saying that a CPA does audits. So now Yost describes himself as the only “public auditor.”
What’s weird is that being a county auditor isn’t even about doing audits. A county auditor does a hodge-podge of other things. The state auditor actually audits.
At any rate, these guys will all make up and praise each other highly before November. For now, though, the race is a comforting reminder that our politicians haven’t become so obsessively partisan that their other combat abilities have atrophied.
Permalink | Comments (6) | Post your comment | Categories: Columns, Martin Gottlieb, Miami Valley Politics, Ohio politics
Editorial: There are some things all kids should know
A controversial idea in education is back in a form that just might work for Ohio and the nation.
The “common core” idea promotes basic standards about what students should learn in English, math, social studies and science — the core subjects.
The notion that basic expectations should be consistent across the nation doesn’t sound especially divisive. In fact, though, there are camps passionately in favor and against the idea.
To many conservatives — including those who are critical of public education and who believe there are basics in every subject that every child should know — the idea of the federal government telling local schools what to teach is heretical.
On the other side, some liberal groups have pushed to require states to ensure every student is taught at least to a minimum level in the major subjects. Former President Bill Clinton was a huge proponent of national standards and a national test to measure how well kids are measuring up. He abandoned the effort in the face of a backlash from the states.
To get around the political minefield, this time the call for standards, cleverly, has been led by the states. Through the National Governors Association, 48 states have joined an effort to jointly write common standards. Ohio and Gov. Ted Strickland have been strong supporters of the idea, with a handful of Ohioans playing key roles crafting the draft standards that were just released for math and English.
The goal is to finalize those standards this summer in anticipation of the participating states adopting them soon after.
A decade ago, Ohio’s own standards were not well regarded. The Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, in a national review of state standards, rated Ohio a D+ in 2002. But things have changed. Last year, in its annual report on standards, Education Week gave Ohio an A. Others are not as high on Ohio’s approach, but there is agreement that the state has come a long way in the past decade.
The “common core” draft standards are getting some good reviews. Adopting them, which Ohio is likely to do, would help ensure Ohio is keeping up with what’s happening nationally. At that level, it’s hard to dilute standards and have the effort go unnoticed.
The “common core” could have a dramatic impact on the states — and the kids — in need of the most help. If everyone gets on board with bringing their systems to the same high standard, millions of students could really benefit.
Of course, if all this comes together, then the natural next question is which states are doing the best job of getting kids to learn at the level expected in the new standards? Answering that question probably would require some sort of national test.
Better leave that battle for another day.
Permalink | Comments (13) | Post your comment | Categories: Editorials, Education, Scott Elliott
