A majority of people in the U.S. support collective bargaining rights. (Photo Credit: CC BY-ND/Andrew Glidden/California Patriot)

A recent New York Times/CBS News poll indicates a majority of people in the U.S. support the collective bargaining rights of public employee unions. Poll results also show that a majority oppose cutting pay to reduce state budget deficits. The nationwide poll surveyed 984 adults, the majority of whom did not have a union member in the household.

Collective bargaining popular among Americans

Numerous Democrats from the Wisconsin Senate recently ducked a vote that could demolish collective bargaining, and the majority of U.S. residents who participated in the New York Times/CBS News telephone poll supported collective bargaining. However, only a third of the 984 polled supported labor unions, and a quarter were opposed. The rest were undecided.

Support for public employee unions was strong. By a two-to-one margin, poll participants objected to the “extreme” deficit recovery efforts of Republican governors like Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Ohio Gov. John Kasich. Democrats and Independents outnumbered the slim majority of Republicans who favored the loss of some collective bargaining rights, and as a result, poll results were 56 percent against and 37 percent for public employee pay cuts.

Governors say public workers are overpaid

Governors on both sides of the political aisle have presented concerns that public employees are overpaid or have overly generous health insurance and pension plans. Yet 61 percent of phone respondents – including a simple majority of Republicans – believed pay and benefits were “about right” or “too low” for public employees. Results were divided regarding whether private sector employees, such as firefighters and teachers, should enjoy government-style benefits like early retirement and pension collection.

Collective bargaining: ‘A job that needs to be done’

Retired 67-year-old Democratic poll respondent Phil Merritt of Crossville, Tenn., told the New York Times that collective bargaining is essential for U.S. families.

“I feel they do a job that needs to be done. If you work hard, you should be able to have a home, save for retirement and send your kids to college,” Merritt said. “Most public employees have to struggle to do those things, and generally both spouses must work.”

Republican view: Toppling labor union power

Representative of those who supported the dissolution of collective bargaining rights was Republican Warren Lemma, 56, an electrical contractor from Longview, Texas. States don’t have the money to pay such benefits, he said.

“Retirement benefits shouldn’t be taken from those near retirement, but the system should be changed for workers just starting out,” Lemma said. “The only way the system will change is to do something about union control, and the only way to do that is to remove collective bargaining.”

USA TODAY/Gallup Poll showed similar results

Protecting collective bargaining rights was also on the minds of the majority of respondents to a similar USA Today/Gallup Poll. Sixty-one percent opposed an anti-collective bargaining law like the one Wisconsin is attempting to pass, while 33 percent were in favor. While two-thirds of respondents recognized budget problems in their states, they were split on how to solve those problems, whether it be through tax hikes or other government spending cuts.

Sources

New York Times

The Caucus NYT blog

USA Today

Fascism and its effect on collective bargaining rights

Ohio cash loans even for people with bad credit

Problems with bad credit? No worries. If you feel you might be turned down because of bad credit, rest your worries aside knowing that our Ohio cash loans are typically offered with no credit checks. So even if you are struggling with bad, poor or no credit at all, you have the same opportunity as anyone else who applies through our online services. Even better, just in case you need more time to pay off the loan, you can even apply for installment loans for bad credit. With these loans, you can pay back the loan in small increments that work well with your monthly budget.

Requirements for Ohio cash loans online

To qualify for online cash loans in Ohio, you must meet the following basic requirements:

• Currently employed, preferably full-time
• Must be 18 or older to apply
• Must have an open and active bank account
• You are a legal U.S. citizen

Ohio online cash loans offer quick convenience

Applying for Ohio cash loans is fast and completely convenient, especially since everything is done online. It takes an average 2.5 minutes to complete the application, and once you submit the form, you will be notified of your status almost instantly. Upon approval, cash will be deposited straight to your bank account, typically available to use in just two hours. You can pay off unexpected bills before additional fees pile up, but how you choose to spend the money is really up to you. It is your money after all.

Ohio cash loans online – up to $1,500 | Start HERE

Ohio police officers are not required to have a radar gun to issue a speeding ticket. Image from Flickr.

Getting a speeding ticket is never fun – between fees, fines, and increased insurance costs, you’re looking at more than $400. In Ohio, however, the state that gives out the most speeding tickets, fighting that ticket just got a lot harder. The Ohio Supreme Court has ruled that “trained” officers can rely on visual estimates to hand out legally binding speeding tickets.

The Ohio speeding ticket court case

A 5 to 1 decision of the Ohio supreme court stated that officers do not need verifiable evidence to issue a speeding ticket. Instead, the officer only has to be “trained” in estimating speed. This means no radar gun, no laser measurement of speed, no paper trail to dispute – only your word against the officer’s. The supreme court of Ohio is quick to point out that this is not what they wish to see as policy, but what the constitution allows.

The financial reality of speeding tickets

Speeding tickets are often used by small towns for more than safety enforcement. Some cities make more than 30 percent of their budget from traffic enforcement. An average speeding ticket in the United States costs about $150, and increased insurance costs can run up to $300 over three years from just the first infraction. Some states — such as Florida — have even passed laws stating that cities are not allowed to make any more than 30 percent of their income from speeding tickets. Some states have even instituted systems where speeding tickets can be paid for on the spot with a credit card.

Reaction to the Ohio speeding ticket case

The Ohio speeding ticket case has garnered criticism from around the world. The ACLU has stated that this case will open up Ohio to possible racial profiling, stops for no reason and civil liberty violations. SB 280 has been introduced in the Ohio congress to address this concern. Senator Tim Grendell and Senator Capri Cafaro have introduced a bipartisan bill to require verifiable evidence for speeding tickets.

The Colorado state legislature voted against jobs in Colorado when they passed HB 1351. (Photo: Flickr)

Various state legislatures have passed tough payday loans regulation in recent months, and now Colorado HB 1351 has made it through after a narrow vote. According to Progressive States Network, HB 1351 caps APR at 45 percent and requires that lenders give borrowers as long as six months to pay back the money borrowed.  Because payday loans are commonly a two-week short term loan, the interest a lender would gain from extending a loan at an annual interest of 45 percent would amount to not much more than the $4.14 a lender charging a 36 percent APR would receive. Thirty-six percent is a common cap that many states have placed on payday lending, and it isn’t feasible for payday lenders. The only way Colorado lenders could even begin to cover their own costs would be the leeway to charge a $75 origination fee and monthly fees of up to $30 in excess of interest, according to Progressive States.

Who cried no on HB 1351

Colorado Financial Service Centers Association and the Community Financial Service Association (CFSA) said HB 1351 is bad for jobs and the economy. In a TV spot, the organizations cited examples of how recent tax hikes and regulations in Colorado have cost the state jobs (such as 5,000 Amazon.com jobs that were lost). They claimed that HB 1351 would cost the state 1,600 jobs out of the payday loans industry alone. Not only that, but the legislation that the Boulder Daily Camera called “a terrible bill” in February is supported by some groups that would appear to be “targets” of the payday loans industry, if the rhetoric of the Center for Responsible Lending is to be believed. The groups include C3 – Colorado Competitive Council, the Hispanic Contractors of Colorado, Society of Hispanic Human Resource Professionals and Urban League of Metro Denver, among others.

Wall Street madness caused the financial meltdown

Yet pseudo-watchdog organizations with deep pockets claim that payday loans are to blame, particularly because of a consumer’s ability to roll over loans. What the vast majority of such criticism glosses over is the fact that not only do the most visible payday loans companies nationwide either prohibit or severely limit rollovers, the CFSA makes a point of working with the vast majority of lenders who do put consumer protections of this sort in place. Consumers don’t need Colorado HB-1351, Oregon’s SB 993, Illinois’ HB 537, Ohio’s HB209, New Hampshire’s SB 193 or Iowa’s HF 2127, to name a few. Consumers prefer having the choice, rather than having sole options dictated to them in a nanny state atmosphere.

(Photo Credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/yosoynuts/ / CC BY-ND 2.0)

Related Video:

Ohio prisons carry out their fifth execution this year. Image from Wikimedia Commons.

On May 13, Michael Bueke was executed by lethal injection — more than 20 years after his crimes.  His appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court had been denied, as well as his request for Governor Ted Strickland to grant him clemency.  He was pronounced dead just before 11 a.m. at the Southern Ohio Correctional facility.  He had gone on a crime spree along Interstate 275 outside of Cincinnati, killing one and wounding two others in 1983. He was convicted several months later, and sentenced to death.

Michael Bueke: The Mad Hitchhiker

In spring of 1983, Michael Bueke was hitchhiking through the state of Ohio.  He flagged down Gregory Wahoff, then pulled a gun on him and forced him to drive to a rural area. Wahoff attempted to flee as Bueke forced him to turn over his car at gunpoint, and in fleeing Wahoff was shot several times. He was paralyzed as a result. Two weeks later, Robert Craig was found dead in a ditch, shot in the head. The weapon was found to be the same used to shoot Wahoff. Bueke latergot a ride from Bruce Graham, who was also robbed of his car and shot. Death row inmates cost more to house securely, and the lengthy appeals process means far more cost to taxpayers to execute an inmate rather than just put him in lockup.

Quick conviction

Michael Bueke was quickly convicted of the shootings and the slaying.  At the time, he claimed he needed to steal a car to rob a bank in order to pay for an attorney to defend him on pending drug charges, according to the Associated Press.  Appeals were lodged by his defense, including testimony that his mental status was altered by brain damage. While awaiting execution for the past 27 years, he converted to Catholicism. He expressed a great deal of remorse for his crimes.

Clemency denied by Governor Strickland

According to the Cincinnati Enquirer, Bueke appealed to Governor Ted Strickland for clemency.  Strickland, a former psychologist for Ohio state prisons, sided with the parole board and refused the request the day before the execution was due. The presiding judge in the original conviction, Norbert Nadel, has said the sentence was long overdue, and there was never question over guilt. Michael Bueke was the fifth inmate executed in Ohio this year, the 14th under Strickland’s tenure.  Ohio resumed capital punishment in 1999, and Bueke’s is the 38th death sentence to be carried out.

After the first round of regulation was passed, more than 700 Ohio payday loan stores closed. Image from Flickr.

In 2008, Ohio passed a comprehensive payday lending reform law, HB 545. This law capped the interest rates lenders could charge for payday cash advances. Two years after this law went into effect, Representatives Jennifer Garrison, Gerald Stebelton and Matt Lundy are co-sponsoring HB 486, intended to further limit payday lenders.

The argument for more payday loan regulation through HB 486

Ohio’s HB 486 is being introduced under the auspice of more regulation for the payday lending industry. Many lawmakers are frustrated that payday lending stores are charging fees for services such as check cashing, loan origination and credit checks. When HB 545 passed in 2008, the goal was to reduce the cost of payday loans and more heavily regulate the industry. HB 486 is designed to tighten regulations even more. Legislators are concerned that payday lending customers are paying, in effect, $15 – $25 on each $100 borrowed for a two or four week period. Some borrowers misuse this service and end up digging themselves deeper into debt.

The argument against more regulation on payday loans

While the payday lending industry is not often well received or well liked, HB 486 attempts to punish payday lenders for following the law. When HB 545 was passed, interest rates on payday loans were capped at 28 percent annual interest — about that of most credit cards. However, over the two-week period of most payday loans, that interest rate does not provide the income lenders need to cover their costs. More than 700 payday lending stores closed, and 2,500 Ohio residents lost their jobs.

Ohio lenders operating under the Small Loans Act

In an attempt to remain open, Ohio payday lenders began operating under the Small Loans Act. The Small Loans Act allows lenders to charge fees for check cashing, credit checks and loan origination. The Small Loans Act also requires increased reporting, cash-on-hand and more regulated advertising. The payday lending stores in Ohio that began charging fees and operating under the Small Loans Act have followed the letter of the law, ensuring that they are providing a legal service. HB 486 seeks to end this practice.

The math of payday loans in Ohio

Many legislators are pointing to figures such as 391 percent APR to explain why they believe payday lenders need more regulation. However, neither HB 545 or HB 486 take into account that payday loans are intended as short-term financial solutions for between two and four weeks. Additionally, the only other option available to most payday loan customers are bank fees of $30 or more for bounced checks. Many payday loan customers have credit that does not qualify them for more traditional financial products.

So what do you think? Will HB 486 protect consumers? Or will HB 486 put Ohio payday lenders out of business?

Image from Flickr.

Regardless of the outcome of the debate over a new lethal injection method, the results of the Kenneth Biros execution will remain the same. Convicted murderer Kenneth Biros was executed this morning in Ohio by lethal injection. After 18 years in prison, Biros, 51, told his siblings “Now I am paroled to my father in heaven.”

The family of the woman Biros killed in 1991 made it clear they supported the execution. “We’ve been ready for 18 years,” said a member of Tami Engstrom’s family. Tami was 22 when Biros murdered her. Many people have taken a hard stance as being for or against the death penalty. However, ask most people what they think of the death penalty, and they’ll answer “it depends.”

Arguments regarding the death penalty

A few people look at the death penalty from a financial standpoint. Some say execution is too expensive, while others argue that keeping inmates alive and in jail is more expensive. Some ask whether Americans who are morally opposed to the death penalty should get tax resolution.

A large group of people say that whether the death penalty is warranted depends on the nature of the crime. They believe that if the crime is heinous enough, putting the prisoner to death is acceptable. However, the main debate surrounding the Kenneth Biros execution doesn’t have to do with money or circumstance; it’s about a new method of lethal injection.

Previous problems with lethal injection

A new method of one-drug lethal injection was used on Kenneth Biros, though his lawyers tried to halt his execution by saying that using this new drug amounted to experimentation. The United States Supreme Court refused to intervene. Ohio decided to switch to the one-drug injection after an incident in Ohio a few months ago, when an inmate’s execution was halted after executioners stuck him with needles 18 times trying to find a usable vein.

Death penalty opponents are both praising the one-drug method because it is reportedly less painful and arguing against it because it hasn’t been properly vetted. However, I can imagine it would be difficult to find willing human test subjects for experimenting lethal injections.

Execution is over, case is far from closed

The Kenneth Biros execution, the first execution using the one-drug method, went as planned. Biros died 11 minutes after recieving the injection, roughly the amount of time the three-drug cocktail took to work. Now that the Kenneth Biros execution is over, opponents of changing to a one-drug injection can no longer argue that it hasn’t been tested on humans.

Richard C. Dieter, from the Death Penalty Information Center, says that the key to whether a method of execution is acceptable depends on due process and that the Ohio Legislature should have examined this method more carefully before using it for the Kenneth Biros execution. “In this case, however, everyone has taken the Ohio Department of Corrections at their word, without an adversarial debate,” Dieter said.

A few different groups are looking into whether Ohio’s switch to the one-drug method was constitutional or whether further review is needed before the state can continue using the method.

Payday loans in Ohio still exist, but the opposition continues to bulk up for the next battle. (Photo: Wikipedia.org)

The battle for payday loans in Ohio has been a difficult one for consumers. The recession hit the Ohio workforce harder than most, and the need for emergency short term loans is greater than ever before. Yet the state legislature in their infinite wisdom decided that what their constituents needed was nanny state regulation. Rates were capped at 28 percent APR, which effectively crippled the industry in Ohio and sent credit- and liquid asset-constrained consumers scrambling toward more expensive options. That rate is more stringent that the federal rate of 36 percent APR set for lending to active military, and we know that even at that level, the business model in unsustainable.

Payday Lending is Now

Consumers desire the flexibility to choose what is best for their financial situation. The Columbus Dispatch, rather than turning away from this point in order to blow with the political wind, recently produced an article that was pleasantly even-handed. For some, it’s true: payday loans are “the only way to get by.” ( See: http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2009/11/09/copy/More_Payday.ART_ART_11-09-09_A1_6QFK8AH.html?adsec=politics&sid=101) While no reputable lender would advocate payday loan dependency, it’s been proven not only in customer surveys but in studies conducted by the Federal Reserve and institutions of higher learning that payday loan can be an invaluable tool for smoothing out financial shocks.

Choice is Good

CheckSmart CEO Ted Saunders pointed out to the Dispatch that “There is a bank right there,” in reference to a traditional institution just a football field away from one of his stores. “They could go right there if they wanted to.”

Competition fosters choice. It also tends to help regulate prices, both of which are benefits to the consumer. But activists like Bill Faith of the Coalition on Homelessness and Housing in Ohio (COOHIO), who appears to be a firm believer in the nanny state, reminds that “People at one point also were excited about high-interest subprime mortgage loans that helped ruin the housing market.” Yet Faith makes an apples-to-oranges comparison. Wall Street shenanigans and impotent governmental policy that allowed it to go on are what destroyed the economy. Payday loans aren’t even in the same ballpark. In fact, studies like those by Dartmouth College’s Jonathan Zinman suggest that capping payday loan rates and otherwise restricting the industry harms consumers’ financial welfare.

Don’t Believe? Ask Somebody Who Has Used Payday Loans

The Dispatch interviewed Amie, a 47-year-old mother of six. Recessionary times have been tough for her budget, and her low earnings make getting ahead almost impossible. Even though she’s found herself jumping from one payday loan to another, she said “I can’t complain. At least they’re helping me,” referring to CheckSmart in Ohio.

That’s ammunition that payday loan critics would use to say that companies like CheckSmart are pulling Amie into an endless cycle of debt. But what we truly have here is a financial landscape where banks, credit unions and even employers have for the most part failed to serve the populace. Requirements to apply for consumer loans through old-school channels often exclude those who need the most help. As wages have not kept pace with the rise of inflation, too many consumers like Amie find themselves in a large hole.

Legislation: Like an Ant Lion’s Hole

Legislators who fight for 28 percent APR and other such unreasonable restrictions upon businesses without the deep pockets of the financial mainstream are creating a nanny state scenario where consumers with nowhere else to turn will have to depend upon the “alms” of the government and their banking tentacles. Freedom of choice sinks beneath the waves. Or, if the government does not assert total control and credit-restricted consumers are left to fend for themselves, regulating payday loan companies out of the market most frequently leaves consumers with even more expensive options, from loan sharks to overdraft fees. At least payday lenders make their costs clear up front. That’s something a bank never does with overdraft fees. If you’re skirting the red, using an ATM card becomes a deadly game, as every infraction can incur a fee of $25 or more, even if you overdraw your account by as little as one penny. But that’s OK, says banks. It’s all in the micro-fine print!

“Banks and other lending institutions aren’t doing their jobs,” says Koziura

That’s what House Financial Institutions Committee chair Rep. Joseph F. Koziura of Lorain, Ohio told the Dispatch. “The system is built on making money on fees now instead of the old-fashioned loaning money and putting money in the system. That’s 90 percent of the reason we’re screwed up.”

What happened when half of Ohio’s 1,600 payday lending outlets closed down after approval of a 28 percent APR rate cap? Lots of people hopped into the unemployment line, for one. Consumers kowtowed to the voice of government and made life more difficult for those who can ill afford such windmill chasing. There were certainly some payday lenders who were unscrupulous in their dealings with customers, but it was not a majority. Payday lending is a regulated industry with a keen eye toward consumer relations. Groups like the Community Financial Services Association and the Online Lenders Alliance are there to ensure that consumers can safely enjoy the use of payday loans.

But Payday Lenders Aren’t Being Allowed to Run Legitimate Business

Charging $15 per $100 loaned is common for a payday loan. For a two-week loan, paying 15 percent interest is reasonable for an emergency service that can expose the lender to a great deal of financial risk. But Ohio legislators managed to convince consumers (lead the lemmings?) into laws that prevent payday lenders from even doing that. According to the Dispatch, CheckSmart charges up to that rate, but it’s broken down into numerous fees in order to circumvent faulty legislation. It gets around the 28 percent APR rate cap as it currently exists. And CheckSmart makes each of the individual fees clear to its customers, who continue to use their services. The truth is what consumers want, not horror stories that leave you thinking, “Yeah, that really doesn’t happen to most people.” No hook hands scraping the door at midnight, no dolls that move on their own and no payday loan debt traps… that’s story time, kids.

Legislators Still Aren’t Satisfied

Ohio legislators are continuing to drive for a 28 percent APR rate cap that applies to any payday loan and closes the loopholes. “The latest bill up for debate in a House committee,” writes the Dispatch, “would cap interest at 28 percent for all loans of up to $1,000 made for a term of three months or less.” That would kill payday lending in Ohio. A vote is set for early December.

Payday Lending: A Tool to Be Used with Healthy Caution

Payday lending is not a magic ATM. It isn’t money to fulfill your wildest cash desires at a moment’s notice. Such unbridled use can easily lead to dependency, when what a consumer’s finances need is sound budgeting. But regulating payday lending out of business in Ohio because a minority of consumers use the payday loan product in ways it was not intended to be used is no answer. If people fear the nanny state when it comes to bailouts and healthcare, shouldn’t they also fear it in this avenue of consumer finance?

Speaking of government, there’s an invention called Social Security. While it has been a cash lifeline for some, many others worry that it may be a financial scam, a Ponzi scheme that is costing the modern workforce millions each year. Yet legislators make no earnest attempt to reform that system. They consider payday loans a more desirable target, perhaps? There might just be more of a campaign war chest in that field, thanks to the banking industry. Vote as the dollars go; isn’t that the way?

Related Video:

Image from Flikr.

A word to the wise, people: If you’re ever out shopping and someone marches into the store and says she’ll pay for $500 worth of merchandise for everyone, remember that sometimes people lie. Furthermore, if this happens to you, please exercise further common sense by realizing that if a stranger walks in and offers to buy clothing for you and then doesn’t follow through, you are not allowed to steal it.

A Burlington Coat Factory riot broke out on Tuesday when a woman emerged from a limousine at the store and told cashiers she had won the lottery and would spend up to $500 on everybody in the store. Guaranteed loans may be guaranteed, but promises from strangers have no such legal backing. I’m not sure who I think is crazier in this story: the woman who lied about winning the lottery and being able to buy stuff for everyone, or the people who caused a riot and started looting the store after they realized the stranger wouldn’t be funding their purchases.

Details on Burlington Coat Factory riot

It all started at a Burlington Coat Factory location in Columbus, OH. Though the fact that I first read about this in the Weekly World News made me wonder which was the real hoax, the story is confirmed in the Chicago Tribune and on MSNBC. As they tell it, a woman named Linda Brown rolled up to the store in a rented limousine Tuesday and “walked to a cash register and loudly announced she had won the lottery and would pay for each person’s merchandise up to $500,” police said.

She told people she had won $1.5 million. Customers started calling relatives and friends, and soon the store had to call in police officers to handle the crowd. Brown went to the bank to get the money to pay for everything, then came back empty handed. She hadn’t won anything and had no money.

And the crowd goes wild

Once customers found out they weren’t getting free stuff, the Burlington Coat Factory riot broke out as “Angry customers threw merchandise around and looted, leaving the store looking as though a hurricane had passed through it, police said,” according to MSNBC. Some customers took off with their merchandise without paying for it, and police are reviewing surveillance footage to find those people.

Announcing to a store that you will buy things for everyone and then not doing it isn’t a crime. However, receiving $900 worth of limousine services and not paying for it is. When the limo driver realized he wasn’t going to get paid, he turned Brown into the police.

Quite the rap sheet

Turns out, the woman who caused the Burlington Coat Factory riot has three outstanding warrants for aggravated menacing, misuse of 911 systems and causing false alarms. Interesting hobby.