Are government unions misleading Ohio voters on Issue 2?
Posted By RichC on November 7, 2011
Most important of all, the “no” forces are shaping public perception about the stakes, according to Quinnipiac pollster Peter Brown. They’ve made it “about union rights and whether the governor and the legislature were trying to kill unions.”
The TV ads by We Are Ohio, which have dominated the Ohio airwaves for months, stress the prohibition on unions’ ability to negotiate staff levels for police, firefighters and teachers. They suggest Issue 2 would put Ohio citizens in danger.
In one ad, a paramedic says emergency teams would face “slower response times because [Issue 2] makes it illegal to negotiate for enough crew to do the job.” Another says Issue 2 “places our police and our communities at risk.”
No doubt intentionally, these ads miss the point of Issue 2. It’s aimed at reducing the cost of local government and the burden on taxpayers. Without it, layoffs of employees, including police and firefighters, are inevitable.
After avoiding the subject for months, the pro-Issue 2 spots have taken on the central issue of government employees as a class. “Had enough?” begins an ad that pictures Ohio as a giant slum. “Without Issue 2,” a narrator says, “hard-working Ohio families will face higher taxes to pay for the excessive wages and benefits of government employees who already make 43 percent more than the rest of us.”
The Issue 2 struggle offers a few consolations for its advocates. Significant parts of it are popular, polls have indicated. In a Quinnipiac poll, for instance, by large margins voters would require government employees to pay more for health insurance, (57% for and 34% against) and pensions (60%-33%), and they prefer merit raises to seniority-based pay increases (49%-40%).
Comments