With the poor economic conditions we are facing, there is a lot of talk about wanting to ensure the next generation has the same opportunities that we have had. In fact, I believe we all want to leave our children with an even better future. It’s human nature to want them to have more than we did.
Some of the life lessons we teach our kids as they grow older are that you have to work to be successful, you have to save up your money and you have to be responsible in the ways that you spend it. I’m working on this right now with my own kids; my seven year old thinks he’s saving to buy himself a cell phone! The question is: why can’t our government follow that advice?
With a budget that is $8 billion in the hole, we must do everything we can to reinvent the way our state government does business. That’s why I’m supporting legislation that will get us back on the right track, including a bill that will ensure our state spends its money as efficiently as possible.
House Bill 2 reduces wasteful government spending as well as ensures our state agencies are delivering services through the most efficient structure. It requires Ohio’s state auditor to conduct a performance audit of select state agencies every two years, which will make our government more productive and responsive. As the state’s fiscal watchdog, Ohio Auditor Dave Yost is in support of this legislation and is eager to see it move forward.
We must make sure that our government operates as cost-effectively as possible and is not bogged down by layers of waste or inefficiency. House Bill 2 will offer both short-term and long-term solutions, which will save tax dollars for our families and businesses down the road.
Another way Ohioans can keep more of their hard-earned money is to ensure that they are not taxed simply because they chose to die within our borders—an egregious policy known as the estate tax. House Bill 3 aims to abolish this “death tax” because when Ohioans are taxed for working, investing and spending in this state, I see no reason why we ought to tax them for dying here, too.
Most states do not have a “death” tax, which means Ohio is put at a disadvantage and causes people to flock to other states as a means of saving their money. The tax is a hit to the middle class—farmers and small business owners like those of the 70th House District—who must face this penalty if their assets obtain a value of just $338,333 (the lowest exemption of any state).
I believe people should keep their own money. I believe children should not be punished for what they inherit from their hard-working parents. And I believe that we need to find ways of ensuring Ohioans stay here to do business and raise their families, rather than contribute to the economies of other states.
The passage of House Bill 3 is an important part of strengthening Ohio. I expect to be working hard on this and other legislation that arise in the Ohio House of Representatives. As your voice in Columbus, I will certainly keep you informed and ensure that our state is not only taking initiative on the economy, but is doing so in the most responsible way.
About Me
Showing posts with label Ohio House. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ohio House. Show all posts
Friday, April 22, 2011
Sunday, March 29, 2009
House Vote on Senate's Version of Transportation Budget
An interesting thing happened last week. It was Tuesday March 24, 2009. We were in the House Chambers for Session. The Agenda included a vote on concurrence with the Senate version of the Transportation Budget.
Everything appeared to be normal, there was an emergency clause in the bill and the Speaker called for the vote, repeating the question to be voted on, as is customary; The question is, shall the emergency clause be a part of the bill? (I'm paraphrasing because I forgot my papers in the office) The vote came down: 93 nays 6 yeahs. The Speaker then states: (again paraphrasing), The measure failed to receive the constitutional requirement for passage, therefore the House does not concur with the Senate, the bill will go to conference committee.
My immediate thought was that maybe I voted wrong or made some sort of freshman mistake because I did indeed concur with the Senate changes. There was immediate reaction from other members, papers were rustling, a few people quickly left their seats to speak to others, and quiet discussion followed. Minority Leader Batchelder went to speak to the Clerk. The Speaker then proceeded through the remainder of the Agenda.
I sat in my chair speaking with my colleagues who sit around me. We were all wondering what had just happened because we voted according to the question asked. Normally, and by House Rules, whenever there is an emergency clause; the emergency clause and the bill are voted on separately. We had not voted on concurrence! Yet the Speaker said we did and that we voted against it!!!
Later that evening in caucus, the leadership outlined what had happened and what recourse and actions we might take. We were sure to get copies of the Journal - both, to make sure that it would not be changed and to prove that there was never a vote taken on concurrence with the Senate. Some members, like Leader Batchelder, said that in his forty some years in the Legislature, he had never seen anything like this! One would think that the Speaker of the House would know the House Rules!
Of course, all the rest of the week, the media reported that the House had rejected the Senate changes to the Transportation Budget by a vote of 93-6, which I think looks pretty bad. It looks like we overwhelming didn't like what changes the Senate had made. That is simply false. I mean, it would probably have gone to conference anyhow, but the vote would have been more like 53-46.
What happens from here I'm not sure. The Conference Committee has been scheduled and rescheduled about six times now. Of course, I don't know what they have to talk about in conference committee, the only thing we voted on was the emergency clause! It has been suggested that because the democrats screwed it up that they will have to accept the Senate changes or that they might be able to request a reconsideration.
Whatever happens, I know this much; the democrats don't seem to know what they are doing and I did not vote against the Senate changes to the Transportation Budget, I voted against the emergency clause!
Everything appeared to be normal, there was an emergency clause in the bill and the Speaker called for the vote, repeating the question to be voted on, as is customary; The question is, shall the emergency clause be a part of the bill? (I'm paraphrasing because I forgot my papers in the office) The vote came down: 93 nays 6 yeahs. The Speaker then states: (again paraphrasing), The measure failed to receive the constitutional requirement for passage, therefore the House does not concur with the Senate, the bill will go to conference committee.
My immediate thought was that maybe I voted wrong or made some sort of freshman mistake because I did indeed concur with the Senate changes. There was immediate reaction from other members, papers were rustling, a few people quickly left their seats to speak to others, and quiet discussion followed. Minority Leader Batchelder went to speak to the Clerk. The Speaker then proceeded through the remainder of the Agenda.
I sat in my chair speaking with my colleagues who sit around me. We were all wondering what had just happened because we voted according to the question asked. Normally, and by House Rules, whenever there is an emergency clause; the emergency clause and the bill are voted on separately. We had not voted on concurrence! Yet the Speaker said we did and that we voted against it!!!
Later that evening in caucus, the leadership outlined what had happened and what recourse and actions we might take. We were sure to get copies of the Journal - both, to make sure that it would not be changed and to prove that there was never a vote taken on concurrence with the Senate. Some members, like Leader Batchelder, said that in his forty some years in the Legislature, he had never seen anything like this! One would think that the Speaker of the House would know the House Rules!
Of course, all the rest of the week, the media reported that the House had rejected the Senate changes to the Transportation Budget by a vote of 93-6, which I think looks pretty bad. It looks like we overwhelming didn't like what changes the Senate had made. That is simply false. I mean, it would probably have gone to conference anyhow, but the vote would have been more like 53-46.
What happens from here I'm not sure. The Conference Committee has been scheduled and rescheduled about six times now. Of course, I don't know what they have to talk about in conference committee, the only thing we voted on was the emergency clause! It has been suggested that because the democrats screwed it up that they will have to accept the Senate changes or that they might be able to request a reconsideration.
Whatever happens, I know this much; the democrats don't seem to know what they are doing and I did not vote against the Senate changes to the Transportation Budget, I voted against the emergency clause!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
