Posted by amyers68 on 02/12/10
Last updated 02/12/10

Dont miss Ron Paul and Judge Andrew Napolitano at Ohio State University March 8th!

Details here: www.ronpaulohio.com

 
Posted by amyers68 on 02/02/10

February 1, 2010

The rest of the story

RE: "Greene County snubs advocate of its interests," Dayton Daily News, Friday, January 29, 2010. Greene County Commissioners Marilyn Reid and Alan Anderson were correct in significantly reducing taxpayer contributions to the Dayton Development Coalition (DDC), except their rationale for doing so didn't reveal the whole story. True enough, the budget is tight, but even in good times our elected officials shouldn't be throwing money over the fence to special interests without competition for that work, without value added and without oversight. That's precisely what happened in 2005-2006 with the Base Realignment And Closure (BRAC) Initiative Agreement between Greene County and the DDC. The simple truth is the only jobs protected by this effort were high priced consultants, lobbyists and career politicians who received kickbacks to their political campaigns. Here are the facts to support that assertion.

In 2005 and 2006, the last 21 months of the $1.9 million BRAC Initiative Agreement, the Dayton Development Coalition also received a $2.34 million Third Frontier grant through Development Research Corporation, a non-profit company fronting for the DDC. In 2005-2006 the DDC paid over $500,000 to their President and CEO, over $300,000 to a Washington lobbying firm currently under investigation by the FBI, $190,000 to Qbase which is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, and over $200,000 to two other consultants, not to mention at least $50,000 on domestic and foreign travel.* Although this is just the tip of the iceberg, it's hard to disagree that it reveals a broad pattern of self-dealing, waste and abuse, if not blatant corruption by the Dayton Development Coalition and their inner circle. 

Ms. Reid and Mr. Anderson finally understand that Greene County and Ohio taxpayer dollars had minimum impact if any at all on saving or creating jobs at Wright Patterson. But what they did impact was the financial well-being of the special interests that recycled that money back to the politicians who in the end took credit for job creation they had nothing to do with. This is an insult to Greene County taxpayers, not to mention Wright Patt professionals that day in and day out provide the real value added to our warfighters who put everything on the line to protect our freedom and liberty.

John Mitchel
Beavercreek, OH (Greene County)
http://reformcongress.com/congress/2010/pr/oped02_01_10.htm

*Source: BRAC Initiative Agreement, Internal Revenue Service, Federal Election Commission records and other documents obtained in a public records disclosure lawsuit against Greene County Commissioners (Case #: 2009CV0305). 

 
Posted by amyers68 on 01/04/10

Revolving door undermines public trust in government

RE: Local contractors under scrutiny for using paid military "mentors", Dayton Daily News, December 30, 2009: Many consider Gen. Bill Creech as "father of the modern Air Force."  During his distinguished career and before he died in 2003, Gen. Creech practiced and preached the notion that the most important responsibility of a leader is to train new leaders.  "Mentoring" was on Gen. Creech's short list of important tasks required to prepare Air Force leaders for the future.  However, simultaneous receipt of  $1600 a day mentoring fees plus a six-figure military pension plus hundreds of thousands in consulting fees from defense contractors doesn't seem to fit Gen. Creech's noble intentions of preparing Air Force leaders for challenges they may face in the future.  Besides, each senior officer participating in the Air Force mentoring program has more than 30 years experience on active duty.  That should be sufficient time to positively instill the core values of duty, honor, country in subordinates of all ranks, and especially the senior troops who more senior officers deal with on a daily basis. 

"Mentors for hire" may seem abusive to some, but it pales in comparison to the ease and speed in which elected officials and their staff members pass through the "revolving door."  Take for example Congressman Dave Hobson, who retired a multi-millionaire after nearly 30 years of public service, then took a job as a lobbyist for Vorys Advisors, a subsidiary of Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease, LLC, a Columbus law firm.  And let's not forget Congressman Steve Austria's wife Eileen, who moved from Congressman Dave Hobson's District Director to Director of Sales and Marketing with Nextedge Development Corporation, a non-profit, tax exempt company 60-70 percent financed by tax dollars including federal earmarks requested by Dave Hobson and Third Frontier and other state funding sponsored by Steve Austria when he was in the Ohio General Assembly.  It's no wonder approval ratings for Congress are at all-time lows. 

If the revolving door between government and the private sector should exist at all, it should be with two conditions; full and open disclosure, and a reasonable cooling off period, especially at the most senior levels.  Instead, the usual suspects prefer to conceal their self-dealing with faceless private corporations, and more often than not, through non-profit, tax exempt entities financed mostly with taxpayer dollars.  Term limits, self imposed or otherwise, would be a step in the right direction to mitigate the revolving door issue for federal elected officials.  That would motivate our congressional leaders to act as citizen legislators who serve for a time, and then return to their home districts to enjoy the liberty and freedom they helped protect as representatives of the people.  The longer we allow the self-dealing career politician mindset to prevail in Washington and Columbus, the closer we will come to America falling into the abyss.

Note: John Mitchel was a candidate for Ohio governor in 1998 and ran for U.S. House of Representatives in the 7^th Congressional District in 2008.  In 2006 he wrote and self-published America at the Abyss: A View from the Heartland. 

Contact information:

John Mitchel

Beavercreek , Ohio

mitch07ohio@sbcglobal.net

John Mitchel, LtCol, USAF (Ret)

"The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the tolerance of those they oppress."

                     &nbs
p;   Frederick Douglass, August 3, 1857

 
Posted by amyers68 on 11/29/09

We realize these are very serious allegations, and as such, they are not taken lightly

by the author, nor should they be taken lightly by those that are accused or the media. 

We invite readers to do their own due diligence, and at their discretion, pass it along.   

If you choose to do so, we thank you in advance for giving this the widest dissemination.

Letter to the Editor 

Dirty little secret in Greene County 

RE: Invasion of privacy isn't fault of Ohio 's taxpayers, Dayton Daily News, November 26, 2009: In his "Other Voices" column, Mike DeWine rightly points out that, "The Attorney General may not represent an employee who acts recklessly, maliciously or in bad faith outside the scope of his employment."  To be sure, Ohio taxpayers should not have to pay to defend government officials who act outside the law.  That's precisely what happened in a lawsuit filed against Greene County Commissioners.  To add insult to injury, taxpayers also paid for a cover-up perpetrated by the Greene County Common Pleas Court (Reference Case No. 2009-CV-0305). 

In my public records lawsuit I asked the Greene County Common Pleas Court to force the Greene County Commissioners to produce public records related to the 2003 BRAC Initiative Agreement with the Dayton Development Coalition.  Tragically, the Court dismissed my lawsuit on a procedural technicality, then less than 24 hours later, the Greene County Prosecutor's office released 26 boxes of  requested records, but only after at least two public investigative agencies got involved.  Greene County elected officials suddenly realized they broke the law three times; once when they withheld public records from a private citizen, again when the County Prosecutor defended their illegal action, and finally when the Greene County Common Pleas Court covered up their malfeasance. 

But perhaps they finally got it right in October when they hired a private Columbus law firm (Downes, Fishel, Hass, Kim, LLP) to defend them against further actions.  Trouble is; the taxpayers will pay for that too, which could add up to $50,000.*

* Greene County Board of Commissioners agenda, October 20, 2009    

John Mitchel

Beavercreek , OH

www.reformcongress.com

http://www.meetup.com/Patriots-Against-Public-Corruption/

 
Posted by amyers68 on 10/21/09
Last updated 10/21/09

Introduced in the Ohio  House on October 20, 2009, the "Firearms Freedom Act" (HB-315)  seeks "To enact section 2923.26 of the Revised Code to provide that ammunition, firearms, and firearm accessories that are manufactured and remain in Ohio are not subject to federal laws and regulations derived under Congress' authority to regulate interstate commerce and to require the words "Made in Ohio" be stamped on a central metallic part of any firearm manufactured and sold in Ohio."

The bill was authored by State Representatives Morgan and Martin, and currently has 15 other co-sponsors.  (h/t BuckeyeFirearms.org)

While the HB315's title focuses on federal gun regulations, it has far more to do with the 10th Amendment's limit on the power of the federal government.  It specifically states:

The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, particularly if not expressly preempted by federal law. The congress of the United States has not expressly preempted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearm accessories, and ammunition.

Some supporters of the legislation say that a successful application of such a state-law would set a strong precedent and open the door for states to take their own positions on a wide range of activities that they see as not being authorized to the Federal Government by the Constitution.

Firearms Freedom Acts have already passed in both Montana and Tennessee, and have been introduced in a number of other states around the country. There's been no lack of controversy surrounding them, either.  The Tenth Amendment Center recently reported on the ATF's position that such laws don't matter:

The Federal Government, by way of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms expressed its own view of the Tenth Amendment this week when it issued an open letter to 'all Tennessee Federal Firearms Licensees' in which it denounced the opinion of Beavers and the Tennessee legislature.  ATF assistant director Carson W. Carroll wrote that 'Federal law supersedes the Act', and thus the ATF considers it meaningless.

Constitutional historian Kevin R.C. Gutzman sees this as something far removed from the founders' vision of constitutional government:

"Their view is that the states exist for the administrative convenience of the Federal Government, and so of course any conflict between state and federal policy must be resolved in favor of the latter."

"This is another way of saying that the Tenth Amendment is not binding on the Federal Government. Of course, that amounts to saying that federal officials have decided to ignore the Constitution when it doesn't suit them."

Advocates of these efforts say it doesn't matter if the federal government disagrees, or even threatens states over funding, as they did recently with Oklahoma.  Gary Marbut, author of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act, and founder of http://www.firearmsfreedomact.com/ took this position in a recent interview with the Tenth Amendment Center:

"We're not depending on permission from federal judges to be able to effectuate our state-made guns bills.  And, we're working on other strategies to wrest essential and effective power from the federal government and put it where it belongs."

The principle behind such legislation is nullification, which has a long history in the American tradition. When a state 'nullifies' a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or 'non-effective,' within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as the state is concerned.

All across the country, activists and state-legislators are pressing for similar legislation, to nullify specific federal laws within their states.

A proposed Constitutional Amendment to effectively ban national health care will go to a vote in Arizona in 2010.  Fourteen states now have some form of medical marijuana laws - in direct contravention to federal laws which state that the plant is illegal in all circumstances.  And, massive state nullification of the 2005 Real ID Act has rendered the law nearly void.

While many advocates concede that a federal court battle has a slim chance of success, they point to the successful nullification of the Real ID Act as a blueprint to resist various federal laws that they see as outside the scope of the Constitution.

Some say that each successful state-level resistance to federal programs will only embolden others to try the same - resulting in an eventual shift of power from the federal government to the States and the People themselves.

http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/

http://sovereign.ohiofreedom.com/wordpress/?p=785#more-785