Issue 1 - Should Ohio issue $200mm in debt to make cash payments to Iraq vets?

Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion » Politics

Issue 1 - Should Ohio issue $200mm in debt to make cash payments to Iraq vets?

[28 posts] [20 contributors]

Topic Rating:

(Total Ratings: )
Rate this topic:

Started 2 years ago by StowCbusCleveland
Latest reply from myliftkk

Tags:

12 Next »

StowCbusCleveland
Jackson Township, Canton, OH
Login to Send PM

An Issue 2 (Livestock and Poultry standards board) thread is raging, I've seen at least some mention of the "Here we go again" Issue 3 (casinos), but nothing on Issue 1. Issue 1 would authorize Ohio to issue $200 million in bonds in order to make payments to Ohioans who were enlisted during the Gulf, Afghanistan or Iraq Wars.

I personally can't believe this was put up for a vote. We're slugging it out over the budget, and then we have an issue on the ballot that openly says we want to add long term debt to make a present day payment to vets. I'm not saying the goal isn't worthy, but if it's important enough to us to flat out give away additional funds to veterans, then let's cut something else or all chip in and pay for it.

Issuing additional bonds to make an unnecessary cash payment...what am I missing here? At least my voting on the 3 issues will be easy: No! No! No!

Posted 2 years ago #
lifeliberty
Here
Login to Send PM

http://www.sos.state.oh.us/SOS/elections/IssueProcBallotBd/BallotBoard.aspx

Not to seem unpatriotic, but financial obligations to veterans should be a federal thing, not a state responsibility. Unless they are trying to attract and retain veterans to live and work here, I don't know. Appears to be something lobbied from a veterans association. I'd be up for a bill supporting veterans attending state sponsored schools for free.

oh, and I don't have a problem with this being on the ballot. Every body wants money and power and to support their own causes. The fact that we get to vote on what actually happens instead of people telling us what is GOING to happen is a good thing. It's just that certain groups lobby better than others, and those are the ones you see on the ballots.

Posted 2 years ago #
Analogue Kid
5th by West-Northwest
Login to Send PM

This is one of those "ugh" things that is going to end up bad no matter the outcome. Either we take on more debt and make our already precarious financial situation worse or we get accused of hating the troops and hating America.

Posted 2 years ago #
Brant
Gahanna
Login to Send PM

Does this have anything to do with Ohio offering in-state tuition to its state universities for out-of-state vets?

Posted 2 years ago #
lifeliberty
Here
Login to Send PM

Brant Jones wrote >>
Does this have anything to do with Ohio offering in-state tuition to its state universities for out-of-state vets?

I didn't know if that was the entire state, I thought just certain schools were offering that.

and to answer the question, I skimmed over the Issue http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/upload/ballotboard/2009/1-text.pdf http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/upload/ballotboard/2009/1-final_language.pdf and didn't see anything regarding tuition at Ohio colleges, so No.

Posted 2 years ago #
Mercurius
First Avenue
Login to Send PM

While $200 million looks like a lot of money, it is only 0.35% of Ohio's budget. Once you break that down into payments of a bond, it really amounts to almost nothing. Still thinking about it but leaning towards voting for it.

Posted 2 years ago #
StowCbusCleveland
Jackson Township, Canton, OH
Login to Send PM

Mercurius wrote >>
While $200 million looks like a lot of money, it is only 0.35% of Ohio's budget. Once you break that down into payments of a bond, it really amounts to almost nothing. Still thinking about it but leaning towards voting for it.

$200 million here, $200 million there...soon you're talking about real money!

That percentage on its own is meaningless without thinking about what it means. If you shoot NBA free throws at 40%, you're one of the worst free throw shooters of all time. If you get a MLB hit 40% of the time, you're the greatest hitter of all time. To me, 0.35% in the context of a state budget for a new, unfunded transfer of wealth for which we get no value other than the opportunity to pat ourselves on the back for loving our soldiers more than the next state is a lot of money. It's adding debt just to do it.

This is the problem: If something is worth doing, then be willing to put the money together yourself, don't charge it. If it's only .35% of the budget, then it should be easy to trim some fat or re-prioritize. Is fixing the split more important than cash transfers to vets? Maybe yes, maybe no, but let's have that discussion instead of "I thought of somebody who deserves money, let's run up some debt and give them the money." I mean, teachers are definitely underpaid. I think if we could find a way to pay teachers better it would be a great thing! I wouldn't advocate going into debt specifically to give the money to them. That's crazy.

I don't have a problem with paying vets. I don't even have a problem specifically with states taking on debt. I do have a problem with taking on debt needlessly and then not getting any value for your trouble. It's a nice sentiment to pay the vets a bonus, but it's a stupid, costly way to do it.

Posted 2 years ago #
joev
Merion Village
Login to Send PM

No way. Vets who completed their service did an admirable job for our nation. But no one is getting a bonus these days. I don't think the State should go into debt to do this, especially since it's not even expected. If you have the money for a gift, that's great. If you don't, then a nicely worded card will suffice.

Posted 2 years ago #
JackieC
Grandview
Login to Send PM

As having served both Active Duty for 3 years and with the Ohio Army National Guard in the Middle East for all of 2008 I would love to take any money that would be given to me. I think joev here is short selling vets service, (or his sarcasm is misplaced) I know most of us volunteered for service, think of the consequences though if we did not have enough volunteers to fill one of the worlds few all volunteer Armies? I do not think this gesture is too small or too big and it is much appreciated from an otherwise thankless job.

You were able to live your life, go to birthday parties, Holidays, concerts/movies/football games, go out to eat, take a vacation, have air conditioning, not go to bed every night shaking your sheets out for spiders/sand/scorpions, I could go on and on. Just think of the life you have lived for the last 12 to 15 months and ask if you would ever be willing to give it up.

I could think of worse things Ohio can and is spending our money on.

Posted 2 years ago #
StowCbusCleveland
Jackson Township, Canton, OH
Login to Send PM

JackieC wrote >>
I could think of worse things Ohio can and is spending our money on.

If doing these cash bonuses is something people want to do, we should stop doing those worse things, and actually pay for these bonuses. While I'm very thankful for the job our military does, I don't think that makes any policy that does a nice thing for them a smart idea. If this is a good idea (which I'm not convinced it is) then we should make it a priority and pay for it by finding the money in the existing budget.

Posted 2 years ago #
TaraK
probably at the coffee shop
Login to Send PM

Can anyone explain why this is state not federal?

Posted 2 years ago #
Mercurius
First Avenue
Login to Send PM

TaraK wrote >>
Can anyone explain why this is state not federal?

http://www.ohiochannel.org/multimedia/organizations/media.cfm?file_id=118737&start_time=330&organization_id=31
It looks like there is historical relevance and Ohio did the same thing during
WW1, WW2, Korea and Vietnam.

Posted 2 years ago #
adrock
Grandview Heights
Login to Send PM

i know a number of people from ohio who went into the military...but not one of them lives in ohio now. it seems to me that part of being in the military is that you generally have to move somewhere else. we aren't helping ohioans with this, we're helping people who just happen to live here now and will probably move away. and then when the people from ohio move back, they won't get a thing.

Posted 2 years ago #
gramarye
In Exile
Login to Send PM

JackieC: I have nothing against increasing veterans' benefits.

My problem is with increasing debt.

Obviously, the benefits are almost never an argument *against* a proposal, unless you think that the "benefits" aren't benefits at all. In this case, they obviously are. It's the costs that can make something not worthwhile. This country is already drowning in debt--public, corporate, consumer, you name it--and I simply start out reflexively hostile to *any* proposal to increase it. (Note that I follow this credo in my own personal life, too. This is something I hold myself to as well. I've gone into debt exactly once in my life: for law school. I live below my means and save up rainy day funds for rainy days. Something Warren Buffett once said had a lasting effect on me: "There's no way a smart person can go broke except through borrowed money." I think that's equally applicable to a smart community, not just a smart person.)

Posted 2 years ago #
UrbanApplachian
Central Franklinton
Login to Send PM

Why stop at recent vets? Many older vets who were in Vietnam or the Gulf wars need the help more. They make up a suprisingly large number of the homeless. The amount being given is too small to really matter to individuals and overall while well intended, is not the best way to spend state revenue. Don't vets get free or reduced cost education and other benfits anyway by virtue of signing up for service?

Posted 2 years ago #
joev
Merion Village
Login to Send PM

$200 million is too much to go in debt for a gift. Why not reconsider this in a few years if/when the economy has picked up, and there is extra money to give away? I'd rather have that $200 million spent on infrastructure that would help veterans and everyone else for years to come.

Posted 2 years ago #
misskitty
Columbus
Login to Send PM

I also think that this should be something dealt with by the federal government.
In a perfect world it would be nice but as tight as the budget is it just does not seem like the right time.

You were able to live your life, go to birthday parties, Holidays, concerts/movies/football games, go out to eat, take a vacation, have air conditioning, not go to bed every night shaking your sheets out for spiders/sand/scorpions, I could go on and on. Just think of the life you have lived for the last 12 to 15 months and ask if you would ever be willing to give it up.

I would be willing to give it up. I understand I would be giving it up by choice not force.
Also you mention how we got to do our thing and live life normally go to parties , etc.
However, Unless you got drafted if was the choice of the person going in to give up the normal life.
I also think Veterans should have more benefits and should be givin more. But like I said thatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s federal not state. I respect the choice of people going into the military. I am not against it I just think the fed needs to step up its game.

Posted 2 years ago #
roy
Downtown
Login to Send PM

joev wrote >> If you have the money for a gift, that's great. If you don't, then a nicely worded card will suffice.

I love this! Nicely stated joev.

Posted 2 years ago #
DavidF
Elysium Fields
Login to Send PM

It's considered an all volunteer military because we signed up voluntarily rather than being drafted. Duh.

Vote against it if you want, just don't diss those who choose to serve.

Posted 2 years ago #
Tenzo
Chicago Lakeshore
Login to Send PM

DavidF wrote >>
It's considered an all volunteer military because we signed up voluntarily rather than being drafted. Duh.
Vote against it if you want, just don't diss those who choose to serve.

Agreed.
And I'll buy dinner for anyone I see on active service.

But last time I looked at the consititution, this was federal.

Posted 2 years ago #