Dispatch Gets It Right on Early Voting/Registration Overlap
Submitted by Jeff on Wed, 08/20/2008 - 10:50am.
I'm really pleased that the Columbus Dispatch gets it exactly right in today's editorial, dismissing GOP objections to Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner's directive on same-day registration and voting as "much ado about nothing" and "not a big deal":
Some Republicans are overreacting because an unforeseen interaction of separate election statutes has created a five-day window in which people may register to vote and then immediately vote by absentee ballot. . . .If Republicans so dislike the overlap, they should persuade the GOP-led General Assembly to address the situation instead of complaining about Brunner's directive to county election boards.
This option was available to registrants in the gubernatorial election of 2006, and just 60 people in Franklin County voted this way. There were no recorded complaints. Brunner, a Democrat, said not a "single question or concern has been raised about the overlap period" prior to last week.
For more reaction from Secretary Brunner to the trumped-up objections, be sure to watch the video clip provided by reporter Marc Kovac on his excellent Capital Blog. Brunner does a great job of pointing out the absurdity of the strained interpretation that the GOP now seeks to impose on a statute that they themselves drafted and passed in 2005, and flatly states that if she is sued over the issue she will defend her directive.
Brunner Right on This, Wrong on Payday
Brunner is right on this issue, but she was wrong to steer the Ohio Ballot Board towards omitting 391% from the ballot language for Issue 5 in November. It's unfortunate that the ballot board was rolled by the payday lobby and gave the good guys the "Yes vote." The ballot language is confusing and traditionally confused voters vote 'No.' Brunner should have worked harder to make the language clear and let voters know that if they vote 'No' that they are voting for 391% interest.
Vote Yes on Issue 5!!!
All 5 members voted the same way
All 5 board members voted on the ballot language. The ballot language is just a recitation of the law, not the place for arguments. The 391% will be in the argument for the issue.
As for the no vote. The Ohio Constitution requires that a referrendum present the law in question to be affirmed (yes) or rescinded (no). It's against the law to give anti-payday forces the no vote.
VOTE YES ON ISSUE 5!
However, the referendum is a repeal of a section of a repeal of an old law. Confusing as hell, but it should have at least included the 391% APR. It now says that a NO vote will allow interest rates to "substantially exceed 28% APR." Given that current law caps interest rates at 391% APR and that consumers are provided with a disclosure of 391% APR when taking out a loan, the ballot language should have included 391% APR.
It appears the language will remain as it is. So, VOTE YES on issue 5 to end predatory payday lending in Ohio!
http://www.yesonissue5.org