Speaking on conservative host Bill Cunningham’s program on Cincinnati’s 700 WLW on June 3, Husted described Iran’s leadership as opaque and divided. He said the country’s leaders are “in bunkers” and that “you don’t really know who is actually making the decisions,” pointing to “the political clerics and then the military that are all sort of doing their own thing.”

“It is not clear to me how this comes to an end at this point in time, but it needs to,” Husted said. “Iran needs to open up the strait [of Hormuz].”

The comments come a little more than three months after the United States and Israel launched air strikes on Iran on Feb. 28, opening a conflict that included the killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. In response, Iran blocked the Strait of Hormuz — a chokepoint for roughly a fifth of the world’s oil — and the closure has driven up global crude prices and the cost of gas at Ohio pumps. A U.S.-led naval blockade of Iran began in April, and an effort to reopen the waterway is ongoing.

A shift from ‘brief and successful’

Husted’s acknowledgment that he does not know how the war ends marks a more cautious tone than his earlier public statements. Shortly after the fighting began, he described the U.S. military operation as going “much better than anybody thought it would,” and for months he has said he expects the war to be “brief and successful,” a view he has said he shares regularly with the Trump administration.

In a separate interview with Signal Statewide this week, Husted used nearly identical language about Iran’s leadership, saying its leaders “are hiding in bunkers underground” and that “it’s not easy to have negotiations with people like that.” He framed the U.S. goals as twofold — preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon while reopening Gulf oil shipments — and said voters “want us to do both.” Asked when the war will have gone on too long, or whether its end is near, Husted declined to say.

Brown runs against the war

The exchange lands in the middle of Husted’s November race against former Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown, who is making opposition to the war a centerpiece of his campaign. At a recent stop near Columbus, Brown said Ohio taxpayers “have already spent a billion dollars on this war” — money he argued is not going to schools, roads or public health — and has tied the conflict to higher gas, diesel and fertilizer costs hitting Ohio farmers.

National polling has shown the war is unpopular. A YouGov survey conducted May 29 to June 1 found 29% support for President Donald Trump’s handling of the situation in Iran, a figure comparable to public sentiment on the Iraq War late in the 2006 campaign that first sent Brown to the Senate.

Husted, for his part, has pushed back on Brown, arguing that his long record in Congress contributed to Iran’s rise as a state sponsor of terrorism and that his energy positions raised electricity prices. “I believe that Ohioans understand all that,” Husted said.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The 6-1 decision in State v. Heffley, issued June 2, resolves a legal catch-22 that had blocked some Ohioans with felony convictions from using a state process meant to give them a path back to lawful firearm possession. Justice R. Patrick DeWine wrote the majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice Sharon Kennedy and Justices Patrick Fischer, Joseph Deters, Dan Hawkins and Megan Shanahan. Justice Jennifer Brunner, the court’s lone Democrat, dissented.

The case began in Allen County, where Patrick Heffley was found guilty of domestic violence, a fourth-degree felony, in 2006. He served a prison term, paid his fines and court costs and was discharged from post-release control. The conviction barred him from possessing a firearm under Ohio law and also triggered a separate federal prohibition.

In August 2023, Heffley applied for relief from his state firearms disability under R.C. 2923.14, a statute that lets people prohibited from possessing firearms petition the common pleas court in their home county to have those rights restored. The Allen County Court of Common Pleas denied the application, and the Third District Court of Appeals reversed that denial. The state, represented by the Allen County prosecutor’s office, appealed to the Supreme Court.

The legal catch-22

To qualify for relief under the Ohio statute, an applicant must show, among other things, that they are “not otherwise prohibited by law” from having firearms. The trial court read that phrase to include the federal ban under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1), which prohibits firearm possession by people convicted of a crime punishable by more than a year in prison.

That reading created a loop the majority described as a stalemate: an Ohio court could lift the federal ban by restoring a person’s state rights, but it would be powerless to restore those state rights because the federal ban still existed. Because every Ohio violent-felony conviction triggers both bans, the court noted, the statute would be effectively useless for the people it was written to help.

Federal law includes an exception. A conviction is no longer disqualifying once a person’s civil rights — the rights to vote, hold office and serve on a jury — have been restored, unless the restoration itself still bars firearm possession. Heffley’s civil rights were restored by operation of Ohio law after his release. Granting his state application, the majority found, would restore his firearm rights in full and remove the federal ban along with it.

How the court read the statute

Much of the ruling turned on a single word: “otherwise.” DeWine wrote that the term means “in a different way or manner,” and concluded that it refers to a firearms ban arising from a separate conviction — not the same conviction an applicant is asking the court to clear. Because Heffley’s state and federal disabilities both stem from his 2006 conviction, the court held, he has only one disabling conviction and is not “otherwise prohibited by law.”

The majority also pointed to the statute’s text, which says relief “restores the applicant to all civil firearm rights to the full extent enjoyed by any citizen,” and to a 2011 amendment in which the General Assembly said it was clarifying that the state process removes the federal ban as well.

Responding to the dissent, DeWine wrote that policy disagreements belong with lawmakers, not the court: “Our task is to apply the laws that have been enacted, not the ones that the dissenting jurist thinks should have been enacted.”

Brunner’s dissent

Brunner would have upheld the trial court’s denial. She argued that the federal ban applies to Heffley independently of state law and that the phrase “otherwise prohibited by law” includes that federal prohibition, even when it is triggered by the same conviction.

She also warned of a practical consequence. Under a 2021 Ohio Supreme Court decision, people convicted of certain misdemeanor domestic-violence offenses cannot regain firearm rights, Brunner noted, yet the majority’s ruling allows some people convicted of felony domestic violence to do so. She called that a “galling disparity in the law” and “an absurd result,” and wrote that the decision “lessens the protection for future victims of felony-level domestic violence.”

“Moreover, majority opinions like this one harm the rule of law,” Brunner wrote. “I strongly dissent from the court’s judgment.”

What happens next

The ruling does not restore Heffley’s firearm rights. The court affirmed the Third District and sent the case back to the Allen County Court of Common Pleas, which retains discretion to grant or deny his application. The statute requires a judge to find, among other things, that the applicant has led a law-abiding life since release and appears likely to continue doing so.

Because R.C. 2923.14 applications are filed in the county where the applicant lives, the decision sets a statewide precedent that common pleas courts in Seneca and Sandusky counties will follow when they weigh future firearms-disability petitions.

Heffley was represented by attorney Andrea Henning of Huffman, Kelley & Brock, L.L.C. The state was represented by Allen County Prosecuting Attorney Destiny R. Caldwell and Assistant Prosecuting Attorney John R. Willamowski Jr.

The full decision is available through the court’s published opinion.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

Twenty years after his opposition to the Iraq War helped elect him to the U.S. Senate, Sherrod Brown is making another Middle East conflict central to his attempt at a political comeback. 

Brown, who’s challenging Republican U.S. Sen. Jon Husted this November after losing his Senate seat in November 2024, railed against the ongoing war in Iran at a recent campaign stop at a brewery in suburban Columbus. 

In a 10-minute speech delivered to dozens of people sitting at picnic tables and bar stools, Brown barely mentioned President Donald Trump, who, along with Israel, launched air strikes in February. Instead, he railed against Republican Sen. Jon Husted, Brown’s opponent in the November election, for either describing the war positively or voting against efforts to immediately end it.

“Ohio taxpayers have already spent a billion dollars on this war,” Brown said. “That’s money we’re not spending on schools, money we’re not spending on roads. It’s money we’re not spending on public health. It’s money we’re not spending on keeping our rivers and our streams and our lakes clean.”

Brown has made similar points on social media. In a May 22 post on X, Brown tied the Iran war to rising pressure on farmers.

Family farmers like Bob, Bill, and Pamela in Pleasant City just can’t keep up with the rising cost of gas, diesel, and fertilizer.

Instead of working to lower costs for Ohio farmers as they head into planting season, Jon Husted is voting to spend billions on the Iran war, and… pic.twitter.com/1faBTwGB4i

— Sherrod Brown (@SherrodBrown) May 22, 2026

Besides the details – such as the name of the invaded country — Brown’s talking points sound like they could have been delivered in the 2000s. 

As a U.S House member in 2003, Brown regularly took to reading anti-war letters from constituents from the U.S. House floor. The year before, Brown had voted against authorizing then-President George W. Bush to invade Iraq. 

“Bring back the troops… Spend the $87 billion and more at home for schools, health care, basic infrastructure,” Brown said in one October 2003 speech, quoting one constituent letter. “Take care of the people at home.”

While he challenged the Repuublican’s then-Sen. Mike DeWine in the 2006 election, Brown also framed the Iraq War as being at the expense of domestic priorities. 

There was a twist though – Brown said the money spent in Iraq instead could have been spent on hardening Ohio infrastructure against terrorist attacks, reflecting a major preoccupation and a potential vulnerability for Democrats at the time.

Polling shows parallels between 2026 and 2006

National polling has shown the Iran war is unpopular, with a national poll by YouGov taken from May 29-June 1 finding only 29% support how Trump is handling the situation there.

If those numbers hold, they are comparable to polling late in the 2006 election that saw Brown elected to the Senate in the first place. A New York Times / ABC News poll released on Nov. 1, 2006, found 29% approval for then-President George W. Bush’s handling of the Iraq War. 

Notably, the new poll also shows how Trump’s decision to attack Iran has divided his own voters after campaigning on an America First platform, which includes staying out of regional conflicts in the Middle East and elsewhere. The poll says 25% of 2024 Trump voters said they opposed the president’s handling of the war while 55% said they want the war to end as quickly as possible.

In response to a question from Signal Statewide following the brewery event, Brown declined to say whether he personally sees parallels in public sentiment between 2006 and 2026. But, he said voters are angry.

“People are mad about everything,” Brown said**.** “They’re mad about prices. They’re mad about this war. They’re mad about tax cuts for the rich and cuts in health care, they see a government that’s betrayed them.”

Husted: The public “understands how complex this is”

In early public comments, Husted described the war as going “much better than anybody thought it would” shortly after it began. He’s also described how the resulting spike in gas prices has been hard on everyday Ohioans.

And the war has dragged on, Husted has described the challenge as twofold: trying to ensure the Trump Administration achieves its main justification for launching the war by  removing Iran’s ability to develop a nuclear weapon, while reopening oil shipments in the Persian Gulf disrupted by the conflict.

In an interview with Signal Statewide this week, Husted made the case that the public sees nuance in the issue. 

“I think they want the Strait of Hormuz open,” Husted said, referencing the body of water that Iran has blocked since the war’s start, causing worldwide oil prices to spike and choking shipments of other goods as well. “They want gas prices down. But they also want to make sure that Iran does not become a nuclear threat.” 

Husted portrays the voter sentiment as “They want us to do both… and those can be accomplished.”

For months, Husted has said he expects the war in Iran to be “brief and successful,” and he’s said he regularly shares that view with the Trump Administration.

In his conversation with Signal Statewide, Husted wouldn’t say at what point the war will have dragged on for too long, or if he thinks it’s close to ending.

“I know that I know that that’s what they’re trying to accomplish on a daily basis, hourly, minute, minute to minute basis,” Husted said. “The challenge for Iran is that they’re not of one mind. Their leaders are hiding in bunkers underground. It’s not easy to have negotiations with people like that.” 

Husted also would not address how the war may affect this year’s election. Instead, he tried to argue that Brown shares blame for Iran’s status as a sponsor of proxy groups like Hezbollah that have attacked U.S. military and civilian targets. He also criticized Brown for supporting anti-climate change policies that he said have driven up electricity prices.

“Sherrod Brown was here for 32 years, he didn’t address these issues. Iran became a bigger sponsor of state terrorism during his time in Congress,” Husted said.

“I believe that Ohioans understand all that,” Husted added. “Every time I have a conversation with a constituent, they definitely understand how complex it is.”

Signal Ohio is a nonprofit news organization covering government, education, health, economy and public safety.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

A powerful state senator asked that his local police chief file criminal charges against a political blogger, leading to an eventual arrest and formal accusation of telecommunications harassment, new records show.

The email from Sen. Jerry Cirino, a Lake County Republican, details three text messages he received from D.J. Byrnes, who runs The Rooster, a progressive newsletter. The text messages include Byrnes’ political commentary, him calling Cirino his oft-repeated and derisive nickname “Young Mussolini,” and Byrnes plugging his own newsletter. 

It also contains a digitally altered version of Shrek, the ogre with a titular children’s movie franchise, with his penis exposed. An affidavit with Byrnes’ arrest report refers to the depiction of Shrek as “fully nude with an exposed and erect humanlike penis engaged in an act of masturbation.” 

Byrnes sent the image to Cirino on May 6. Two days later, Cirino emailed Kirtland Police Chief Jeremy Fisher. He said Byrnes has “harassed” him in the past and he doesn’t want to see the “disgusting” and “pornographic” picture of Shrek. 

“I am officially filing a complaint and am asking that the Kirtland Police Department take appropriate actions since this occurred in Kirtland where I live,” Cirino wrote. “I would like this harassment to stop immediately and I would like charges filed against the individual.”

Byrnes was arrested Monday at the statehouse. He spent 23 hours incarcerated before posting bail. Telecommunications harassment is a first-degree misdemeanor, the most severe classification before felony level crimes. It’s punishable by up to six months in prison if the state can prove Byrnes knowingly made a telecommunication “with purpose to harass, intimidate, or abuse.”

Police detective read the Rooster archives

The police records identify Byrnes by name, but not Cirino. However, Signal Statewide can confirm Cirino is the recipient of the text messages based on the text messages themselves and other details within the police report. 

Cirino declined to comment Wednesday. In a previous interview Monday, he said he didn’t request that Byrnes be arrested but declined further comment. 

The involvement of a figure as powerful as Cirino – who as chairman of the Senate Finance committee wields outsize influence over Ohio’s roughly $100 billion state budget – triggers new scrutiny over charges filed against a political critic for his speech.

The police investigation amounted to little more than a Google search, according to details provided in an accompanying affidavit. The investigating officer, Detective Jake Scott, read one Rooster article (a paywall blocked nine more). The officer also read a profile of Byrnes that appeared in Columbus Monthly. 

“This article quoted Senate Director of Communications, John Fortney, labeling Byrnes as a ‘security threat,’” the police report states. 

The department requested an arrest warrant for Byrnes, which was granted by Judge Marisa Cornachio, whose campaign website includes an endorsement from Cirino. 

Max Littman, a Rooster contributor who has acted as a de facto Rooster spokesman since the arrest, declined to comment on the arrest reports. But he provided a copy of a statement from Byrnes, issued on Rooster letterhead including tagline “All Ohio’s depravity, all the time.”

“I believe that the facts presented in court will show that I’m innocent of the misdemeanor charge of telecommunications harassment,” Byrnes said. 

“On the advice of my legal counsel, Bill Livingston, I will not be commenting on the specifics of the allegations. The work of shining a light on the wretched and decaying underbelly of Ohio politics is too important to be sidetracked by this attempted interference.”

Signal Ohio is a nonprofit news organization covering government, education, health, economy and public safety.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The contributions, which appear in campaign finance records filed with the Federal Election Commission, came from Anatoly Yakovenko, the CEO and co-founder of Solana Labs, and Donald R. Wilson Jr., the founder and CEO of the Chicago trading firm DRW. Federal records list both donations at the per-candidate maximum for the 2025–2026 cycle.

What the FEC records show

FEC data shows Yakovenko, of Boulder, Colorado, contributed $7,000 to Max Miller for Congress on March 31, 2026, and that the committee refunded an additional $3,500 contribution from him the same day. Wilson, of Chicago, made two $3,500 contributions on March 10, 2026, for a total of $7,000. Combined, the two executives gave $14,000 — the limit each individual could contribute across the primary and general elections.

The contributions are legal and were publicly disclosed. There is no indication in the records of any agreement or exchange tied to the donations.

Solana’s Yakovenko is a named defendant in a civil racketeering case

Yakovenko is among the defendants added to a class-action lawsuit over the Pump.fun memecoin platform. In a consolidated amended complaint filed in July 2025 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, attorneys with Wolf Popper and Burwick Law expanded the case to name Solana Labs and its leadership, including Yakovenko, alleging violations of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO.

The amended complaint also asserts securities claims and alleged violations of New York General Business Law sections 349 and 350, which address deceptive business practices and false advertising. The RICO allegations are predicated on claims of illegal gambling, wire fraud, intellectual property theft and unlicensed money transmission.

The allegations are unproven. The case, Aguilar v. Baton Corp., remains in litigation, and the defendants have signaled they intend to contest the claims through motions to dismiss. A judge granted plaintiffs leave to file a further amended complaint in December 2025.

Wilson’s firm faced an SEC suit that was dismissed under Trump

The Securities and Exchange Commission sued Cumberland DRW, the crypto trading arm of Wilson’s firm, in October 2024, accusing it of operating as an unregistered dealer in more than $2 billion of crypto assets the agency considered securities. Cumberland disputed the charge and said it had previously tried to register.

In March 2025, after President Donald Trump returned to office, the SEC dismissed the case with prejudice. In its litigation release, the agency said the decision rested on its effort to “reform and renew its regulatory approach to the crypto industry,” and “not on any assessment of the merits of the claims alleged in the action.” The dismissal was one of several crypto enforcement cases the SEC dropped during that period.

According to the Financial Times and public filings, DRW Investments, the firm Wilson founded and controls, invested $100 million in Trump Media & Technology Group — the company behind Truth Social and controlled by the president’s family — about nine weeks after the dismissal, as part of a funding round for the group’s purchase of more than $2 billion in cryptocurrency.

Miller’s record on crypto legislation

The donations arrived as Miller has compiled a consistent record favoring lighter regulation of digital assets. In July 2025, he voted for the CLARITY Act, the digital-asset market structure bill (H.R. 3633), which passed the House 294–134.

The watchdog group Americans for Financial Reform described the bill in a July 2025 fact sheet as “pitifully weak and loophole-ridden” legislation that “will expose crypto investors — and the financial system and real economy — to growing risk, rampant fraud, and money laundering.” The bill drew bipartisan support, with most Democrats who opposed it citing investor-protection concerns.

In December 2025, Miller and Rep. Steven Horsford, D-Nev., both members of the House Ways and Means Committee, unveiled a bipartisan discussion draft of the Digital Asset PARITY Act. The proposal would exempt routine consumer purchases of up to $200 made with regulated, dollar-pegged stablecoins from capital gains tax, among other changes to how digital assets are taxed. Miller has framed the measure as consumer protection, saying it “protects consumers making everyday purchases” and brings “clarity, parity, fairness, and common sense” to digital-asset taxation.

Miller credits the industry with making him ‘passionate’

Speaking about the PARITY Act at the DC Blockchain Summit on March 18, 2026, Miller credited the cryptocurrency industry with shaping his views. “I came into Congress, you should probably looked at my background. I’m not a big crypto guy,” he said. “But it’s all of you who educated me to get to this point … It’s because of your industry and people like you as to why I’m up here passionate about cryptocurrency. So thank you for taking the time in your community to educate me as we continue to work on a piece of legislation, when you are the subject matter experts.”

At a Blockchain Association policy summit in December 2025, Miller singled out the previous administration as an obstacle to the industry, saying the “only one who is really hostile toward it” during his time as a member and as a congressional staffer “was really President Biden and his administration.”

Miller, a former senior aide in the first Trump administration, was first elected in 2022 and is running for reelection in 2026.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The theater said the schedule reflects bookings confirmed to date and that additional performers may be added during the season. The Ritz is at 30 S. Washington St.; the box office can be reached at 419-448-8544 or at ritztheatre.org.

Concerts and national acts

• Chris Janson — Friday, Oct. 2, 2026, 7:30 p.m. Country singer, songwriter and multi-instrumentalist known for “Buy Me a Boat” and “Good Vibes.”

• Golden Girls: The Laughs Continue — Sunday, Oct. 4, 2026, 2 p.m. A parody stage show written by Robert Leleux that reimagines the “Golden Girls” characters in the present day.

• John Anderson — Oct. 26, 2026, 7:30 p.m. (day of week to be confirmed — see note). Country singer associated with the early-1980s “new traditionalist” movement, known for “Swingin’” and “Straight Tequila Night.”

• Greg West: The Ultimate Aldean Experience — Friday, Nov. 6, 2026, 7:30 p.m. A Jason Aldean tribute act.

• The Super Tramps: A Tribute to Supertramp — Saturday, Jan. 16, 2027, 7:30 p.m. A nine-piece Minneapolis-based tribute band.

• LMOA Comedy Fest — Saturday, Jan. 23, 2027, 7:30 p.m. The Ritz’s annual stand-up showcase.

• The StepCrew — Friday, March 5, 2027, 7:30 p.m. A dance production blending Irish stepdancing, Ottawa Valley stepdancing and modern tap, backed by a live band.

• Jake Hoot — March 16, 2027, 7:30 p.m. (day of week to be confirmed — see note). Country singer and the Season 17 (2019) winner of NBC’s “The Voice,” who returned to compete on the 2026 season, “The Voice: Battle of Champions.”

• Warrant: Turn Up the Good Times Tour — Saturday, April 10, 2027, 7:30 p.m. The glam-metal band known for “Cherry Pie” and “Heaven,” fronted by Robert Mason.

• 3 Redneck Tenors — Friday, April 16, 2027, 7:30 p.m. A musical-comedy trio pairing classically trained vocals with comedy.

• Thomas Pandolfi — May 27, 2027, 7:30 p.m. (day of week to be confirmed — see note). A Juilliard-trained concert pianist.

Ritz Players community theater

The Ritz Players, the theater’s community stage company, will present four productions, each with public audition dates.

• “Come From Away” — Oct. 17, 18, 24 and 25, 2026; auditions Aug. 2 and 3, 2026. The musical by Irene Sankoff and David Hein, based on the true story of airline passengers grounded in Gander, Newfoundland, after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

• “Almost, Maine” — Feb. 12, 13, 19, 20 and 21, 2027; auditions Jan. 3 and 4, 2027. John Cariani’s romantic comedy of nine interconnected short plays.

• “The Laramie Project” — May 7, 8, 15 and 16, 2027; auditions March 21 and 22, 2027. The documentary play by Moisés Kaufman and the Tectonic Theater Project, drawn from interviews conducted after the 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard in Laramie, Wyoming.

• “Something Rotten!” — July 16, 17, 24 and 25, 2027; auditions May 23 and 24, 2027. The Tony-nominated musical comedy set in 1595.

Teen Theaspian Guild

The Ritz Teen Theaspian Guild will stage two one-act plays in repertory Nov. 21–23, 2026:

• “American History in 60,” a comedic one-act by Jeremy Desmon — Nov. 21 and 22 at 7:30 p.m. and Nov. 23 at 2 p.m.

• “Vote?,” an educational time-travel drama by Eric Coble — Nov. 21 and 22 at 8:30 p.m. and Nov. 23 at 3 p.m.

Friday Night Live and classic films

Friday Night Live is an unplugged series featuring regional performers, held Fridays at 7:30 p.m. on Oct. 23, Nov. 13 and Dec. 18, 2026, and on Jan. 15, Feb. 5, March 12, April 9 and May 14, 2027.

Monday Night at the Movies screens classic films Mondays at 7 p.m.:

• “Come Back, Little Sheba” (1952) — Oct. 19, 2026

• “The Fountainhead” (1949) — Nov. 23, 2026

• “The Shop Around the Corner” (1940) — Dec. 14, 2026

• “A Star Is Born” (1954) — Jan. 11, 2027

• “Arsenic and Old Lace” (1944) — Feb. 15, 2027

• “I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang” (1932) — March 22, 2027

• “Vertigo” (1958) — April 12, 2027

• “Bringing Up Beauty” (1938) — May 17, 2027 (title to be confirmed — see note)

Tickets

On-sale dates are tentative, the theater said. Subscription renewals are set to begin July 13, new subscriptions July 27, flex packages of three or more shows Aug. 3, and single-event tickets Aug. 10. Ticket prices, subscription packages and sponsors are to be announced before July 13.

For information, contact the Ritz Theatre box office at 30 S. Washington St. in downtown Tiffin, call 419-448-8544 or visit ritztheatre.org.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

If at least 60% of Ohio House members sign off, voters will weigh the proposal this November.

Speaking after the vote, Senate President Rob McColley, predicted the easy passage if it makes it to the ballot.

“It’s going to be very well supported by the voters,” McColley said, “and I expect that it will pass overwhelmingly, because this is the type of protection that voters want to see in the system.

Although photo voter ID is extremely popular, the last-minute amendment push is a head-scratcher for some. Critics contend Republicans are advancing the amendment to boost turnout in an unfavorable election cycle. Republican leaders deny that’s the case.

The proposal has drawn sharp criticism from different sides of the electoral policy debate.

Voting rights advocates note the proposal only reiterates state law. Nothing about the current voting process would change if the amendment were to pass. But the amendment would make future changes harder, and by leaving out a statutory provision guaranteeing a free ID card, the proposal might draw legal challenges as a poll tax.

Meanwhile, Ohioans pushing for greater restrictions on voting oppose the amendment because it doesn’t go far enough. They’re calling for legislation requiring absentee voters to include a photocopy of their ID along with their ballot, and worry the amendment could scuttle that effort.

They’ve urged lawmakers to amend the resolution to extend photo ID requirements to absentee ballot. Lawmakers have largely balked at the idea — what good is a photo ID if you don’t have the voter standing in front of you?

In committee and on the Senate floor, Democrats offered a flurry of amendments of their own. Why not expand the list of acceptable documents or explicitly allow lawmakers to update the list? Couldn’t the amendment leave room for future electronic forms of ID? How about including a provision to ensure Ohioans can get a free ID card? Perhaps most significant, if state law requires an unexpired, government issued ID, why not allow same day voter registration?

The GOP-majority committee tabled each one in turn.

Floor debate

The resolution’s sponsors defended their proposal as a way to ensure “the longterm security of our elections,” and ensure “a government-issued photo ID is the default in Ohio elections.” Ohio state Sen. Jane Timken, R-North Canton, pointed to Virginia as “a cautionary tale.”

“After several years of operation, surviving judicial challenges, Virginia repealed its photo ID requirements in 2020 after a single seat in the General Assembly flipped,” Timken said. “And this was despite being overwhelmingly supported by the voters.”

Although Virginia does allow voters to prove their identity with documents like a utility bill or a bank statement, most voters still show a photo ID. A 2021 review of several large localities by The Virginia Mercury showed only about .05% of voters cast a ballot without showing an ID.

Ohio state Sen. Willis Blackshear, D-Dayton, criticized Republicans for turning down Democrats’ amendments.

“The general response was, well, those provisions are already in statute,” he said. “Well, photo ID’s already in statute. So then the question becomes, if we believe photo ID is important enough to enshrine in the Constitution, then why not include those protections?”

Ohio state Sen. Kent Smith, D-Euclid, said the election security concerns behind the GOP’s push for ever more stringent election policies are bogus. Since 2008, he said, 22 million people have voted in the state, but there have been just 18 charges of voter fraud in the same timeframe.

“Phony voting just is not happening very much at all in the state of Ohio,” he said. “In-person voter fraud is less common than UFO sightings, or more importantly, Bigfoot sightings in Portage County.”

Senate passage & next steps

The resolution advanced easily, 22 to 9, but Republican support wasn’t universal.

Ohio state Sen. Andrew Brenner, R-Delaware, said he’d prefer to include photo ID requirements for absentee voters, but he decided support the measure anyway. Brenner compared the resolution’s incremental progress to Ohio State football coach Woody Hayes’ “three yards and a cloud of dust.”

President McColley insisted the amendment “leaves the door open” for future legislatures to make changes like a requiring photo ID for absentee voting. But Ohio state Sen. Al Cutrona, R-Canfield, couldn’t get past his reservations.

“When you mail in your ballot, you should have to have some type of form of ID. Unfortunately, I don’t see that here, and that raises major concerns for me,” he said. “I think this is creating a loophole within our own constitution if this is indeed passed.”

Cutrona said he’d urge House members to “strengthen” the resolution’s provisions.

The House committee hearing the companion measure, House Joint Resolution 9, has yet to advance the proposal. Some committee members, including the chair, Ohio state Rep. Sharon Ray, R-Wadsworth, have expressed skepticism about a photo ID requirement for absentee ballots.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The Senate Education Committee held its second hearing on Ohio House Bill 25, a bipartisan bill to bolster education resources for foster care children from public K-12 schools all the way to higher education.

Kisha Boone, a foster parent and advocacy coordinator for the Junior League of Columbus, said that school often provides stability.

“For students in foster care, school can be the one steady place left: the counselor who feels like family, the teacher who knows the child can succeed, the (Individualized Education Program) team that understands a disability, the sibling in the same building even when siblings are living apart, or the friend group that makes a child want to show up,” Boone said.

The bill, which overwhelmingly passed the Ohio House in March, would require leadership at the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce to work with other state agencies “to encourage the sharing of best practices to support students placed in foster care,” according to an analysis by the Legislative Service Commission.

Public schools in Ohio would be required to designate a staff member as a “foster family navigator” in each school building, and the state Department of Education and Workforce must develop a training for those navigators and foster care education liaisons, under the bill.

The chancellor of the state’s higher education agency would be required to post “any scholarship opportunities specifically for students placed in foster care that are available at each state institution of higher education,” if the bill passes.

For Lilly Zetting, a child who was separated from her two younger brothers when they entered the foster care system, having a system in place that helps a child have a steady education and plan for the future can create longterm success.

“I have friends who had to leave schools they loved, even when they were doing well, because of placement changes,” Zetting told the committee on June 2. “I also know adults who work closely with foster children and have seen how often young people struggle later in life because they moved homes and schools so many times.”

Sponsors of the bill say foster children experience some of the worst education outcomes in the state, struggling to get through school without guidance that other children might receive.

Bill co-sponsor state Rep. Dontavius Jarrells, D-Columbus, said more than 15,000 children are in foster care in Ohio.

“Thousands of them are school-aged youth navigating trauma, instability, and uncertainty while still being expected to learn, grow, and prepare for adulthood,” he told the Senate committee when introducing the bill in May.

The National Foster Youth Institute found that only 3% to 4% of former foster youth obtain a four-year college degree, and high school dropout rates among foster youth are higher than other low-income children.

More than 40% of foster children in America face “educational difficulties,” according to the institute.

Hearing from children in the foster care system helped bill co-sponsor state Rep. Sharon Ray, R-Wadsworth, realize “our system was broken,” and the stories “were the catalyst needed to fix our current system.”

H.B. 25 outlines the roles of Ohio’s Department of Education and Workforce, Department of Children and Youth, Department of Higher Education, and Department of Job and Family Services “to work together in an accountable fashion to ensure needed resources are made available and utilized to support our foster care youth in their education journey,” according to Ray.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

Honestly, I can’t go half a day without someone bringing up data centers. A phrase that seems wonky and technical has captured public imagination in a surprising way in 2026.

This isn’t just my experience, either. Google Trends data shows the exponential growth in the search term “data centers” in Ohio over the past year. Ohio residents googled the term “data centers” 10 times more in May 2026 than they did a year earlier.

What is driving this rising interest in data centers in Ohio and beyond?

One explanation is environmental impact. Many are concerned about the impact of data centers on local water supply, a concern that has made a lot of headway in social media circles.

Another is electricity prices. Many fear the increased demand for electricity to power data centers will lead to higher prices for consumers. In an era of fears of growing problems with affordability and an economy that is still living in the shadow of 9% inflation in 2022, anything that could lead to higher prices still poses an area of concern for consumers.

Members of the public are also concerned about public investment in data centers. Ohio created a framework for economic development incentives for data centers over a decade ago in the Kasich administration’s first budget bill. Two years later, the incentive was expanded to more data centers. A recent story by Signal Ohio reported Ohio’s sales tax exemption for data centers ballooned from a projected $136 million in deferred sales taxes to $555 million in 2024 and $1.6 billion in 2025. A recent poll of Ohio economists conducted by my firm Scioto Analysis found only one of 14 economists believing tax incentives for data centers were an efficient strategy for job creation.

Another factor driving public interest in data centers is community change. Many of these arguments sound a lot like community opposition to solar panels or wind turbines, with people saying they are ugly or change the character or tenor of a neighborhood. For people who see a number of data centers crop up in their neighborhood in a short period of time, this sort of change can be shocking.

A final reason people are worried about the proliferation of data centers comes from a broader concern: social change. I was on a panel with social critic Michael Clune and tech consultant Nicole Jackson hosted by workforce strategy organization ASPYR last month. One thing that stuck with me that Clune said was that polling around adoption of the internet when it appeared in the 1990s was optimistic, even as few people were using it. This trend has been reversed with artificial intelligence: the technology is seeing rapid adoption, and the public is generally pessimistic about it. A viral speech from a Ravenna City Council meeting given against approval of a data center by a former programmer captures this sentiment well.

The truth is that each of these areas of concern for the public have shades of grey. Data centers impact the environment, but not nearly as much as agriculture or transportation. They impact energy prices, though these impacts can be mitigated by construction of new power generation projects to support them. Data centers and AI will change our communities and our society, but our communities and society are changing with these particular changes or without them.

But Ohio lawmakers can decide whether they want to spend billions of dollars on projects that are likely to happen without those incentives. Last week, Representative Tristan Rader and ten other members of the Ohio House of Representatives introduced legislation to phase out the data center subsidy starting later this year, leaving new data centers to the whims of market forces. While this change would not curtail all concerns with data center development in the state, it would at the very least give a chance for data center development to come a little closer to what an efficient market would provide.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

Abortion funds can help when someone must travel from their home state to a state where care is available. That often includes people living in one of the 13 states with a near-total abortion ban, but it also encompasses those who need to travel because of gestational limits in other states. Funds, which often come exclusively from donations, help pay for the cost of the abortion procedure as well as transportation costs, lodging, meals and other expenses.

In the four years since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health case, abortion fund leaders say the need for assistance has exploded. Poonam Dreyfus-Pai, interim executive director of the National Network of Abortion Funds, said Monday that the funds supported more than 158,000 people in 2025, up from 82,000 in 2022. And the cost per person has doubled from less than $200 to nearly $400 on average nationwide.

Dreyfus-Pai said about one-third of the abortion funds in their network reported that they had to pause their hotline services in 2025 because of funding shortages, staff burnout, legal barriers, security concerns and other issues.

“We’re seeing that this year is even harder for funds, with many more funds needing to temporarily close their doors to stretch their funding, and some even closing permanently,” Dreyfus-Pai said.

In Virginia, Blue Ridge Abortion Fund Executive Director April Greene said more than one-quarter of their callers traveled from out of state in the current fiscal year. Greene said the fund has distributed more than $6.1 million in funding since it was founded in 1989, but more than $4 million of that came after the Dobbs decision.  

Melisa Hidalgo-Cuellar, director of Colorado’s Cobalt Abortion Fund, said her organization saw a 1,000% increase in spending for abortion seekers from 2021 to 2025, supporting patients from 32 states and six countries. The fund spent $2.4 million to support abortion seekers in 2025, compared with $206,000 spent in 2021, before Dobbs. Many of the fund’s out-of-state clients are from Texas, which has a near-total ban and other civil enforcement laws related to abortion.

The spending rose another 26% in the first three months of 2026, at least in part because of rising fuel costs associated with the ongoing conflict in Iran and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, and recent price increases for food and other services. The total spent in the first quarter of 2025 was about $465,000, while the total in the first quarter of 2026 was nearly $590,000. 

“We saw a 44% increase in how much we spent on flights in March of 2025 to March of 2026,” Hidalgo-Cuellar said. “So it’s a significant increase.”  

The airfare costs can be especially high because when funds receive a help request, the caller usually needs to travel within a few days. Ginnely Carrasco, director of programs and interim executive director of the Florida Access Network, said the quick travel window can increase a ticket’s price by $500 to $700.

According to a report published Tuesday, the Cobalt Abortion Fund also spent $23,000 in the first quarter of this year to support access to abortion medication by telehealth. Continued access via telehealth to mifepristone, one of two drugs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to terminate a pregnancy before 10 weeks, is threatened by an ongoing lawsuit filed by the state of Louisiana in 2025. 

The U.S. Supreme Court preserved the rule allowing telehealth prescriptions for now, but the case is ongoing.

Stateline reporter Kelcie Moseley-Morris can be reached at kmoseley@stateline.org.

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Ohio Capital Journal, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The new interim rule, issued by the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, is intended to give states more details on how they’re supposed to verify the work status for about 20 million adults enrolled in Medicaid, the publicly funded health insurance program for people with low incomes.

The new details come as states are staring down the January 1, 2027, deadline to put the new work requirements in place, and have requested more clarity from the feds on how they’re supposed to implement them.

“States are being asked to carry out a complicated federal mandate without clear rules, without enough time, and with the risk that eligible people lose health care because of paperwork problems and system failures,” Oregon Democratic Gov. Tina Kotek said last week in a statement.

Kotek led a six-state coalition of Democratic governors in asking the Trump administration last week to slow the rollout of the new work requirements, calling the timeline unworkable.

Congress built the new work requirements into last year’s so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Under the measure, states that have expanded Medicaid eligibility to more adults under the Affordable Care Act — 40 states plus the District of Columbia and another two that have partially expanded — will have to require those adults to prove they’re working, going to school or serving their communities for at least 80 hours a month to receive Medicaid.

The rules released this week are intended to clarify key parts of the new law, including exemptions for people who are considered “medically frail,” how to reach out to Medicaid beneficiaries, and methods for verifying Medicaid eligibility.

“This rule helps Americans build skills and independence through work, education, job training, or community service, creating new opportunities for themselves and their families,” said Dr. Mehmet Oz, director for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, in a statement announcing the new guidance.

But critics of work requirements point to evidence that it kicks people off Medicaid who are otherwise entitled to it without meaningfully increasing the share of adults who are working.

For example, Arkansas tried instituting work requirements for Medicaid recipients during Trump’s first term in 2018. By the time a federal judge halted the policy less than a year later, 18,000 adults had already lost coverage and reported problems paying off medical debt, delaying healthcare and delaying medications due to cost. Studies later found that Arkansas’ work requirements didn’t increase employment. And data shows that most adults on Medicaid under age 65 are already working.

Supporters say the new requirements are flexible. They say the feds have created a broad category of “medically frail” people who are exempt from the work requirements, and they’re permitting states to allow people to self-attest that they’re exempt one time before documentation is required.

The new work requirements will apply to about 20 million people who are eligible for Medicaid through expansion, according to estimates from health research organization KFF. These expansion enrollees make up about 30% of all Medicaid enrollees.

A recent analysis from the Urban Institute projects that 3-7 million people could lose coverage because of the new work requirements.

Stateline reporter Anna Claire Vollers can be reached at avollers@stateline.org.

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Ohio Capital Journal, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The directive contradicts the Trump administration’s notice to physicians last year cautioning against the use of the primary pain reliever recommended for pregnant women, following the president’s unsupported claims that the medication could lead to autism in children.

The national professional association for maternal-fetal medicine specialists, clinicians and scientists continues to recommend acetaminophen as the “first-line medication” to treat pain and fever during pregnancy. The federal government’s statements prompted the organization to review its 2017 guidance finding acetaminophen safe to use during pregnancy. 

“Although some studies have reported associations between maternal acetaminophen use and adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes in offspring, methodological limitations preclude conclusions about causality, and the biological mechanism for such an effect remains unestablished,” reads the statement, following a comprehensive review of recent and historical scientific literature. 

The organization’s guidance cautions patients to “use the lowest effective dose of acetaminophen for the shortest duration necessary,” while emphasizing that untreated maternal fever carries well-documented risks to the fetus, especially in the first trimester.

At a news conference last September, President Donald Trump said his administration had found acetaminophen use during pregnancy to be a likely contributing environmental cause of autism. 

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has directed the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to shift its research into autism toward potential environmental causes. 

Even though medical experts and the drug manufacturer have said there is no proven link, the FDA immediately said it would initiate a process for a label change for Tylenol and similar products to “reflect evidence suggesting that the use of acetaminophen by pregnant women may be associated with an increased risk of neurological conditions such as autism and ADHD in children.”

The label has not yet changed. But the September news conference has had consequences.  

A month later, Texas’ Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is running for U.S. Senate, sued Johnson and Johnson, alleging the pharmaceutical company failed to warn pregnant consumers about the risk of taking Tylenol.

And a study in The Lancet published in March found that emergency department orders for acetaminophen for pregnant patients fell 10% in the months following Trump’s statement, while there was no change in the acetaminophen orders for comparable women who were not pregnant.

Stateline reporter Sofia Resnick can be reached at sresnick@stateline.org. 

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Ohio Capital Journal, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The update was one of two utility presentations at the meeting, where council also passed four ordinances, gave first readings to three others and scheduled a public hearing on next year’s tax budget.

Gas-main work coming to the east side

Katie Rosa, a public affairs specialist with Columbia Gas of Ohio, said the company’s Coe Street Accelerated Main Replacement Program will cover a large portion of the city’s eastern half. The program replaces older cast-iron and bare-steel pipe — some of it in the ground since the 1950s and 1960s, Rosa said — with plastic line the company expects to last more than 100 years.

Most of the project area will receive full mainline and service-line replacement along with meter relocation, Rosa said. Two areas, Rosa Street and Hedgegate Court, will see mainline upgrades only, with service-line replacements decided case by case.

Miller Pipeline will serve as the contractor, with crews carrying photo identification on themselves, their vehicles and their equipment, she said. Mainline work is completed first, followed by appointment-based service-line installations that typically run two to four hours. Because crews must enter the home to complete service-line work and relight gas appliances, someone 18 or older must be present for each appointment. Rosa said most homes will also need their meter relocated to comply with state and federal regulations adopted over the past five to 10 years.

Rosa said she did not yet have pre-construction dates and expected to share them after a scheduling call the following day. She estimated the project would begin around mid-July.

She also said the company’s ongoing Noble Street project is nearly finished. Mainline installation on Monroe between Noble and Hudson and on Erie between Noble and Water was wrapping up, she said, with the new mainline set to be energized at midweek and service-line installations on Noble and Webster to follow later in the week.

Bulk cleanup week set for June 15–19

Blake Austin, a municipal and public sector specialist for Rumpke, reminded council that the city’s annual bulk cleanup week runs June 15 through 19. He said residents are asked to limit set-outs to five items per household, plastic-wrap any upholstered furniture so crews can load it safely, and have Freon removed from refrigerators before disposal. Car batteries and other hazardous materials should not be placed at the curb, he said. Yard waste and tree limbs are not part of the cleanup and are handled as regular trash.

Austin also urged residents not to throw away lithium-ion batteries, or batteries of any kind, saying they can cause fires in collection trucks and at disposal facilities. He pointed residents to the Ottawa-Sandusky-Seneca Solid Waste District, which holds household hazardous-waste collection events. Registration and information are available at RecycleOSS.org or by phone at 419-334-7222.

Council action: easements, intern pay, budget

Council passed four ordinances unanimously, each on a 7-0 vote after suspending its three-reading rule.

Ordinance 2026-36, introduced by Councilmember John Hays, authorizes the mayor to enter into permanent stormwater easements with various property owners. Hays said the agreements provide for ongoing inspection, maintenance and repair tied to infrastructure improvements.

Ordinance 2026-39, also introduced by Hays, authorizes the mayor to accept an easement from Tiffin RA LLC for public use of sidewalks on Wentz Street. Hays said the company is awaiting permits before work begins, which he cited as the reason for immediate passage.

Ordinance 2026-40, introduced by Councilmember Kevin Roessner, amends the city pay ordinance to set pay for a law-office intern. Law Director Zach Fowler said his office plans to bring on a law-school student as an intern and that the part-time position is already covered in the budget. The measure was passed as an emergency.

Ordinance 2026-42, also introduced by Roessner, amends the 2026 budget to appropriate $10,769.95 to the street maintenance department and $50 to the police department. Finance Director Jill Lindhorst said the street maintenance figure reflects three insurance-claim checks the city received. Roessner thanked Tiffin Women in Action for the donation to the Tiffin Police Department.

Three ordinances received first readings without a vote: Ordinance 2026-37, a sanitary sewer easement with Trilogy Real Estate Tiffin LLC; Ordinance 2026-38, a sanitary and stormwater sewer easement with the Seneca Industrial and Economic Development Corporation; and Ordinance 2026-41, which would adopt a tax budget for fiscal year 2027 and direct the finance director to deliver it to the Seneca County Auditor.

Council President Bridget Boyle announced a public hearing on the fiscal year 2027 tax budget for 7 p.m. June 15, the date of the next regular council meeting.

Progress Parkway TIF and a new confidentiality law

In other business, Councilmember Kyle Daugherty, who chairs the Law and Community Planning Committee, said the committee did not need to meet on the mayor’s request for legislation regarding a tax increment financing arrangement for Progress Parkway because it had previously discussed the matter. He asked the law director to prepare the legislation. Tax increment financing, or TIF, redirects future property-tax revenue generated by a property’s increased value toward public infrastructure or development costs.

Fowler also told council about a recent change in state law affecting how the city handles economic-development records. He said an amendment to Ohio Revised Code Section 9.66 makes paperwork tied to economic-development assistance programs — such as Community Reinvestment Area applications and items going before the Tax Incentive Review Council — confidential rather than public record. The provision, enacted through House Bill 184 and effective March 20, 2026, classifies information submitted by applicants for economic-development assistance as not a public record under Ohio’s public records law. Fowler said the confidentiality applies while applications are being processed and that the handling differs once items formally come before council. He noted the Ohio Municipal League is holding a seminar on the change June 9.

Mayor’s town hall

Earlier in the meeting, Mayor Lee Wilkinson reminded residents of a town hall he is hosting at 6:30 p.m. Thursday, June 4, at the Tiffin-Seneca Public Library, where he said he would take questions from the public.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The annual outing brings together alumni, community members, local businesses and supporters of TU Athletics for a day of golf benefiting Tiffin University student-athletes. According to the university, proceeds help fund the student-athlete experience through investments in facilities, travel and apparel.

Participants will play 18 holes while enjoying food and beverages on the course. The day will also feature games and contests with prizes, followed by awards. Tiffin University coaches and athletic staff will be present throughout. Skins and mulligans will be available for purchase at check-in, and participants are encouraged to bring cash or be prepared for day-of payment options.

Team and individual registrations, along with sponsorship opportunities, are available through June 8. The university says sponsorships give businesses and organizations community visibility while directly supporting TU student-athletes and athletic programs.

“The Annual Golf Outing is a memorable and enjoyable day for the Tiffin University Athletic Department. Every year it gets better and better and this year will be no exception,” said Kelly Daniel, assistant vice president for athletics and director of athletics at Tiffin University. “We look forward to great camaraderie and the opportunity to share Dragon Nation with all who are a part of this special day. The golf outing is an integral part of our athletic success for our department and our students.”

Mohawk Golf and Country Club, a Donald Ross–designed course in Seneca County, serves as the home course for Tiffin University.

Additional event details and registration information are available through the university’s event page at my.onecause.com.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The 215-208 vote, in which four Republicans voted with all Democrats to adopt the resolution, is the strongest rebuke to date against Trump’s handling of the months-long war that has left more than a dozen military troops dead, killed thousands of Iranian civilians and disrupted global supply chains of fertilizer and oil with the blockage of the Strait of Hormuz. 

Republican Reps. Tom Barrett of Michigan, Warren Davidson of Ohio, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania and Thomas Massie of Kentucky voted in favor.

The War Powers Resolution nearly passed the House last month, but failed on a 212-212 tie. The measure is a tool for Congress to limit the president’s ability to initiate or escalate military actions.

Several similar efforts in the Senate have failed. However, following the Republican primary loss of Sen. Bill Cassidy, the Louisianan joined with Democrats and several GOP senators in a vote to move the measure forward. A vote on final passage on the Senate measure has not been scheduled.

Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, sponsored the resolution in that chamber.

Michigan Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib has a separate War Powers Resolution that would force the president to withdraw troops from Lebanon. Israel, with weapons and funding from the United States, has launched an assault on that nation.

The passage of the resolution in the GOP-controlled House was the latest sign of growing dissent against Trump among congressional Republicans. 

Senate Republicans balked at Trump’s effort to create a nearly $1.8 billion fund to pay people who believe they were wrongly prosecuted by the Justice Department, including those who were convicted and later pardoned by the president for attacking the U.S. Capitol in January 2021. 

The Trump administration backed away from the fund after disputes over it halted work on legislation to fund immigration and deportation activities for the rest of the president’s second term.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

Nathaniel H. Cain, 23, faces a single count of strangulation, a third-degree felony, in Seneca County Common Pleas Court. The Ohio State Highway Patrol confirmed that Cain was employed as a trooper at the time of the alleged offense.

“The Patrol took immediate action upon learning of the allegations,” the agency told TiffinOhio.net. “The employee has since been terminated. The conduct alleged does not reflect the values of this agency.”

Cain was assigned to the Patrol’s Norwalk post.

The charge stems from an incident on Tuesday, May 19, at the couple’s Tiffin home. According to a sworn complaint, Cain’s girlfriend reported that the two had a verbal argument during which Cain grabbed her jaw and squeezed, breaking one of her lower teeth.

When she tried to lie down, the complaint states, he grabbed her neck and squeezed for about seven seconds. The officer who took the report wrote that he saw redness on the front of her neck and injuries to her lower lip and tooth. The woman, whom TiffinOhio.net is not naming, reported that she had lived with Cain since October 2025 and that the two were in a romantic relationship.

The complaint was sworn by Tiffin Police Sgt. Joseph P. Feld.

Strangulation became a stand-alone felony in Ohio in April 2023 under Senate Bill 288; before the change, such cases were typically charged as misdemeanor assault or domestic violence.

The woman reported the incident in person at the Tiffin Police Department.

The sergeant assigned to the case took her report at the station, so no body-worn or cruiser-camera video of the report exists, Tiffin Police Lt. Jason Windsor told TiffinOhio.net in response to a public records request.

Windsor said the Highway Patrol took Cain into custody when he arrived at his post for duty and may have recorded his arrest and transport. TiffinOhio.net has a pending records request with OSHP for additional information.

Cain was charged on Wednesday, May 20, and his bond was set at $75,000 with conditions. The case is before Common Pleas Judge Damon D. Alt, and Seneca County Prosecutor Derek W. DeVine’s office is prosecuting.

Cain was initially assigned appointed counsel; attorney Dean Henry later entered an appearance and asked the court to lower the bond, but that request was denied. Cain waived a preliminary hearing on Thursday, May 28, and posted bond the same day through a bail bonding company. The case remains pending.

A criminal charge is an allegation. Cain is presumed innocent unless and until he is convicted in court.

Editor’s Note: Cain was previously placed on unpaid administrative leave, according to an OSHP statement Wednesday. On Thursday, OSHP told TiffinOhio.net Cain’s employment had been terminated.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche testified Tuesday before a House committee the DOJ will no longer move forward with those plans shortly after Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, said the administration had reversed course. 

That decision could clear the way for the Senate to debate a roughly $70 billion package meant to fund immigration and deportation for the rest of President Donald Trump’s term. 

“I think his statements are going to be very definitive, very clear and create the certainty that I hope all of our members, and House members need as well, in order for us to proceed on the reconciliation bill,” Thune said, referring to Blanche. “But I’m not guaranteeing that happens yet.” 

Blanche confirmed Thune’s statements when he testified before a House Appropriations subcommittee in the afternoon.

“We’re not moving forward with the fund, period,” Blanche said when pressed by the subcommittee’s top Democrat, Rep. Grace Meng of New York.

“You and Associate Attorney General Woodward signed earlier documents regarding the settlement and this fund, would both of you now sign and release documents reversing the DOJ position on the fund?” Meng asked.

“We’re not moving forward with the fund. I’m not sure what that means to sign documents reversing. There’s nothing to reverse,” Blanche replied.

The DOJ posted on social media this week that it plans to abide by a temporary court ruling that blocked distribution of the funds, but Republican lawmakers said that wasn’t enough to end the impasse it created.

The Justice Department announced the creation of the fund last month as part of a legal settlement between Trump and the IRS over leaked copies of his returns during Trump’s first term. The settlement included provisions that precluded future IRS investigations into Trump and his family.

Senate Republicans weigh in

Thune said GOP senators had a “quite robust conversation” during a closed-door lunch about the DOJ fund and whether to move forward with their immigration and deportation package. 

North Dakota Sen. John Hoeven said after that meeting it’s up to GOP leaders to determine whether there are enough votes to move forward with the immigration package. 

“I think the next step is for our whip team to find out where everybody’s at based on the administration’s indication that they’re not going to move forward with the fund,” Hoeven said. 

Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy said there is a “chance” that Republicans could begin a marathon amendment voting session on the immigration bill as soon as Wednesday, if Blanche’s testimony alleviates concerns created by the DOJ fund. 

Montana Sen. Steve Daines, however, said he believes it’s “unlikely” that process begins this week. 

North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis said earlier in the day, before the lunch, that he wouldn’t accept taxpayer dollars going toward people who attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6. 

“To provide restitution to somebody who assaulted a police officer and pled guilty to it. I mean, man, I’ve seen some crazy stuff before, but that’s right up there with crazy,” he said. 

Utah Republican Sen. John Curtis said he needs to know “if it’s dead or nearly dead.” 

Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Lankford said he wants clarification from the White House about the settlement fund in light of the court’s ruling. 

He added that Republicans are waiting to see if “the court case set aside both the settlement fund and the audits.”

“We need clarification for what it is and isn’t, because the White House already said ‘we agree, we don’t like it, but we agree with the courts,’” Lankford said. “What does that mean?”

Amendment to ban fund

Democrats have also criticized Trump and those in his administration over the fund, vowing to block it in law. 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said during an afternoon press conference that promises from Trump and administration officials are “worthless.” 

“Trump sued his own government, had his own Justice Department settle the case and is now trying to use taxpayer dollars to pay off his MAGA allies, billionaire buddies and cop-beating insurrectionists,” Schumer said. 

“And let’s be clear, Trump has not killed this slush fund,” he added. “He has not revoked the special tax immunity he gave himself and his family. He has not ended the corruption. He hit a temporary roadblock. That’s it.”

Schumer said the first amendment he would offer during debate on Republicans’ immigration and deportation bill would “ban Trump’s slush fund permanently and revoke his family’s free rein to commit tax fraud forever.”

Ashley Murray contributed to this report.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

At the same time, the only federal agency dedicated solely to helping states and localities run smooth and secure elections operates on a meager budget. It provides grants for election security far smaller than in the past. And U.S. House Republicans have signaled they want sizable further cuts.

The agency, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, sits at the center of a fight playing out in Congress over how to best ensure secure elections. The debate has thrown into sharp relief a yawning gap between GOP rhetoric over election tampering and actual congressional support for election security efforts.

“If my colleagues truly cared about protecting our elections from foreign interference, they’d put the resources behind it,” Rep. Sanford Bishop, a Georgia Democrat, said at a House Appropriations Committee meeting this spring. “Instead, we get empty rhetoric, zero urgency, while putting the right of citizens to vote at risk.”

Congressional support of the EAC’s election security grant program has fluctuated over time, but has generally trended downward.

Lawmakers approved $380 million in 2018 and $425 million in 2020, along with an additional $400 million in election-related pandemic aid that year. 

Since then, grant funding has slowed to a trickle. Congress appropriated $75 million in 2022 and again in 2023. That was followed by $55 million in 2024 and $15 million in 2025.

This year’s amount, $45 million, is an increase from the previous year — consistent with enhanced needs in an election year — but substantially lower than other recent years and a far cry from the program’s early years.

Trump and many GOP lawmakers support the SAVE America Act, which would impose new restrictions on voting. It would require voters to show a photo ID at the polls, as well as require them to bring documents proving their citizenship, such as a passport or birth certificate, with them when they register to vote.

The requirements are needed, the bill’s supporters say, to combat noncitizen voting, an extremely rare occurrence. 

“The cheating is rampant in our elections,” Trump asserted without evidence in his 2026 State of the Union address. He has called the SAVE America Act “commonsense, country-saving legislation.”

The House passed the bill in February but it has floundered in the Senate amid opposition from Democrats and a handful of Republicans. Trump continues to seek new avenues to advance the measure, including urging lawmakers to attach it to housing legislation.

Cuts to election security agency

The Trump-led push for voting restrictions has largely ignored concrete election security needs in favor of chasing the phantom specter of noncitizen voting, Democrats and experts on election administration say. The result, they say, has been the possibility of sharp cuts at the EAC.

The House Appropriations Committee in April approved a bill that would cut the EAC’s salaries and expenses from $23.86 million to $17 million. It would mark the first time in four years the agency’s budget has dropped below $20 million.

The bill would also sharply cut the EAC’s election security grant program from $45 million to $15 million, the same as the last non-election year.

Since 2018, the agency has distributed the grants to election officials for technology upgrades, including cybersecurity, physical security improvements at election sites and efforts to combat voter misinformation. Lawmakers created the election security grants in response to foreign interference in the 2016 election.

“Republicans claim falsely that our elections are plagued by fraud and that more needs to be done to secure the vote,” Rep. Steny Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat, said in a statement to States Newsroom.

“Yet, they have consistently undermined the security of our elections, including by proposing to cut election-security grants by two-thirds and the Election Assistance Commission’s (EAC) overall budget by almost 30% in Fiscal Year 2027,” Hoyer said. “This will leave states without critical resources to secure their voting systems and adopt the latest in voting technology and best practices.”

Hoyer, who helped spearhead the 2002 legislation creating the EAC and is the ranking Democrat on the Appropriations subcommittee that oversees the agency’s budget, said it has been a tremendous benefit to state and local election officials and to the integrity of the vote.

“I will continue to oppose Republican efforts to cut its funding,” he said.

Congressional GOP embraces Trump

The bill represents only one, early step in the appropriations process. The House hasn’t voted on it and the Senate could eliminate or alter the cuts, with any differences eventually worked out in a conference committee. 

The House Appropriations Committee, which is not burdened with the Senate’s need for bipartisan approval of most legislation, in past years has also put forward cuts to election security grant funding that have been abandoned later.

Still, the measure this year demonstrates how House Republicans have embraced Trump’s focus on noncitizen voting. 

While cutting the EAC and election security funding, the bill includes a provision prohibiting the use of funds to register noncitizens to vote. Noncitizens are already prohibited from voting in federal elections and only a very small number of municipalities allow noncitizens to vote in local contests.

“The people demanded a new mandate, we’re carrying it forward. That includes reinforcing President Trump’s work to … ensure that only citizens vote in our elections,” Rep. Tom Cole, an Oklahoma Republican and the Appropriations Committee chairman, said at an April meeting.

A spokesperson for Rep. Dave Joyce, an Ohio Republican who chairs the Appropriations subcommittee that developed the bill, didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Funding ebb

Congress created the EAC in the 2002 Help America Vote Act, passed in the wake of the 2000 presidential election and the Florida recount. 

A bipartisan commission leads the agency, which has about 70 employees, according to its 2025 annual report. It focuses on aiding state and local election officials with training and other resources, certifying voting equipment and overseeing grant programs.

Gideon Cohn-Postar, director of federal affairs at the Institute for Responsive Government, said election officials generally want Congress to provide about $400 million a year, a figure that reflects lawmakers’ initial commitment to the grant program in 2018 and would allow states to make significant strides in bolstering their election infrastructure.

Each year’s grants are split between states and territories based on a formula. In practice, most receive the minimum amount. The $45 million grant for 2026 translated into $819,000 for most states, with a mandatory 20% match.

“It’s absolutely insufficient,” Cohn-Postar said.

State spending

A December 2024 report from the Bipartisan Policy Center measuring the impact of the grant program found that cybersecurity constituted the single largest category of grant spending, at over $200 million, followed by nearly $150 million on voting equipment.

Some states save up their grant money over several years to help pay for larger purchases, like voter registration systems, with the money earning interest in the meantime. As of March 2025, states had collectively spent 69% of their grant dollars, according to the latest data available from the EAC. 

Two states — Nevada and Ohio — have spent 100% of their funds. Only Louisiana has spent none, ahead of a future elections system overhaul.

In Connecticut, election officials have spent 95% of the $13.8 million it has received in election security grants over the years, according to the EAC data. The funds have helped towns conduct security audits, Connecticut Democratic Secretary of State Stephanie Thomas said in an interview. 

As an example, Thomas said when she took office in 2023 not all of the town’s systems were on a government online domain but most have now adopted one.

“Someting like that, it never gets the headlines but hugely important from a security perspective,” Thomas said.

Commission warns against cuts

EAC commissioners have been warning Congress that unstable funding and budget cuts would harm their agency’s work. All three current commissioners and a recent former commissioner testified at a House Administration Committee hearing on election security in May, where they cautioned lawmakers against reduced and unpredictable resources.

Commissioner Benjamin Hovland, a Democratic appointee of Trump, noted that while Congress has provided “significant” funding since the 2002 law, federal dollars have covered less than 5% of the total cost of running elections during that time. 

Election officials today face challenges that would have been unimaginable when the law was passed, he said, adding that commissioners heard enthusiasm for the EAC’s work in recent meetings with officials.

“But the agency is nearing a point where funding cuts will impact what we can accomplish, and the support we can provide election officials, especially related to election security,” Hovland said.

States frequently tell the EAC they want federal funding that is “predictable, consistent, and sufficient” to support long-term planning, said Christy McCormick, a Republican commissioner appointed by President Barack Obama. 

The EAC’s adoption of newer, more rigorous standards for election equipment illustrates the importance of funding for state and local election officials. 

In 2021, the EAC adopted the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 2.0, or VVSG 2.0, replacing the earlier 1.0 guidelines. The technical standards are designed to enhance security, such as requiring air gapped systems, and greater accessibility for voters with disabilities.

While states are not required to use VVSG-certified machines, many states have followed the EAC’s lead and mandated the use of machines that meet these standards. Upgrading is expensive, however.

In the meantime, election technology continues to age. By 2028, the average age of modern voting equipment will rise to 9.3 years old, up from just 4.9 years old in 2020, according to a report from the Bipartisan Policy Center released in late May. The report identified “episodic and unpredictable” federal funding as one obstacle to states purchasing VVSG 2.0 equipment.

“Federal support is absolutely key to making sure that election infrastructure is functioning well at the state and local levels,” Will Adler, a co-author of the report, said in an interview.

‘Don’t give me any more money’

To be sure, some state election officials are skeptical of accepting grant funding. Kansas Republican Secretary of State Scott Schwab told a congressional hearing in April that elections are best run and funded locally. 

He said he previously accepted grant dollars but that state lawmakers then didn’t approve the required matching funds, leaving his office in a bind.

“I would rather, because of the strings attached, just don’t give me any more money,” Schwab said. “If we need more money, we can handle it locally.”

But since the House Appropriations Committee advanced cuts to the EAC and the election security grants in April, numerous election officials and voting rights groups have urged lawmakers to reconsider.

On May 12, the Project for Election Infrastructure sent a letter signed by several dozen local election officials asking senators for $400 million in election security grants, with at least two-thirds directed to localities. The true cost of modernizing and fully securing American election systems will run billions of dollars, the letter warned.

The National Association of Counties on June 2 asked House and Senate appropriations leaders to not cut funding. The years between presidential elections are when “critical groundwork is laid,” the association’s CEO and executive director, Matt Chase, wrote in a letter.

Chase ticked through typical security expenses that can quickly add up. Bollards to protect remote drop boxes can cost $500 to $4,000 per bollard. Key card access at election facilities can cost $1,500 to $5,000 per door. Video surveillance cameras can run hundreds to thousands of dollars.

“Federal investment scaled only to presidential cycles leaves counties without the resources needed to be ready when turnout surges,” Chase wrote.

Thomas, the Connecticut secretary of state, echoed the sentiment.

“I feel that many people use the term election security almost like a slogan,” Thomas said. “But election security is actually year-round work.”

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

Lawmakers heard an array of concerns about the proliferation of data centers around the state — the environmental impact, the cost of tax breaks, and the use of nondisclosure agreements to avoid public scrutiny.

Lawmakers also received pointed critiques from Ohioans who say elected officials have been too slow to respond to their frustrations, and their response thus far has been inadequate.

Many pressed lawmakers for a data center moratorium — a step lawmakers have so far been unwilling to take.

“The citizens are going to continue working to ban them if the legislative body doesn’t take action,” Stephanie Stock, the president of Ohio Advocates for Medical Freedom, warned.

Organizers are currently gathering signatures for a constitutional amendment prohibiting construction of data centers that consume more than 25 megawatts a month.

Broken trust

Many speakers made the drive from Adams County in Appalachian Ohio. They described a familiar pattern of new industries showing up in Appalachian communities to extract resources and leave residents with little if any benefit.

“I understand the importance of jobs; I understand economic development. I am not opposed to progress,” Emily Young told lawmakers. “I am opposed to communities being asked to accept risk before they have been given honest answers.”

No industry, she said, has asked local communities “to surrender the amount of land, water, energy, and local control” as hyperscale data centers have.

To many speakers, the epitome of those demands is the industry’s use of nondisclosure agreements to shield new developments from public input.

Jessica Baker from Williamsburg brought in 16 NDAs from a data center project in a nearby town.

She recited the officials — councilmembers, the mayor, fire chief, village engineer, and more — as she flipped through the documents.

Like Young, Baker insisted she doesn’t oppose technology or progress, she opposes the secrecy. And she expressed frustration that it fell to her to dig up answers.

“Everyday Ohioans should not have to spend their evenings submitting records requests and digging through utility filings just to understand what is happening around their homes,” she said. “That is why people elect leaders in the first place.”

Carl Setzer is uniquely qualified to talk about data centers, he shared. After working for a firm testing tech companies’ security systems, he started a company that grew into what he described as China’s largest craft brewery.

“I have dealt with private equity, I’ve dealt with cooling systems, I’ve dealt with wastewater management, I’ve dealt with IT,” he said.

Setzer said we’re in the midst of a speculative bubble, and “the reason why we need to build so many data centers yesterday,” is so private investors can cash out before the broader public realizes “there’s no there there.”

“Ohio residents are not in the way of progress,” he said. “We’re just anxious, and we’re afraid that we’re going to lose the little that we have left, to things that we never even asked for.”

Environmental concerns

Research scientist Stephen Petty worries about what’s in the water data centers use to cool their facilities.

Ohio state Sen. Shane Wilkin, R-Hillsboro, asked why state regulators’ permitting systems aren’t enough to protect residents.

“They’re effective for chemicals that are regulated,” Petty said. “They’re not effective for chemicals that are not regulated.”

Currently, he said, many materials including PFAS — microplastics known as forever chemicals — fall outside state regulations.

That discharge could present health concerns, but it could cost local governments, too, Petty warned.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently announced plans to rollback PFAS drinking water limits that were set to take effect in 2029.

But if PFAS eventually face regulation, and the chemicals have already been discharged into water systems, local governments could be on the hook for the cleanup.

Petty described a city in New Jersey that spent more than $30 million on technology to filter the chemicals from its municipal water system.

In addition to concerns about water contaminants, speakers voiced concerns about the scope of water use generally.

Nikki Gerber works for a canoe and kayak rental company in Adams County and she explained the region’s aquifers are some of the slowest in the state to recharge.

“We have many people with private residential wells,” Gerber said. “Well, are those wells gonna go dry? That’s their source of life.”

“Cows can’t drink bottled water,” she added. “Crops can’t grow off of bottled water.”

Other speakers complained about air emissions — particularly from backup generators.

Cathy Cowan Becker from Save Ohio Parks pointed to a Hilliard data center that will use a fuel cell system for backup power.

“It’s going to emit 1.5 million pounds of carbon dioxide per day,” she said. “The equivalent of if you took 66,000 cars, parked them on site, and let them run 24/7 next to hundreds of homes, an elementary school, a park, and the county’s largest animal shelter.”

Co-chairs’ thoughts

The committee’s Ohio House co-chair, state Rep. Adam Holmes, R-Nashport, acknowledged most speakers showed up to voice opposition to data centers.

“From the ground level, they’re all opponents, but I did pick up various different concerns,” Holmes said.

“That was really the intent of this whole process,” he added. “(To) understand specific concerns and specific areas that really don’t have oversight at the state level.”

Senate co-chair, state Sen. Brian Chavez, R-Marietta, said the process is working.

“I love the fact that we’re having the public come in and give their point of view and their opinions,” he said. “I just want to make sure that we’re not giving our own facts.”

Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Nick Evans on X or on Bluesky.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The measure at issue would reinstitute a previous provision in state law, despite a state court barring enforcement of it after voters passed an Ohio Constitutional amendment protecting reproductive rights.

Ohio House Bill 347 would require pregnant individuals to meet with a medical professional at least 24 hours before an abortion procedure.

Physicians are required to provide informed consent information at that appointment, under threat of civil penalties for violations of the bill.

The measure would authorize the Ohio State Medical Board to create rules “specifying adverse physical or psychological conditions arising from abortion that a physician must disclose as possible complications” when meeting with a pregnant person.

The board only includes one OB/GYN among its membership. The president of the board is a dermatologist, and the vice president is a podiatrist.

Other medical professionals on the board have specialities in pulmonology, pediatrics, orthopedic surgery, spinal treatments, and internal medicine.

The other three members of the board are attorneys, including Michael Gonidakis, who is a former leader and current member of the anti-abortion group Ohio Right to Life.

The Senate Health Committee will hear from supporters in their hearing scheduled for Wednesday.

Those who want to see the bill passed argue the bill does not stop abortions from happening, which would fly in the face of a constitutional amendment passed by 57% of Ohio voters in 2023 enshrining abortion and other reproductive health rights into the state’s constitution.

Bill advocates claim the measure is focused on providing necessary information to pregnant individuals before they have an abortion.

Opponents of the bill, including abortion rights groups, say not only that the bill is duplicative — in that medical professionals are already required based on their medical training and oaths to provide evidence-based information to patients about the procedures and the risks that could come from them — but also that a 24-hour waiting period has already been put into Ohio law once.

Since then, the law has been blocked from enforcement in the midst of a lawsuit.

In 2024, Franklin County Court of Common Pleas Judge David C. Young placed a 24-hour waiting period on pause, citing the newest amendment to the constitution as reason to hold off on the requirement.

“The plain language of the amendment clearly sets forth the applicable legal standard,” Young wrote in 2024. “This language is easily understood and clear.”

H.B. 347 left the Ohio House Health Committee in March as opponents yelled “shame,” passing along party lines in the committee. A full Ohio House vote moved it on to the Ohio Senate with a party-line split of 64 to 32.

During discussion on the House floor before the measure was passed, one co-sponsor of the bill, state Rep. Mike Odioso, R-Cincinnati, said the temporary pause on the previous 24-hour waiting period “had the effect of undermining long-standing established legislation under Ohio’s general informed consent law.”

He went on to claim the ruling “creates uncertainty’ for patients and providers and “disrupts the long-standing legal framework that has protected women’s health across the state.”

Abortion rights groups who spoke out against the bill had the opposite opinion, saying implementing a 24-hour waiting period before medical care creates barriers to access, impacting low-income Ohioans, those without reliable transportation to get to and from appointments, and those in need of child care for other children while they are seeking care.

In the 2025 annual abortion report released by the Ohio Department of Health, 35% of those who had abortions that year already had two or more children, and 24% had one child before they sought an abortion.

“A state-mandated 24-hour waiting period will harm patients by creating additional barriers to care and increasing costs of the procedure,” Jaime Miracle, deputy director of the advocacy group Abortion Forward, said after the House committee passed the bill on for a full chamber vote.

She said those issues were “a feature, not a flaw” for anti-abortion lawmakers in crafting legislation to regulate the practice.

When the bill entered the Senate Health Committee on May 20, state Rep. Josh Williams, R-Sylvania Twp., denied arguments that the bill would create obstacles to care, saying it would “ensure that when a woman is facing one of the most difficult decisions of her life, she is empowered with clarity, time, and honest medical information.”

“She should not be used, or pressured into a decision and she will not be uninformed in the state of Ohio,” he said in testimony to the committee.

The Ohio Senate Health Committee is scheduled to hear supporter testimony on the bill on Wednesday.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The analysis by the Brookings Institution shows that the issue stretches at least all the way back to 2014, and that a huge swath of the population has been affected. That’s particularly true of people of color and especially true of single parents.

The think tank last week published the first in a series of articles titled States of Affordability, and it broke its analysis down to the state and county level.

“This mix of states shows that although headlines often focus on the cost of housing in big cities such as New York City and San Francisco, affordability crises emerge from a variety of pressures depending on the state or region, such as stagnant wages, child care costs, transportation burdens, and weak job markets,” it said.

The think tank estimated “the cost of living in every U.S. county by bundling housing, food, childcare, healthcare, transportation, and miscellaneous necessities such as utilities for different household types, from single adults to larger families with children.”

Significantly, it did not include student and medical debt in that calculation. So its estimates of hope many are having difficulty making ends meet are likely to be conservative.

The study used U.S. Census data on income to determine what percentage of families were able to pay their bills.

The results may explain some of the frustration among the electorate.

In 2024, 45.5% of households in the country were not making enough to cover their expenses — and that was before the start of the most recent inflationary cycle.

Ohioans fared better than average, with 40.6% not making enough to make ends meet, the analysis said. 

But at the county level, there are disparities. Families in some counties in Southeastern Ohio were making ends meet at a significantly lower rate than in Delaware County, for example.

More stark were demographic disparities.

Among white Ohio’s families, 63.2% were making ends meet in 2024. For Hispanic families, that figure dropped to 47.3%, and for Black families, it dropped to 41.8%.

In other words, most Ohio families of color — 54.2% — didn’t have enough money to pay the bills in 2024.

But even more determinate was household composition. 

The Brookings report said that in Ohio in 2024, a full 73% of single-parent households couldn’t make ends meet.

Between 2014 and 2024, there was a single bump in the percentage of families that had enough to pay the bills, and it came during the pandemic. 

The percentage of Ohio families making ends meet rose to 68.5% at the end of 2022. Two years later, it had dropped to 59.4%.

“In nearly every year from 2014 to 2024, more than 40% of American households have struggled to make ends meet,” the Brookings report said.

“The only exception over this period was during the COVID-19 pandemic recovery in 2021 and 2022, when federal stimulus checks and expanded tax credits provided a significant but temporary boost to post-tax incomes.”

It added, “The expiration of these federal policy interventions, coupled with rising costs, drove the share of households making ends meet sharply downward. While the share of households making ends meet increased by two percentage points over the decade, that share dropped by a full 10 percentage points in just two years following the COVID-19 pandemic, from 2022 to 2024, erasing most of the gains made earlier in the decade.”

And while the political debate over affordability tends to focus on the prices of things, the Brookings report said that’s only half the picture.

“When the costs for housing, health care, education, and food rise faster than wages, families fall behind not because they are failing, but because the math no longer works in their favor,” the report said.

“But more affordable lives are within reach: As of 2024, 37.9 million U.S. households could afford to make ends meet with a raise of $10 an hour. Additionally, if costs declined by $500 per month, another 10 million households could make ends meet.”

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The Columbus Democratic representative is one of 23 ex officio members of the Kennedy Center board who serve by virtue of their positions in federal or local government. But Beatty had no say in the Trump name-change.

When she tried to object to the rebranding — that defied a congressional statute — she was muted. Literally. On a quorum call. Infuriating? You bet. She could have raged to no end. Resigned herself to a regime that has relentlessly steamrollered the rule of law into seeming irrelevance. Shrugged off a new name on an old building as trivial in the big picture of rapid authoritarian descent in America. But that’s how free people succumb to lawlessness and adapt to brazen tyranny. 

Beatty chose to push back. Last Friday the Ohioan was vindicated in a federal court ruling that ordered Trump’s name removed from the Kennedy Center and a temporary halt to plans to shutter the building while renovations continue.

A small victory for the rule of law in the most corrupt presidency in 250 years of American history? Yes. But it mattered, stressed Beatty’s lead counsel Nathaniel Zelinsky.

Trump seized control of the iconic cultural institution in Washington last year, replaced multiple board members with lap dogs, made himself chair and had his name carved over The John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts.

What people saw hammered into the stone edifice of the national landmark — that Congress designated as a living memorial to a slain president in 1964 — was “a visible mark of authoritarianism,” Zelinksy argued. “It’s something that’s more appropriate for Moscow or Pyongyang than it is for Washington, D.C.”

At some point, he added, those tangible signs of corruption blend into other cases people can see and easily grasp from the bulldozed East Wing of the White House to the billion dollar ballroom, Trump banners hanging on the U.S. Justice Department and other government buildings and the $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund Trump set up with the DOJ to reward his supporters, including Jan. 6 insurrectionists.

“If you treat these things that are in our national trust with such disdain,” said Zelinsky, “you’re going to treat all of the other elements of the office, of the presidency that you hold, the trust placed in you by the American people with a similar disdain.”

That’s why public pushback matters.

On the same day that Beatty’s lawsuit prevailed in U.S. District Court in Washington, a federal judge in Virginia temporarily barred Trump’s corrupted DOJ from moving forward with the massive slush fund the department created to resolve a bizarre IRS lawsuit Trump filed against his own administration.

And another federal court in Florida ordered a review of that sketchy Trump litigation (as a pretext to the slush fund agreement?) in response to a motion filed by 35 retired federal judges. They alleged that the settlement “is a product of collusion and is itself a fraud on the court.”

U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams wants to know whether Trump defrauded her court by suing the IRS for the sole purpose of forcing a sweet deal to make payouts to his political allies and shut the door on the government’s pursuit of tax claims against the president, his family and their companies.

But her scrutiny was prompted by pushback in defense of the rule of law.

In Virginia, plaintiffs who pushed back won an injunction on slush fund payouts and their Democracy Forward attorneys called the order a triumph for the rule of law.

“No administration has the authority to spend public money through a political rewards program that Congress never authorized.”

And it took an Ohio congresswoman on the Kennedy Center board, who would not be silenced, to score another win for the rule of law against Trump’s illegal rechristening of a national treasure.

As a trustee she sued to protect the institution she was charged with overseeing.

Beatty then amended her lawsuit to also challenge Trump’s abrupt decision to close the center for renovation after his disastrous takeover triggered widespread operational chaos, leadership purges, mass layoffs, artists boycotts, severe financial and attendance declines, and intense congressional scrutiny.

The Kennedy Center board, stacked with Trump cronies, rubber-stamped both the closure and putting Trump’s name on the prestigious venue meant to honor the 35th president in perpetuity with world-class performing arts, major exhibits and education.

But in Beatty v. Trump, U.S. District Judge Casey Cooper concluded the law establishing the center over five decades ago “makes it crystal clear that it is to be named for President Kennedy and it cannot bear any other formal name or public memorials based on the board’s unilateral say-so.”

He gave the center two weeks to get Trump’s name off the building, website, signs, and marquee events.

The judge also found the board had not properly considered the ramifications of a two-year closure of the facility when they were invited to the White House to sign off on the preordained plan. 

In short, the court said Kennedy Center trustees flouted the will of Congress and Donald Trump is not above the law. Let them appeal. Even a modest vindication of the rule of law under authoritarian power grabs matters.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The incident was reported at approximately 1:30 p.m. on June 2, 2026. The victim reported that four individuals displayed what appeared to be a handgun during the commission of the robbery. Investigators subsequently recovered an airsoft-style handgun believed to have been used in the incident.

Two adult suspects — Oliver Armstrong, 18, and Trenton Cook, 18 — have each been charged with Complicity to Aggravated Robbery and are being held at the Seneca County Jail.

Two juvenile suspects have also been taken into custody and are being held at the Seneca County Youth Center. One juvenile has been charged with Complicity to Aggravated Robbery; a second has been charged with Aggravated Robbery. The juveniles’ names have not been released.

No injuries were reported.

Lt. Jason Windsor credited the rapid resolution of the case to coordinated efforts across the department. “This case was resolved quickly due to the immediate response of patrol officers, the rapid communication and information gathering by dispatchers, and the investigative efforts of Detective Sergeant Nowak and Detective Stafford,” Windsor said.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

Ohio officials have approved a new $42.3 million tax exemption for a pair of giant data center projects in the Columbus area. The move comes days after Gov. Mike DeWine announced a pause on these kinds of tax exemptions as scrutiny has grown over their mushrooming costs for the state.

The new tax exemption will subsidize Cologix Inc.’s planned data centers in suburban Delaware and Licking counties. As a condition of taking the state tax incentive, the company promises to spend $1.17 billion to build the new data centers. It also agreed to hire 90 full-time workers before 2035 with a payroll of $10 million, or about $111,000 per job, and keep its new facilities operating for at least 13 years.

With the new tax break, the state’s total price tag for data center tax exemptions issued since 2025 rises to nearly $2.17 billion. The data center industry is in a prolonged construction boom, thanks to increased demand and hype associated with artificial intelligence. 

The Ohio Tax Credit Authority approved the new tax exemption on Monday at a meeting in downtown Columbus in what will be the last the state approves for the indefinite future. DeWine announced a pause on new data center tax breaks last Wednesday, exempting a project he said was already in the works – the Cologix project. 

The governor said the moratorium – announced hours after Signal Statewide reported the tax breaks’ value had grown to nearly $1.6 billion in 2025, or 11 times larger than state estimates – will continue while a special legislative committee holds hearings on data centers. Lawmakers have described the hearings as a way to gather facts about the projects’ effects on the environment, electricity costs and the economy. A hearing was underway at the Statehouse on Monday, where members of the public got the chance to comment. 

A group gathering signatures for a long-shot effort to ban large data center projects statewide used the occasion to hold a press conference updating the public on their efforts. Members of the group later testified before the special legislative data center committee.

More about the new projects

In late 2024, Cologix, which rents out computing capacity to other companies, announced it would spend $7 billion in the Columbus area to build a complex of data centers. When construction is complete, the company said the centers will use 800 megawatts of electricity, roughly the same amount of power a city the size of Cleveland or Cincinnati might use. Part of the terms of the new tax exemption approved on Monday require the company to also retain nearly $5.2 million in payroll at its existing locations. 

Allison Rowland, an official with One Columbus, an economic development nonprofit, told members of the Tax Credit Authority on Monday that the new exemptions will go to a pair of projects. 

One, in Delaware County, will be built on a 25-acre site and initially will use 25 megawatts of electricity, and perhaps grow to as large as 75 megawatts, depending on future power availability.

The other, in Johnstown in Licking County – the same general area as the massive, under-construction Intel plant – is on a 150-acre site. The larger facility will use 75 megawatts of electricity at first and could grow as large as 176 megawatts. 

Rowland said Cologix also considered building its new data centers in Minnesota, Iowa and Canada. The state tax break was a “highly critical factor” in the company’s decision to choose Ohio, she said. 

The company provides colocation services – renting out computing space and power to other businesses – and builds its facilities close to end customers to reduce lag time and improve computing speed.

Cologix serves 200 customers in its existing service area in Columbus, Rowland said. Most of those are small and medium-sized businesses, but customers also include several large companies, including prominent consumer brands, she said.

“State support will ensure that these proposed projects move forward in Ohio,” Rowland said.

Before the vote, Rowland fielded a couple questions from Tax Credit Authority board member Debora McGraw. 

In response to one question, Rowland said the Delaware County data center will buy its power from American Electric Power, while the larger facility in Johnstown will be in the service territory for both AEP and the Energy Cooperative, a rural-coop based in the area.

McGraw also asked about local government support for the projects. In response, Rowland said the smaller project is getting a 10-year, 50% property tax abatement from the Delaware County government, plus additional income tax break and another type of property tax subsidy, while the larger project is getting a 15-year, 100% property tax abatement from the Johnstown city government.

“The proposed developments by Cologix in both Orange Township and Johnstown bring significant investment in tax generation. Neither community has ever experienced industrial investment at this scale,” Rowland said.

More on data centers in Ohio

Ohio, and the Columbus area more particularly, has emerged in recent years as a top national market for data centers. There currently are 204 data centers in Ohio, the sixth-most of any state, according to an industry consultancy. 

Ohio has used its data center tax exemption, which gives recipients a 50% reduction in their state sales tax bill on the purchase of the pricey computer equipment that stocks the facilities, as a perk to attract industry investment.

But the tax break’s price tag has exploded in recent years, reaching $554.9 million in 2024 and $1.568 billion in 2025 – compared to state estimates of around $133 million a year.

The industry’s rapid expansion has caused a local political backlash, with residents complaining about the facilities’ size and environmental impact. Data centers also have been scrutinized for the strain they place on the electrical system, via their massive energy use and the costly grid upgrades – both of which have the potential to drive electricity prices upward.

Republican legislators tried to eliminate the state’s data center tax exemption last summer, but DeWine blocked them with a veto. GOP House Speaker Matt Huffman has announced plans to overturn the veto, but has said he’s so far been unable to muster enough Republican votes to do so.

Signal Ohio is a nonprofit news organization covering government, education, health, economy and public safety.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

As data centers face increasing political and public scrutiny, the industry in Ohio has built up a lobbying and PR apparatus to punch back. 

At the statehouse, the Data Center Coalition, a trade association, and its individual members have hired a fleet at least 51 lobbyists, according to a review of state lobbying disclosures. The bulk of them work for either Google (19 registered agents) or Meta (14).

Some lesser-known developers like QTS, CyrusOne and Vantage have hired their own lobbyists as well. 

Meanwhile, the national arm of the Data Center Coalition created a nonprofit, Connected Ohio, which has spent more than $10,000 on Facebook ads since May 23, according to records with Facebook’s ad archive. 

“Healthcare. Education. Public safety. Ohio’s data centers make it all possible — supporting 84,000 jobs and thousands of high-wage construction roles, while generating billions in tax revenue for local services,” the ads state. 

Connected Ohio is made up of industry stakeholders working “to educate and engage with Ohioans on the benefits data centers provide statewide and local communities,” said Josh Levi, the Washington D.C. area-based president of the Data Center Coalition, in a statement. 

He said its goal is education, and it does not endorse candidates for public office or participate in political campaigns. 

“The Data Center Coalition launched Connected Ohio this year to help inform communities and policymakers about the data center industry, what it does, the larger ecosystem of small businesses, service providers, supply chain, and jobs that support the industry, and why it matters to Ohioans,” Levi said. 

The ad spending comes as tax breaks for the industry have drawn political scrutiny and citizen opposition to the facilities’ rapid buildout in Ohio has mounted. 

After the Ohio Department of Taxation released new data that shows a sales tax exemption for data centers cost the state $1.6 billion in revenue in 2025, 11 times more than was forecasted, Gov. Mike DeWine announced a temporary, limited pause on the issuance of new credits. This will last until the General Assembly’s newly formed “Select Committee on Data Centers” issues a report or proposed legislation when it wraps up. 

In Columbus, a long list of lobbying firms have registered on the data center industry’s behalf. The Data Center Coalition hired three attorneys with Dickinson Wright, a Columbus law firm.

At least 19 different law firms and lobby shops registered on behalf of the builders of data centers, the arena sized warehouses facilitating the artificial intelligence boom. 

Some have hired politically connected figures. For Amazon that includes Michael Hall, DeWine’s former chief of staff, now a lobbyist for the CJR Group. For Google, that includes Spencer Gross, of High Bridge Consulting, whose website notes its former partner is now chief of staff to House Speaker Matt Huffman. And Aligned Data Centers hired Brenton Temple, campaign manager for DeWine’s 2022 re-election campaign. 

There’s nothing illegal or unusual about any of this. Rather, it reflects data centers adopting a tried and true political playbook executed by seasoned statehouse professionals. 

It also follows some of the industry’s towering investments in Ohio. Google says it has invested more than $20 billion in data centers here. Amazon expects its investments here to reach $23 billion by 2030. Cologix, which was awarded a new break on Monday, has pledged more than $7 billion.

Signal Ohio is a nonprofit news organization covering government, education, health, economy and public safety.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The structure was donated by Brandon Price of Price Manufacturing, a Tiffin-area custom metal fabrication company. Inspired by the Pont des Arts bridge in Paris and similar installations in Main Street communities across the country, the structure invites couples to attach a lock as a symbol of their relationship and place the key in an attached key box.

“We wanted to create something that people could connect with and enjoy for years to come,” said Donna Gross, Downtown Tiffin Main Street Manager. “The East Green has become such a special gathering place in our community, and this Love Lock structure gives couples, families, and visitors a fun and meaningful way to make memories together in Downtown Tiffin.”

The East Green, located near the downtown amphitheater with the East Tower as a backdrop, has served as the venue for concerts, community events, and celebrations. The site gained particular significance in 2024, when nearly 150 couples were married there during the Total Eclipse celebration.

The Love Lock structure is part of the Downtown Tiffin Design Committee’s ongoing beautification work, which also includes Downtown Clean Ups, design assistance for projects such as the Court Street Arch and streetscaping efforts, and oversight of the Best Foot Forward Program and Golden Broom Award.

Downtown Tiffin has participated in Heritage Ohio’s Main Street Program since 2015 and holds national accreditation through the Main Street America Program. It operates under the Seneca County Collaborative as the Downtown Development Board. More information is available at DowntownTiffin.org.

The June 18 ribbon cutting is open to the public.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

Trump had not yet made a public announcement by late afternoon, but several media outlets reported the president planned to possibly drop the fund to clear the way for Senate Republicans to advance a $72 billion immigration enforcement funding package. Politico reported White House officials communicated the decision Monday to Republicans on Capitol Hill, according to two unnamed sources.

Trump’s fund has sparked resistance from both parties as concerns mounted that Jan. 6, 2021, riot defendants who assaulted police officers could conceivably get reparations by claiming the law was “weaponized” against them for political purposes. 

A slew of lawsuits challenging what opponents called a “slush fund” followed, including from police officers who defended the Capitol that day.

Shortly after the reports circulated that Trump might shelve the idea, the Department of Justice defended the fund on social media but said it would comply with a court order issued Friday temporarily barring the government from any further action on the fund. The order did not address the merits of a suit filed against the fund.

“The Department of Justice disagrees strongly with the decision on the Anti-Weaponization Fund put forth by the United States District Court Judge in the Eastern District of Virginia, wherein the Court stated that, under no circumstances, may the Department of Justice proceed with the Anti-Weaponization Fund recently established in order to make up for the tremendous abuse, harm, and hate unfairly shown to so many people. This Fund was open to anybody who was so weaponized, targeted, or persecuted, whether they were Democrat, Republican, Conservative, Independent, or otherwise. The Department will abide by the Court’s ruling,” according to the department’s post on X.

The DOJ and the White House directed States Newsroom to the post when asked if the president would scrap the fund altogether.

Several Republicans vehemently opposed the fund, including retiring Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who called the fund “stupid on stilts.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., abandoned plans for a floor vote on the immigration bill ahead of the Memorial Day recess as members threatened to defect unless the budget reconciliation package also included language to apply guardrails on the massive “anti-weaponization” pot of money.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Monday that even if Trump says he will drop the fund, “a promise from Trump is worthless.”

“If Trump and Republicans are truly abandoning this corrupt scheme, they should have zero problem banning it in law,” Schumer said on the floor. “This week, Senate Democrats will push legislation to ban this slush fund and ensure no president can ever do this again. Trump’s word is nowhere near enough.”

The Department of Justice announced the $1.776 billion fund on May 18 as a condition for Trump dropping his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS. A day later, the DOJ issued another order declaring Trump and his family would be forever immune from government inquiries, including tax audits, as part of Trump’s voluntary dismissal of the suit.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

Judges Judith W. Rogers and Robert L. Wilkins for the U.S. Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia upheld a lower court ruling allowing those plaintiffs involved in the case to continue their service. The decision is a preliminary injunction, meaning the case will continue to play out in court.

The policy, issued by President Donald Trump in an executive order in January 2025 and carried out by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, “appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group: persons who identify as transgender,” Wilkins wrote for the 2-1 decision.

“As such, at this preliminary stage, I conclude that the Hegseth Policy is both arbitrary and based upon animus, and for those reasons the Policy violates Plaintiff-Appellees’ constitutional right to equal protection of the law,” continued Wilkins, who was appointed by President Barack Obama in 2014.

Rogers was appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1994.

Judge Justin R. Walker, a 2019 Trump appointee, dissented.

Walker argued U.S. Supreme Court precedent dictates “the military can deprive its members of rights that the Constitution may well guarantee to civilians.”

“Like today’s majority, I cherish those rights, and so I understand the impulse behind the majority’s unprecedented intervention into military affairs. But because the plaintiffs are service members not civilians, and because we are judges not generals, I respectfully dissent,” Walker wrote.

Jennifer Levi, the lead attorney for the eight military plaintiffs, said Monday’s appeals ruling is an “enormous victory.”

“I will say that the plaintiffs in this case have just served their country with incredible honor and courage, and this decision is a recognition of that fact,” Levi, senior director for GLAD Law, told States Newsroom in an interview.

“And really it’s important because (it is) recognizing that those who are capable of serving should be able to continue.”

States Newsroom reached out to the Pentagon and the White House for comment. 

Eight active-duty service members and transgender individuals who are actively pursuing enlistment in the armed forces initially brought the case, Talbott et al v. Trump, against Trump and Hegseth, among other officials and three branches of the U.S. military. The number of plaintiffs has since grown.

The preliminary injunction does not extend to the plaintiffs pursuing enlistment, and does not extend universally to all active transgender service members beyond those who filed the case.

Kara Corcoran, executive director of SPARTA Pride, an advocacy organization for transgender service members, said many transgender service members, including her, are uncertain about the future of their careers.

“While today’s decision provides important relief for certain named plaintiffs, it does not extend protection to the broader transgender military community. Thousands of service members remain subject to ongoing administrative actions, involuntary separation processes, and significant uncertainty about their futures,” said Corcoran, an 18-year Army veteran who is awaiting the military’s decision on whether they will allow her to claim retirement instead of a separation because she is transgender.

Corcoran said “there’s a lot of unknowns to the future” for named plaintiffs and others as the government could seek an emergency stay on the ruling as they did in a separate case, Shilling et al v. Trump. 

In Shilling, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on April 18, 2025, upheld a lower court’s ruling that allowed transgender troops to continue serving, denying the government’s appeal.

In May 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed Trump to ban transgender people from the military.

“This is now two appellate courts from both Schilling and Talbot who have now signaled to the Supreme Court that yes, this is irreparable harm to people who are in (this situation), and at the same time, it’s discrimination,” she said. 

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The reporting was published Wednesday by POGO Investigates – a newsroom within Project On Government Oversight, a nonprofit organization that produces “evidence-based investigations into government waste, fraud, and abuse.”

According to the report, on July 15, 2025, GEO Group – the largest private prison company in the United States – made a $250,000 contribution to the American Liberty Foundation, a super PAC aligned with Jordan.

It was only through a fluke that the contribution came to light.

The contribution came 11 days after Jordan voted for President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act. 

The legislation cut taxes for the wealthy and slashed healthcare and food assistance for the poor.

The law also gave U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement seven times its annual budget to fund Trump’s mass-deportation program.

That money doubled detention space for immigrant-detainees.

GEO Group, is a huge player in the private prison business, with 62,000 total beds at the 51 U.S. facilities it operates, according to its website. It was poised to get a huge windfall from the bill.

As chairman of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, Jordan is in a powerful position to be a friend or foe of any big government contractor — particularly one that contracts with ICE. His committee shares jurisdiction over ICE’s parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security, and has great latitude to investigate or ignore activities that fall under its purview. 

Jordan was a big booster of the bill.

“It delivers Big, Beautiful Deportations,” he posted on X just prior to its passage. “The bill permanently secures our borders by making the largest border security investment in history, funding at least one million annual removals of illegal immigrants and ramping up mass deportation operations to a level never before seen in American history.”

Jordan’s office didn’t respond to multiple phone calls from the Capital Journal seeking comment. GEO Group also didn’t respond to emails.

‘Unprecedented growth opportunities’

As Jordan promised “at least one million annual removals of illegal immigrants,” GEO Group stood to get a boost to its bottom line.

In an August 2025 earnings call — about a month after passage of the Trump bill — GEO Founder and Board Chairman George Zoley touted his company’s prospects. 

“Given the intrinsic value of our assets and the unprecedented growth opportunities we anticipate will materialize over the balance of this year and next year, we believe that our current equity valuation offers an attractive opportunity for investors,” he said, according to a transcript.

Last year, NPR reported that nearly 90% of detainees were in facilities operated by private companies such as GEO.

In February, GEO Group reported to shareholders that it had increased its number of detainee beds by 6,000 in 2025. That brought the total number of ICE detainees the federal government can pay GEO to house to 26,000.

As of April this year, there were about 60,000 people being held in ICE custody, according to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University.  

Critics — including the ACLU of Ohio — say profit motive gives private prisons an incentive to lock up more people and to cut funding for security, medical care, and other supports for the people they imprison.

Complaints of abuse

While expanding its capacity to hold ICE detainees, GEO Group has also faced accusations of mistreatment. 

This past month, hundreds of people being held at a GEO Group facility in Newark, N.J., went on a hunger strike complaining of deplorable conditions. Guards cut phone lines as detainees communicated their problems to people on the outside, the New Jersey Monitor reported.

Complaints of injustice aren’t limited to the New Jersey facility or GEO Group.

During Trump’s second term, ICE has seen the highest number of detainee deaths in decades, detainees were denied due process in more than 10,000 instances, more than 170 detainees turned out to be U.S. citizens, and — despite Trump’s claims — the overwhelming majority of detainees have not been convicted of a violent crime. 

The private detention facilities have also been accused of blocking oversight. Despite having a legal right to enter them to investigate reports of mistreatment, members of Congress have repeatedly been denied access, they say.

News that at least one of those companies made a dark-money contribution demonstrates a lack of transparency that is both toxic and self-reinforcing, said Catherine Turcer, executive director of the good government watchdog group Common Cause Ohio.

“This circumstance of dark money is really painful because a private prison contributed dark money to the chair of a committee that makes decisions about ICE,” she said.

She added, “The policymaking is really direct. It’s ongoing. It’s the use of taxpayer money to go after undocumented people. There have been significant violations of due process. And we know that the lack of transparency when it comes to those prisons is mirrored by the lack of transparency in the dark money.”

Dark money

It was only through happenstance that Nick Schwellenbach, the journalist behind thePOGO Investigates report, found GEO Group’s $250,000 contribution to the Jordan-aligned political committee.

“It popped up in a really weird way,” he said in a phone interview. 

Schwellenbach received a somewhat mistaken tip that led him on a journey through the loophole-riddled world of campaign-finance law.

A summary:

Two committees with similar names and identical leadership are aligned with Jordan — the American Liberty Foundation and the American Liberty Action Fund. 

Each has the same president, secretary, and treasurer. The president, Ray Yonkura, served as Jordan’s chief of staff from 2012 to 2017, Schwellenbach reported. Yonkura didn’t respond to a request for comment from the Capital Journal.

The Federal Election Commission explicitly connects the American Liberty Foundation to Jordan. It lists the group as “current joint fundraising participants” with Jim Jordan for Congress and Team Jordan.

As a “super PAC,” the American Liberty Foundation is required to disclose its donors. As a 501(c)(4) “dark money” group, the American Liberty Action Fund isn’t.

The super PAC mistakenly disclosed the contribution as being made to it from GEO’s political action committee. GEO PAC never reported the contribution as it would have been required to do — had it made it, Schwellenbach said. 

“I suppose it put (GEO) in a little bit of a box,” he said. 

The company clarified that the contribution was made not by GEO’s political action committee, but from a legally distinct “political contribution account” that is subject to different rules, he said. GEO also clarified that the donation was made to the Jordan-aligned dark-money group — not his super PAC, Schwellenbach said.

Beyond that concession, the company has been uncommunicative.

“They basically explained what the facts are about this one contribution, but they wouldn’t tell me anything else,” Schwellenbach said. “I asked them, ‘Have you made any other dark-money contributions?’ ‘Are there other groups that received funds?’ … They just wouldn’t engage with any other questions.” 

The Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit watchdog founded by Trevor Potter, a Republican former chairman of the Federal Election Commission, says that GEO acted improperly in making the contribution.

The same day Schwellenbach published his investigation, Campaign Legal Center filed a complaint with the FEC.

It alleges that the Jordan-aligned super PAC failed to properly report the contribution.

“Moreover, the complaint alleges that GEO Group, American Liberty Foundation, and an affiliated 501(c)(4) dark money group, American Liberty Action Fund, violated federal campaign finance laws that prohibit making or knowingly soliciting a federal contractor contribution,” the Campaign Legal Center said in a written statement.

A lot more important than a single $250,000 donation

Among watchdogs, the GEO Group’s contribution raises the question of how much corporate money may have gone to dark-money groups and from there into political coffers around the time lawmakers were voting on the massive One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

And how many other times have anonymous corporate dollars gushed just as government contracts worth billions were about to — or just had — become available? Is there a secret pay-to-play system that the press and almost everyone else is locked out of?

While nearly all dark money groups’ funding sources remain hidden, studies show that oceans of cash flow through them. The Brennan Center for Justice estimates that a record $1.9 billion in dark money was spent in 2024, a presidential election year. 

The only way the public now knows about GEO’s $250,000 contribution to the Jordan-aligned dark-money group is that Schwellenbach stumbled across it.

Turcer of Common Cause Ohio said the and the private-prison dark money contribution show a dire need for more transparency.

“Dark money came into the light because (the Jordan-aligned super PAC) made a mistake and reported the information to the Federal Election Commission,” she said. “This mistake highlights how important it is to actually make this information public. There is no reason to hide this money unless (corporations) believe it is actually influencing (politicians’) decision-making.”

She explained that campaign-finance disclosure laws exist so the public can understand where elected officials are getting their money as they spend ours. Dark money stands that on its head, she said.

“The reason we care about transparency is so we can root out corruption; so that we can follow the money and make connections to policymaking,” she said. “There are real consequences when we can’t actually follow the money and connect the dots.”

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

Christopher Riggs and Kenneth Holycross III were LifeWise teachers, and William VanSickle was a LifeWise volunteer. 

“LifeWise has received zero reports of misconduct involving LifeWise students in connection with these matters or during LifeWise activities more broadly,” LifeWise said in a statement. 

LifeWise confirmed each of the men was previously involved in local LifeWise chapters and all were recently charged with sex crimes involving minors.

“In each case, the individual completed and passed the required background screening process at the time they began serving, which revealed no disqualifying offenses or prior criminal history,” LifeWise said in a statement. 

LifeWise Academy is a controversial Hilliard-based religious instruction program for public school students on “religious release time,” that operates in 34 states and enrolls nearly 100,000 students, according to its website.

LifeWise is a non-denominational Christian program that teaches religion to public school students during the school day at a special release time. 

Religious release time instruction must meet three criteria: the courses must take place off school property, be privately funded, and students must have parental permission.

LifeWise is in 331 Ohio school districts — a little more than half of the state’s school districts, according to a LifeWise spokesperson. 

LifeWise has many critics and parents have said their students have been ostracized and bullied for not taking part in LifeWise.  

Holycross was charged with two counts of rape involving minors less than 13 years old earlier this month and is currently in custody at the Miami County Jail, according to the Miami County Sheriff’s Office. His arrest came after the county sheriff’s office received rape complaints against Holycross.   

Holycross was formerly a teacher at the LifeWise Academy Bethel Local program in Tipp City.

He pleaded not guilty to both counts of rape on May 20. 

Holycross is also listed as a part-time mental health technician at Dayton Children’s Hospital, according to his LinkedIn account. The hospital did not respond to inquiries about Holycross’ employment status.

Riggs pleaded guilty to voyeurism and gross sexual imposition involving a minor in the Muskingum County Court of Common Pleas on May 13 and he will register as a sex offender. He will be sentenced on July 1. 

The crimes reportedly took place between June 1, 2023 through Sept. 23, 2023 and Nov. 1, 2025 through Nov. 30, 2025, according to court documents. 

Riggs was formerly a teacher with the LifeWise Tri-Valley program in Muskingum County and was the pastor of Washington Township Baptist Church in Zanesville. 

William VanSickle pleaded guilty to one count of rape and two counts of sexual battery against a minor in the Perry County Common Pleas Court on April 23. The crimes took place between January 2017 through January 2022, according to court documents. 

He will be sentenced June 1. 

VanSickle was previously a volunteer “in a limited capacity” with the LifeWise Northern Local program in Perry County. 

“Any situation involving crimes against minors is deeply disturbing, and the safety and well-being of students is LifeWise’s highest priority.” 

All LifeWise staff and volunteers go through background screenings, and students are not left one-on-one with an adult during LifeWise programming, according to a statement from LifeWise. 

The Secular Education Association — the group that made the connections between the men and their previous involvement with LifeWise —  is “deeply concerned by the cases,” they said in a statement. 

In January 2025, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine signed a law passed by Republican lawmakers that mandates public school districts create a policy allowing release time for religious instruction.

Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Megan Henry on X or on Bluesky.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The newly bespectacled students beaming with joy were recipients of the OhioSEE program which provides students in kindergarten through third grade comprehensive eye exams and glasses at schools for no cost. 

“This is a program that is very, very cost-effective,” DeWine said recently at a Dublin City Schools elementary school. “It’s a program that makes phenomenal differences in children’s lives. We have tens of thousands of kids out there who are needing an eye exam, who are not getting an eye exam.” 

The OhioSEE program has administrated nearly 1,900 eye exams and nearly 1,200 students have received glasses, according to the Ohio Health Department.

Ohio law requires schools to do a school vision screening to students need an eye exam, but many students who fail a screening never receive follow-up care. Some of the barriers to receiving follow-up care include a lack of transportation, lack of providers in the area, or being underinsured.

At least 35,000 Ohio students who needed glasses did not receive them during the 2022-23 school year. 

The $10 million pilot program was enacted through last year’s state budget and it started in January. The Ohio Department of Health administers the program, which was born out of the Children’s Vision Strike Force that DeWine commissioned in 2024. 

About 230 school districts are enrolled in the OhioSEE pilot program in 15 counties —  Allen, Butler, Clark, Clermont, Cuyahoga, Erie, Franklin, Guernsey, Huron, Jackson, Lorain, Mahoning, Marion, Montgomery, and Ross.

Those counties were chosen by the state health department because 80% of children living there were identified as needing additional vision care after an initial screening, but never received it. 

“These kids have a difficult time,” said Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz, who joined DeWine at the central Ohio elementary school Tuesday. 

“They can’t see the chalkboard. They also get bored. They get disruptive. They get frustrated.” 

DeWine announced at the end of last that Ohio will receive more than $200 million from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services through the Rural Health Transformation Program, and part of those funds will be used to expand OhioSEE into additional counties. 

“We believe with this money … OhioSEE is going to enable us to pretty much cover the whole state,” DeWine said. 

The state health department estimates the program will serve up to 14,000 students per year once OhioSEE is fully implemented.

An estimated 1 in 4 school-aged children have vision problems that could affect their ability to learn, according to the American Optometric Association. 

“Children with vision problems are at a higher risk for falling behind in the classroom, especially as they’re learning to read, write, and interact with classmates,” ODH Director Dr. Bruce Vanderhoff said in a statement. 

Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Megan Henry on X or on Bluesky.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

That was the promise I heard throughout my childhood, a commitment by the Catholic schools I attended that no family would be turned away because they couldn’t afford tuition. It wasn’t a marketing slogan. It was a moral declaration: that access to a values-grounded education shouldn’t depend on a family’s bank account.

My parents believed that. They sacrificed for it. They paid tuition out of pocket while also paying the taxes that funded Ohio’s public schools. They never complained about that arrangement.

In fact, my parents and others like them who made the same choice acknowledged freely that a voucher program would have made their lives easier. Yet, they chose to carry that cost anyway, because they understood something that Ohio’s voucher advocates seem to have forgotten: a commitment to your own children’s education doesn’t require defunding someone else’s.

I’m an ordained minister and pastor now. I still carry the values those schools gave me. And I am firmly, unequivocally opposed to Ohio’s school voucher program.

Here’s the truth that voucher advocates don’t want examined too closely: this debate was never really about parents like mine. It was never about helping working families stretch toward a private education for their kids. The numbers make that plain.

Roughly 90% of Ohio’s EdChoice voucher scholarships are going to students who were already enrolled in private school, meaning this public money is simply reimbursing families for a choice they’ve already made. That’s not expanding access. That’s a subsidy.

And it comes directly at the expense of the 90% of Ohio students who attend public schools.

Every dollar redirected through a voucher is a dollar that doesn’t reach the speech therapist, the school counselor, the science lab, or the building in desperate need of renovation where most kids in a community still show up to every morning.

Ohio began a Fair School Funding Plan that legislators failed to fully implement. Vouchers don’t fill that gap, they widen it. Certain politicians are prioritizing private school students with more public dollars per pupil than the local public school receives. 

We need to call that what it is: theft from our children.

If you live outside Columbus, Cleveland, or Cincinnati, the voucher math becomes even more absurd.

Proponents love to talk about “school choice” as though choice is universally available. But choice requires options, and in rural Ohio, in the small towns and scattered townships that make up most of our state, there often aren’t any. Many rural counties have no private schools at all. When voucher money leaves those districts, it doesn’t help a child find a better option. It simply vanishes from a community that can’t afford to lose it.

We should also be honest about who is pushing this agenda and why. The loudest, most politically organized voucher advocates in Ohio aren’t struggling families looking for alternatives. They’re well-funded interests who benefit financially and politically from a system that keeps public schools underfunded and undefended.

“School choice,” in practice, often means the school’s choice: private institutions can select which students they accept, aren’t subject to the same curriculum standards or financial audits as public schools, and employ teachers held to lower certification requirements. The accountability flows one direction toward public schools while the money flows the other.

My Catholic education gave me something I treasure. It was made possible by a community that meant it when they said no child would be left out and by parents who were willing to sacrifice so I could be part of it. None of it required draining resources from a kid in Guernsey County or Champaign County whose only school is already doing more with less.

Ohio can do better. Fund our public schools as though every child in every county deserves a real education. Not a voucher. A school.

Rev. Dr. Ben Huelskamp is the Executive Director of LOVEboldly and the Pastor of Blue Ocean Faith Columbus.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

Nationally there have been 1,983 measles cases this year, nearly the 2,288 total for all of 2025, which in itself was the worst year since 1991, the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported Friday.  

Halfway through the year, 12 states and the District of Columbia already have more measles cases than they did for a full year in 2025. That’s true for South Carolina and Utah, where cases are already more than double last year, and also for states such as Florida, which has 139 cases so far compared with eight in 2025, and Virginia, which already has 63 compared with six in all of 2025.  

South Carolina, the state with the highest number of cases this year at 669, declared an end in April to an outbreak that was the nation’s largest in 35 years. The outbreak in the northwestern part of the state was centered in Spartanburg County, where religious exemptions to vaccination have spiked.  

The Utah outbreak, which began in the Short Creek area on the Utah/Arizona border, where vaccination rates are low, has generated 484 cases this year and is now slowing, said Dr. Andrew Pavia, a pediatrician and professor at the University of Utah, speaking at a May 26 briefing for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. 

Dozens of measles patients have been hospitalized with serious symptoms such as brain inflammation or pneumonia, he said, and one baby developed life-threatening congenital measles during pregnancy but survived, he said.

The national increases signal that the U.S. will certainly lose the measles elimination status it gained in 2000, Pavia said, in a determination due this fall. 

“Most state public health departments are stretched very, very thin, limiting their ability to contain measles. Anti-vaccine rhetoric has made this all the more difficult,” Pavia said. He referred to $11 billion in federal funding cuts to local public health last year that were delayed by a restraining order when states sued. The case is in settlement negotiations, according to court records. 

The Trump administration cited a “non-existent pandemic that Americans moved on from years ago” in the funding cuts, but COVID-19 is still causing more than 1,000 deaths a month and wastewater surveillance still shows hotspots in the Appalachian region and some other states, including Michigan.

Whooping cough is also on the rise with Ohio and Florida most affected. Deaths last year were at the highest level, 22, since 2010, according to the latest CDC WONDER provisional statistics.  

“The rising number of deaths from whooping cough, including among infants, is a reminder of the vital importance of vaccination,” said Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, a pediatrician and professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore who follows whooping cough trends. 

“Families who follow public health guidance on vaccination and other precautions can avoid a needless tragedy,” Sharfstein said. 

Louisiana was accused of unusual delays in reporting a whooping cough outbreak last year that claimed at least two lives. Shortly after the deaths were reported, the state ended promotion of vaccines and vaccination events. At least three babies died in Kentucky last year along with at least one in Oregon. 

Unvaccinated people are like fuel for the wildfire of disease outbreaks, said Pavia, of the University of Utah, in his remarks. 

“Until we can restore faith in vaccines and restore funding for our public health agencies and increase measles vaccine coverage, we have to anticipate that there will be many more outbreaks, and some of these may blow up into very large conflagrations,” Pavia said.

Meanwhile the Trump administration announced a new quarantine center in Kenya opening Friday, May 29, for Americans exposed to the Ebola virus in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The move was criticized by the Infectious Diseases Society of America in a statement, saying the decision to send exposed Americans to Kenya “raises serious questions about resources, timing and the level of care Americans sent there will receive.”

On Ebola, a May 22 CDC directive prohibited United States entry of non-citizens who had been in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, or nearby Uganda or South Sudan, in the previous 21 days. The disease has killed 224 people in that region, and there are more than 900 suspected cases. 

Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@stateline.org.

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Ohio Capital Journal, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

An ongoing hunger and labor strike at the 1,000-bed Delaney Hall facility in Newark, New Jersey, reportedly involves roughly 300 people and has sparked daily protests outside the jail, which is owned and operated by the GEO Group, a private security company that provides security, maintenance, food and medical care under a 15-year contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Earlier this month, it was reported that at least 20 detainees at the 750-bed Desert View Annex in Adelanto, California, had launched a hunger strike to call attention to what they allege are substandard conditions at that facility, including a lack of medical care, unsafe drinking water, and mold.

And last month, hunger strikes reportedly erupted at the 1,800-bed North Lake Processing Center in Baldwin, Michigan, and at the Moshannon Valley Processing Center in Clearfield County, Pennsylvania, which has a capacity of nearly 1,900. North Lake is the largest facility in the Midwest, and Moshannon Valley is the largest in the Northeast.

The GEO Group operates all of the facilities where the hunger strikes have taken place.

Families of migrants detained at Delaney Hall say their relatives  are being tear gassed and beaten by guards. Outside the facility, ICE agents have countered protesters with pepper spray, the New Jersey Monitor reported.

In a statement on Thursday, New Jersey Democratic Gov. Mikie Sherill said the New Jersey Department of Health tried to conduct a health inspection of Delaney Hall, but was denied access to all but a limited portion of the facility. Sherill said Delaney Hall should be shut down.

“Refusing to provide full access raises serious questions about what ICE is trying to hide from public view,” she said in the statement. “I am calling for ICE to immediately de-escalate the situation as I continue working to keep New Jersey residents safe.”

ICE issued a statement dismissing the accusations of substandard conditions at the facilities as a “hoax.”

“All detainees are provided with 3 meals a day, clean water, clothing, bedding, showers, soap, and toiletries. Illegal aliens also have access to phones to communicate with their family members and lawyers,” the statement says. “Certified dietitians evaluate meals. In fact, ICE has higher detention standards than most U.S. prisons that hold actual U.S. citizens.”

In a statement, the GEO Group asserted that its support services “are monitored by ICE, including by on-site agency personnel, and other organizations within the Department of Homeland Security to ensure compliance with ICE’s detention standards and contract requirements regarding the treatment and services ICE detainees receive.”

For the last few days, Gabriela Fuentes, 35, has protested outside Delaney Hall.  She said her husband, who came to the U.S. from Guatemala on a work visa, told her recently that the guards had beaten and tear gassed him and other detainees.

“We’re all human, we’re all people, just because we’re Hispanic does not mean that we need to be treated like this,” Fuentes said.

Haddy Gassama, senior counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, described the hunger strikes as “the natural consequence of a detention system that’s really falling apart at its seams.”

“Hunger strikes are a tool that people use when they are most desperate, where they feel that they have no other options,” Gassama said. “It’s really the natural consequence of what happens when you supersize a detention system that’s already rife with abuse so fast, with so much money, with so little accountability.”

Jasmine Rivera, executive director of the immigrant rights group Pennsylvania Immigration Coalition, said it’s hard to get a handle on the scope of the hunger strikes in Pennsylvania and elsewhere.

“Upon the hunger strike, the detention center stopped communication lines to that particular unit, so it’s hard for us and for family members to stay up-to-date on what was happening,” Rivera said.

In Michigan, Ruby Robinson, an attorney at the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center, called for more state oversight of ICE detention facilities.

“It’s our understanding that they do not really have the means to adequately provide the oversight that’s needed, and outside of that, we don’t really see any other oversight, besides visits from members of Congress,” Robinson said.

“Because many immigrants are being detained in county jails, not just private detention facilities, there’s an opportunity to ensure that state law is followed. And if state law is insufficient, then it needs to be updated to basically reflect reality.”

This story was updated to include a statement from the GEO Group.

Stateline reporter Shalina Chatlani can be reached at schatlani@stateline.org.

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Ohio Capital Journal, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The remark came during a 2023 episode of Ramaswamy’s podcast, recorded while he was seeking the Republican presidential nomination, in a conversation with Adam Coleman, author of “Black Victim to Black Victor.”

“One of the points that came out of my dialogue with her was that actually a Black baby is probably safer in the inner street of Chicago in the inner city of Chicago than in the womb of his own Black mother, and I think that that’s actually a problem, and it’s directly the product of what Margaret Sanger envisioned,” Ramaswamy said.

In the same conversation, Ramaswamy asserted that Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, launched the organization with the goal of reducing the Black population. Fact-checkers, including NPR, have found no basis for the claim that Planned Parenthood was created to suppress Black births. Sanger was a prominent birth-control advocate whose views aligned with the eugenics movement of her era, but her push to expand access to contraception also drew support from some Black leaders and organizations at the time.

The clip is not new. It resurfaced Monday after national Democratic organizations, including the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Governors Association, shared it, theGrio reported.

Ohio has among the worst infant mortality records in the country. In 2022, Black infants in the state died at a rate of 13.4 per 1,000 live births, compared with 5.7 for white infants — about 2.4 times the rate — according to a Groundwork Ohio report analyzing a decade of data. The report found Ohio ranked near the bottom nationally and that the racial gap had widened over the previous 10 years. Black women in Ohio are also more than twice as likely to die from pregnancy-related complications than white women, state health data show.

Reaction to the clip on TiffinOhio.net’s Facebook page was swift and largely critical. Many readers questioned what Chicago had to do with the Ohio governor’s race and pointed to the state’s own infant and maternal mortality rates. Several wrote that the remark would shape their vote in November. A number said they had fact-checked the clip themselves before accepting it was authentic. Some commenters defended the statement on anti-abortion grounds.

Ramaswamy won the Republican primary on May 5 and faces Democrat Amy Acton, a physician and former director of the Ohio Department of Health, in the Nov. 3 general election. Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican, is term-limited and cannot seek re-election.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The founder of The Rooster, a prominent progressive newsletter that regularly criticizes Ohio’s political establishment, was arrested at the Statehouse on Monday.

Officials charged Donald “DJ” Byrnes with a misdemeanor charge of telecommunications harassment. Ohio State Highway Patrol Sgt. Tyler Ross, a patrol spokesperson, said Byrnes was arrested at the Statehouse on a warrant entered by the police department in Kirtland, a small city in Lake County, near Cleveland.

Records show Byrnes is being held in jail by the Franklin County Sheriff’s Office as of 6 p.m. Monday on a misdemeanor offense. The records indicate he’s being held on behalf of officials in Lake County, near Cleveland. 

Specifics about the charges are not available on the Willoughby Municipal Court’s website as of Monday evening.

A photograph shared on social media by Max Littman, an occasional contributor to The Rooster, shows what appears to be a law enforcement officer standing behind Byrnes, his hands behind his back. The two are approaching a police car parked outside the Ohio Statehouse. 

The exact nature of the allegation against Byrnes is unclear, but his arrest could face scrutiny over whether it’s an example of the government punishing a citizen for political speech, violating basic First Amendment rights. 

In 21st century fashion, Byrnes operates as some combination of an online political commentator, newsgatherer, provocateur, prankster and gadfly. In recent days, he has feuded with Republican gubernatorial candidate Vivek Ramaswamy over whether the candidate was denied access to the New York Knicks’ locker room after the team eliminated the Cleveland Cavaliers from the NBA playoffs at a game in Cleveland. Ramaswamy denied Byrnes’ report as “100% fake” and called him a “leftist blogger with mental health issues.”

Telecommunications harassment is a first-degree misdemeanor, the most severe classification before felony level crimes. It’s punishable by up to 180 days in prison if the state can prove Byrnes knowingly made a telecommunication “with purpose to harass, intimidate, or abuse.”

Both Littman and Byrnes’ wife, Rachel Wenning, citing a line on apparent court paperwork identifying the victim as “JC,” claimed the arrest revolves around a text message sent to Sen. Jerry Cirino, a regular subject of Byrnes’ ridicule. (Rooster articles regularly refer to Cirino as “Little Mussolini.”) Cirino lives in Willoughby in Lake County.

Cirino largely declined comment Monday but said he “did not request any such thing” when asked about Byrnes’ arrest. 

The court records were published Monday afternoon by Jack Windsor, a conservative media personality in the Columbus area whom Byrnes also has criticized. The case number in the records though did not appear on the searchable case management system for the Willoughby Municipal Court, which handles misdemeanor charges filed in Kirtland, on Monday evening. The apparent warrant makes reference to an “explicit image and two harassing text messages.”

Signal Ohio is a nonprofit news organization covering government, education, health, economy and public safety.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

But the Trump administration’s push to reward its supporters also harkens back to an earlier era of American cronyism, experts say, while expanding the frontiers of political favoritism.

From the early years of the United States until well into the 19th century, a spoils system dominated the federal government. Presidents handed out jobs to supporters, filling the bureaucracy with workers who had demonstrated loyalty to the administration in power. 

Trump’s political idol, President Andrew Jackson, replaced large numbers of federal officials after his 1829 inauguration, for instance. One appointee to a role at the Port of New York made out with more than $1 million, valued at tens of millions today.

The comparison isn’t exact. The spoils system was associated with the distribution of government jobs to political allies, a practice called patronage. Trump’s new fund would instead deliver taxpayer dollars directly to favored individuals.

Yet, academics who have studied the spoils system and the presidency see parallels between the past and present — with a desire to reward allies and build allegiance at the center of it all.

“It seems to me that may be the common element here,” said Sidney Shapiro, a professor of law at Wake Forest University who wrote before the 2024 election that Trump wanted to reinstate the spoils system. “It appears President Trump is thinking about using the fund to reward people unfairly punished, but I think in his mind it’s unfairly punished because they were trying to support him.”

Five-member board to be named by Trump

The Department of Justice announced the “anti-weaponization fund,” which critics call a “slush fund,” on May 18 as it moved to settle a lawsuit Trump had filed in his personal capacity against the IRS over the leaking of his tax returns by a former agency contractor. 

The suit placed Trump in the extremely unusual position of effectively negotiating with himself because he has erased the DOJ’s post-Watergate tradition of independence from the White House.

Even before the settlement, the Justice Department under Trump had taken actions that would have been unheard of in other recent administrations. For instance, federal prosecutors have brought a case against former FBI Director James Comey and tried to pursue criminal charges against New York Democratic Attorney General Letitia James. 

The DOJ has also obtained an indictment against the Southern Poverty Law Center, a frequent critic of GOP politicians.

Trump’s settlement agreement provides for the creation of the fund overseen by a board of five members chosen by acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who previously served as Trump’s personal attorney. Trump can fire the members for any reason.

The fund’s board will have the power to make decisions about payments, as well as issue formal apologies. Claims submitted to the fund must be processed by Dec. 1, 2028, prior to the end of Trump’s term.

Jan. 6 rioters line up

A bevy of Trump supporters and hangers-on have said they plan to apply for compensation. They include individuals who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, disrupting Congress’ certification of President Joe Biden’s Electoral College victory. Trump previously pardoned rioters when he took office in January 2025.

Former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio, who was convicted of seditious conspiracy and sentenced to 22 years in prison before Trump pardoned him, predicted on a recent podcast that a “lot of J6ers are going to spend their money on firearms.”

Trump has cast the fund as an act of magnanimity on his part because the settlement agreement doesn’t include a monetary payout to him. 

However, Blanche also signed a document barring any additional scrutiny of the president’s past tax history, a move that shields him from audits. The New York Times and ProPublica reported in 2024 that Trump could have owed $100 million if he lost an audit battle over improper tax breaks.

“I gave up a lot of money in allowing the just announced Anti-Weaponization Fund to go forward. I could have settled my case, including the illegal release of my Tax Returns and the equally illegal BREAK IN of Mar-a-Lago, for an absolute fortune,” Trump wrote on Truth Social, referring to the FBI search of his Florida residence in 2022.

“Instead, I am helping others, who were so badly abused by an evil, corrupt, and weaponized Biden Administration, receive, at long last, JUSTICE!”

Trump has adopted a “patrimonial” approach to governing, James Pfiffner, a professor emeritus at George Mason University who has studied the presidency, wrote in an email to States Newsroom. 

Benefits, like federal contracts, go to those who are loyal, Pfiffner wrote, and the government is treated as if it were a family business and the state’s resources were his personal property.

The “anti-weaponization fund” represents an extension of that approach, Pfiffner wrote, but also goes further than past presidents. He wrote that he could think of no past precedents in the modern presidency for such a blatant use of taxpayer money to potentially reward loyalists.

“At least in the spoils system, the people hired by the government were working and presumably doing their jobs,” Pfiffner wrote. “The beneficiaries of this fund have done nothing to earn their benefits, and presumably some will be rewarded for having committed crimes to overturn the 2020 election.”

Congress began curbing the spoils system after the 1881 assassination of President James Garfield by a spurned job seeker. 

Over the next two decades, many federal positions were moved into a civil service system. While the federal government still includes some 4,000 political appointees today, the vast majority of the bureaucracy is staffed by civil servants.

Critics and defenders in Congress

But it’s unclear whether Congress will block Trump’s fund, despite an intense backlash.

Anger among Republican senators has stalled action on budget legislation funding immigration enforcement, which Democrats would have used to force votes on amendments to block the fund. Democrats have introduced multiple bills aimed at halting it.

“Congress cannot stand by while Trump turns the federal government into a political operation for his friends and cronies,” Sen. Michael Bennet, a Colorado Democrat, said in a statement.

Obstacles exist to congressional action. Even if Republicans who control both chambers voted with Democrats, Trump could veto bills passed placing restrictions on the fund, which would require two-thirds majorities in the House and Senate to override. 

And some GOP lawmakers have defended the fund.

On May 21, Sen. Tommy Tuberville, an Alabama Republican, objected to a unanimous consent request by Sen. Alex Padilla, a California Democrat, to pass a bill that would prohibit payments to Jan. 6 rioters.

“Thankfully, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and the Trump Department of Justice established a standard and lawful process to hear from American citizens who suffered lawfare or weaponization under the Biden administration,” Tuberville said on the Senate floor.

Lawsuits have been filed challenging the fund and how it’s structured. Two police officers who defended the Capitol on Jan. 6 have sued, warning that rioters could use the money to organize. 

Fund blocked temporarily

On Friday, a federal judge in Virginia ordered the Trump administration to halt work on the fund for at least two weeks while she considers ordering a lengthier pause.

The decision came in a lawsuit brought by a former federal prosecutor fired by the DOJ and a California professor who was charged but acquitted of assaulting a federal officer after protesting an immigration raid.

Legal advocacy groups also argue Congress didn’t intend for federal money to be used for these kinds of payoffs.

“Another commonality is we the taxpayers are funding both,” Shapiro, the Wake Forest professor, said of the spoils system and the Trump fund. “We certainly fund the jobs that people have and now we’re funding this fund.”

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

But the proposed rule appears to smooth over some of the rougher edges of the executive order, which has been condemned by Democratic state officials as an intrusion on their constitutional authority to administer elections.

“The proposed rule would apply uniform standards for the mailing of absentee ballots to and from voters, which the Postal Service understands will facilitate the faithful execution of federal law,” the Postal Service said in a document posted on the Federal Register website.

The executive order faces at least five lawsuits. Experts on the Postal Service have also warned that Trump’s attempt to assert authority over the agency threatens its decades-long record of independence.

The order remains in effect for now ahead of the November midterm elections. A federal judge on Thursday declined to block it after finding the federal government had taken few steps to implement it. However, with Friday’s proposed rule, that’s beginning to change.

Some exemptions

Trump’s March 31 order directed the postmaster general, who leads the Postal Service, to propose a rule that would block states from sending ballots through the mail except to voters on lists provided by the state to the Postal Service. In effect, states would be blocked from allowing residents to vote by mail unless they provide their names to the federal government.

The proposed rule fulfills that directive, but it exempts overseas and military voters — a concession that wasn’t included in the executive order. Voting by citizens who are abroad and in the military is regulated by the federal Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act. The law sets strict deadlines for states to send ballots.

The rule also doesn’t require states to submit voter lists for primary elections.

“Primary elections largely involve political parties selecting nominees through their chosen procedures, rather than direct election of federal officials, and thus implicate different considerations that bear on the necessity for these provisions,” the Postal Service said in a document outlining the proposed rule.

The Postal Service document emphasizes that states retain full control of who gets to vote by mail or alter the information. 

The proposed rule creates data reporting standards that “can provide information regarding the sending of ballots through the mails that would be available for use by law enforcement,” the document says.

The Postal Service plans to formally publish the rule on June 2.

Noncitizen voting

Trump and administration officials have framed the executive order as a way to combat noncitizen voting, which occurs very rarely. Trump has long attacked mail voting, though he has voted by mail multiple times.

“I think this will help a lot with elections,” Trump said when he signed the order.

But opponents of the executive order say it violates the U.S. Constitution, which gives states the responsibility of running elections and allows Congress to pass regulations. The order represents an attempt by Trump to unilaterally control elections, they say.

After a federal judge in Washington, D.C., declined to block the order, another federal judge in Massachusetts will hold a hearing on June 2 in a separate lawsuit challenging the directive brought by Democratic attorneys general.

“Widespread chaos and confusion is the goal of this executive order,” Cliff Albright, co-founder of Black Voters Matter, said in a statement.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

But Democrats speaking to reporters outside the session criticized Republicans for not conducting the interview under oath or on camera and said Bondi did not answer many questions and blamed acting Attorney General Todd Blanche for the chaotic release of files related to Epstein. Bondi later denied on social media she evaded questions or tried to target Blanche.

Bondi sat for a transcribed hours-long interview before the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform as the panel continues its probe into the government’s handling of the Epstein case and sexual abuse survivors.

Epstein died in 2019 in a Manhattan jail cell awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges.

Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., told reporters before the early morning interview began that the panel is “continuing to move along, and hopefully today will be beneficial.” 

Epstein estate subpoena

The committee subpoenaed Epstein’s estate in August 2025 and made public all documents it received, Comer said. He said the committee has since conducted more than a dozen interviews and has six more scheduled throughout the summer, including with Epstein’s former assistant Lesley Groff, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates and private equity investor Leon Black.

“The government has failed the survivors. There’s no question about that, and that dates back five presidential administrations,” Comer said. 

Comer credited Bondi for appearing a second time before the committee and criticized Democrats who he said “got up and walked out” of the first meeting in March while Republicans “asked questions for a couple of hours.”

Committee Democrats were highly critical.

The panel’s ranking member, Robert Garcia, D-Calif., said the interview ground rules barring video and allowing Bondi to speak without taking an oath are a “disservice to the American people.”

House Oversight Democrats, and an Epstein abuse survivor, spoke to reporters outside the committee room for roughly 30 minutes following their portion of questioning.

The minority members said Bondi refused to answer any questions related to Trump’s knowledge of how the Department of Justice was handling the Epstein documents, and that a current DOJ lawyer was in the room with Bondi, choosing which questions she would answer. 

They also said Bondi sidestepped responsibility for the mishandled release of the files that initially unmasked victims’ names.

“She continues to push all of the investigation and the blame on acting AG Todd Blanche. She said, and I quote, ‘Acting AG Blanche was managing the entire investigation,’ end quote,” Garcia said.

Blanche, whom the president named as the acting attorney general after Bondi’s exit, was Trump’s personal lawyer prior to his second term. Committee Democrats said they plan to request Blanche come before the panel for questioning.

Bondi fires back

Bondi denied Garcia’s statement to reporters that she pushed blame on Blanche for the Epstein files release.

In two posts on X Friday afternoon, Bondi wrote, “I praised Acting AG Blanche’s management of this Herculean task. I said his ethics are beyond reproach and that he is an incredible Attorney General.”

She also denied remarks to reporters by panel member Rep. James Walkinshaw, D-Va., that she was not forthcoming about the president’s knowledge of Epstein’s actions.

“MISREPRESENTATION by Walkinshaw.  What the world knows to be true is President Trump banned Epstein from Mar a Lago decades ago bc Epstein was a despicable creep!!” Bondi wrote.

States Newsroom contacted the White House for comment but did not immediately receive a response. Trump has denied any wrongdoing or knowledge of Epstein’s crimes.

A Department of Justice spokesperson confirmed in a written statement to States Newsroom that department personnel accompanied Bondi to the interview.

“Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon and other Department of Justice personnel attended former Attorney General Bondi’s transcribed interview to assist the Committee in understanding the Department’s role in implementing and complying with the Epstein Files Transparency Act during her tenure,” according to the statement.

The spokesperson continued: “Because former Attorney General Bondi oversaw the Department at the time the Act was enacted and carried out, DOJ’s presence was solely to ensure accurate representation of Department processes, facilitate any necessary clarifications, and support a complete factual record for the Committee.

“As with any congressional engagement involving past Department actions, DOJ routinely provides staff with relevant institutional knowledge to support transparency, accuracy, and cooperation with oversight responsibilities.”

Survivor speaks out

Epstein survivor Liz Stein, now a human trafficking specialist and advocate for the organization World Without Exploitation, said outside the committee room that the Trump administration needs to do more to deliver justice to victims.

“These files contain leads, names, connections, friendships, patterns, witnesses, travel records, financial relationships and institutional failures,” Stein said. “In any other sex trafficking case of this magnitude, those leads would be aggressively pursued, but in this case they have not been.”

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

Requiring voters to show a government-issued photo ID at the polls is popular in opinion polls, and it’s been the law in Ohio since 2023. The new proposal would go before voters this November, and enshrine the requirement in the Ohio Constitution with a permanence well beyond the current statute.

That doesn’t appear to please many besides Ohio House Joint Resolution 9’s sponsors. Of the 80-plus witnesses who submitted testimony, just two support the idea. Neither of them showed up to testify in person last week.

Voting rights groups question the push for an amendment when the proposal makes no changes at all to current law and only makes future changes harder. Meanwhile, advocates who support increasingly more restrictive voting policies reject the idea because it doesn’t go far enough.

Voting rights opposition

Several speakers offered a version of the point made by Richard Topper, a retired lawyer and poll worker — the problem isn’t photo voter ID, it’s rushing to put it in the constitution.

ACLU of Ohio Legislative Director Gary Daniels explained the group’s opposition “is much less about the underlying policy issue of photo IDs for voters and much more about taking away valuable policy and legislative time to quickly place an unneeded constitutional amendment on the ballot for purely political reasons.”

State Rep. Adam Mathews, R-Lebanon, pushed back. He pointed to the ACLU’s support for an Equal Rights Amendment despite similar protections showing up in several federal statutes. Why shouldn’t state lawmakers take steps to insulate Ohio’s current voting laws?

“I think the difference between those examples and this example,” Daniels said, “is that when we (support amendments), we are doing it, hoping to make things better. We don’t see H.J.R. 9 as making things better.”

Although the proposed amendment codifies photo voter ID, it isn’t a carbon copy of Ohio’s statutory language. Several voting rights advocates raised concerns about what the resolution leaves out and what it adds in.

When lawmakers approved photo voter ID in 2023, they included a provision allowing anyone to receive a free state-issued ID card. One reason for that is the prohibition on poll taxes in the U.S. Constitution’s 24th Amendment. But that free ID provision doesn’t appear in the proposed amendment.

“You can easily argue that it is unconstitutional at the federal level to not have free ID,” League of Women Voters Executive Director Jen Miller said, “that if you require something that costs money, that that is a poll tax.”

Miller opposes H.J.R. 9, but told lawmakers if they choose to go forward, they should at least include the free ID provision in the amendment’s text.

Opponents also worry about what lawmakers are adding through the resolution. The measure’s final section asserts that nothing in the resolution requires lawmakers to allow voting “in any location or manner other than in person at a polling place on the day of an election.”

To Steve David from All Voting is Local Action Ohio, that section hints at lawmakers’ long-term intent.

“Rather than installing protections for Ohio voters,” he said, “the General Assembly is telegraphing its intentions to restrict early in-person voting and eliminate the no-fault absentee system.”

‘Unequal treatment’

Advocates who typically welcome more stringent voting policies in the name of greater “integrity” batted down the proposal as well. Marcell Strbich, a retired Air Force officer who regularly testifies on electoral legislation and ran unsuccessfully for Ohio Secretary of State in last month’s Republican primary, said the amendment would lock in “unequal treatment.”

“The problem with the resolution,” he said, “is not the goal of requiring voter ID — as has been discussed today, that’s widely understood and unanimously agreed upon — but the unfair and incomplete way that it achieves it.”

Strbich sees a glaring hole in Ohio’s photo voter ID requirements: absentee voters. While a voter arriving in person at the polls has to present an unexpired government-issued ID, absentee voters simply write down their information on the ballot envelope.

“Most Ohioans support universal photo ID,” Strbich said, “yet many voters will not realize they’re being asked to enshrine this clause of unequal treatment, photo ID for in-person voters only, with no requirement for mail-in absentee ballots.”

To Strbich and others in his corner, that amounts to a “fatal flaw” or a “constitutional loophole.” They say lawmakers should require absentee voters include a photocopy of their license or ID card with their ballot. A measure to that effect, Ohio House Bill 577, is currently under consideration by the same committee working on H.J.R. 9. Strbich worries passage of the amendment might close the door on ID requirements for absentee voters.

Eric Watson, who ran unsuccessfully in the Republican primary for the 88th Ohio House district, described himself as a supporter of the resolution — so long as lawmakers “close these loopholes.”

“You need to show a government photo ID for many other things,” Watson said, “so it only makes sense that a government photo ID would also be required for mail-in ballots to help protect one of the greatest privileges we have as a citizen.”

Ohio state Rep. Tom Young, R-Washington Twp., expressed doubts about security.

“Before you leave today,” he told Watson, “Give me your driver’s license. I’ll keep it for a while and return it to you, maybe, and store all the data. Is that a good idea?”

Meanwhile, committee chair Ohio House Rep. Sharon Ray, R-Wadsworth, pressed him on the logic of requiring absentee voters to send a photocopied ID.

“What are you going to compare the copy to?” she asked. “Do you see how nonsensical that is?”

Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Nick Evans on X or on Bluesky.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The Columbus-based Center for Christian Virtue sent a letter to Dominick Gerace II, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Ohio, and David M Toepfer, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio, calling on the two to enforce the federal Comstock Act, “as it applies to the interstate mailing of mifepristone” and other drugs used in abortion procedures.

“For decades, federal prosecutors chose not to enforce these provisions,” the letter from Aaron Baer, president of the Center for Christian Virtue, states. “That prosecutorial discretion was a policy choice; it was never a legal determination that the statute was unenforceable or unconstitutional.”

The Comstock Act is a federal law that was passed in 1873, originally to bar “obscene” and “immoral” materials from being circulated through the mail. It noted anything “designed, adapted, or intended for producing abortion” as examples of materials for which distribution was criminalized under the law. Provisions regarding contraception were removed in the early 1970s, and the passage of Roe v. Wade by the U.S. Supreme Court, which legalized abortion nationwide through the Constitution, changed the way the law was seen and enforced.

Though Roe v. Wade was repealed by a separate U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2022, Ohio voters approved an amendment to the state constitution legalizing abortion and other reproductive care in the state. The amendment was approved in 2023 by 57% of voters.

The Comstock Act has come up more recently with discussion of mifepristone, a drug typically used in tandem with misoprostol in a regimen used to perform an abortion without the need for surgery. Abortion rights advocates consider medication abortions to be a safe and more accessible option for low income individuals, and those who don’t live near a clinic that performs abortions, or don’t have reliable transportation to get to and from a clinic.

Medication abortion is now overtaking other methods of abortion in the state, according to the Ohio Department of Health’s annual abortion report. The report also attributes a 15% increase in abortions from 2024 to 2025 to telehealth access.

Despite having been an FDA-approved drug since 2000 and with decades of peer-reviewed research finding complications to be statistically rare, mifepristone has been in the crosshairs of state and federal lawmakers, including Ohio Republican U.S. Sen. Jon Husted, who participated in a congressional hearing on “dangerous abortion drugs” in January.

Most recently, the U.S. Supreme Court has held off on banning mail-order medication abortion distribution as it considers a Louisiana case that asks the court to do just that. In a dissent to a Supreme Court decision in May that continues to block a lower court ruling banning mail distribution of mifepristone, Justice Clarence Thomas brought up the Comstock Act. Thomas said the law still criminalizes mailing of drugs for abortions, and because of the law, he said drug companies should not be allowed to continue distributing mifepristone through the mail “based on lost profits from their criminal enterprise.”

In its May letter to federal prosecutors, the Center for Christian Virtue argued that the Comstock Act “is not a dead letter.”

“The statute is unambiguous,” Baer writes. “It does not contain an exception for FDA-approved drugs, for physician supervision, or for states that have chosen to permit abortion. It says what it says.”

Baer points to Thomas’ dissent in the letter, along with a separate dissent by Justice Samuel Alito, and said he hopes concerns over the mail-order process ” will eventually prevail in the courts.”

But until a decision is made, Baer argues federal prosecutors have an oath to enforce the laws, including the Comstock Act.

“We recognize that prosecutorial discretion is a real and legitimate doctrine,” Baer wrote. “But discretion does not mean abdication.”

The letter asks that Gerace and Toepfer “open investigative inquiries into mail-order abortion providers knowingly shipping mifepristone,” coordinate with the U.S. Postal Inspection Service to “document violations,” and also “pursue prosecution where the evidence supports charges, and make clear to providers that the era of consequence-free Comstock violations has ended.”

Ohio-based abortion rights advocacy group Abortion Forward said the push to enforce the Comstock Act goes against what Ohioans want.

“Ohioans do not find it obscene to access safe and effective medication from trusted healthcare providers via telemedicine,” Abortion Forward executive director Kellie Copeland said in a statement. “But what we do find obscene is lobbyists and lawyers shoving their nose into our doctor’s offices, medicine cabinets, and bedrooms because they think they are better than us.”

The offices of the U.S. attorneys mentioned by the Center for Christian Virtue did not respond to requests for comment from the Capital Journal.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

Even if you think taxpayers should be forced to send money to religious institutions, despite the separation of church and state enshrined in the first clause of the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights…

Even if you think state lawmakers should be funding this separate system of private education in Ohio propping up religious institutions and private business with taxpayer dollars, despite the Ohio Constitution‘s clear mandate for funding one public system of common schools and explicit prohibition against religious sects controlling any part of those school funds…

And even if you don’t mind that most of the new recipients of this taxpayer-funded public money never attended public school, and it’s OK with you for taxpayers to subsidize the private school tuition of well-to-do families while nearly 90% of Ohio K-12 students do attend public school…

At the very least, at the bare minimum, don’t Ohio taxpayers deserve a receipt?

An invoice? An accounting of the bill of goods and services rendered?

Some independently audited way to compare and contrast their local public schools that taxpayers are funding to the private ones that taxpayers are also funding?

Don’t Ohio taxpayers deserve transparency, accountability, and oversight of $2.5 billion in our money that is being handed over by our state government leaders to private schools and religious institutions?

A bipartisan group of Ohio lawmakers thinks so, and they’ve introduced a proposal that would dramatically increase transparency over Ohio’s private school voucher programs.

Among a dozen provisions offered by state Sens. Bill Blessing, R-Colerain Township; Kent Smith, D-Euclid; and Rep. Justin Pizzulli, R-Scioto County, Ohio Senate Bill 443 would audit how state dollars are spent in two of the state’s private school voucher programs, create report cards for academic performance, and require students to take the same end-of-course exams that public schools mandate.

Private and religious schools accepting the vouchers would have to submit weekly attendance records, conduct criminal background checks of employees, report the tuition and fees charged by the school in a five-year cost trend, report how many of their students have an Individualized Education Program, and publish their dropout and graduation rates.

Ohio public schools face significant oversight from the state on their budgets, on their performance, and on their curriculum, as it should be. It makes sense: They’re funded by taxpayer money and taxpayers deserve oversight and accountability.

So why shouldn’t private and religious schools that are also taking taxpayer money also be subjected to oversight and accountability?

After all, taxpayers are taking a risk on investment. It hasn’t always worked out well. Ohio taxpayers were ripped off by hundreds of millions of dollars when the ECOT for-profit, private online charter school scheme crashed and burned in 2018.

As a concept, it seems like a no-brainer that $2.5 billion in Ohio taxpayer money deserves transparency and accountability.

Unfortunately that is not a no-brainer for Ohio House Speaker Matt Huffman, R-Lima.

Nearly as soon as the bipartisan proposal was introduced, Huffman threw cold water on it.

But Huffman’s arguments against transparency and accountability are far too weak to carry the $2.5 billion Ohio taxpayer burden they labor under.

Huffman’s first claim is that the best argument that there already is enough accountability is the fact that parents already send their children to these schools.

I’m not sure why that means that those parents don’t still deserve independently audited information on academic performance, graduation rates, attendance records, and accountability testing on par with public schools.

Comparison shopping would be far easier with independent apples-to-apples comparisons. Why don’t those parents deserve that? Huffman doesn’t say. We’re left to wonder.

Huffman’s second claim is that he has concerns about infringing on a private business. He neglects to mention that this is a private business taking public money.

You see, Huffman’s justifications would only make sense if a private family was using their own private money to pay a private business. That’s not the case.

These are private families using public Ohio taxpayer dollars to pay a private business or religious institution.

The use of public money demands public accountability far beyond the personal views of the parent using the public’s money at the public’s expense.

And privacy against public oversight for the business or religious institution stops when they dip their hands in the public honey jar.

If the issue was the contracting of home health services with Medicaid money, would Huffman make the same argument? The services have all the accountability they need because families are using them? The service agencies are private businesses and we don’t want to infringe on the privacy of a private business, even though they’re accepting huge amounts of public money?

‘Seems like pretty weak sauce.

‘Seems like pretty poor reasoning for the state government of Ohio to abdicate responsibility and oversight over billions of dollars in taxpayer money being handed out to private institutions.

If you are going to open up the public coffers for private business, Ohio taxpayers deserve transparency and accountability at the very least. This is as simple and basic as it gets.

If state leaders are going to continue to deny Ohio taxpayers that basic transparency and accountability over our own money, then taxpayers deserve a far more intelligible argument than Huffman has been able to offer.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The local actions come as state lawmakers also are looking to limit or repeal the incentives for the centers, which are sprawling campuses of computer servers that store and transmit the data behind apps and websites.

Supporters of the pauses say cities need rules before projects arrive, especially to answer residential concerns about electricity use, energy costs and nuisance issues. Industry supporters argue data centers bring jobs and tax revenue and are an essential part of the nation’s digital infrastructure. They warn that communities that block data centers are sacrificing those benefits.

The Denver City Council this month unanimously approved a one-year moratorium on data centers, halting new zoning permits and site development plans while the city drafts rules for future projects. In April, Oklahoma City approved a similar moratorium that will be in effect until the end of this year, or until the city updates its zoning code. Tulsa, Oklahoma, also approved a temporary stop on new data center construction, though major projects already in the pipeline will be allowed to proceed.

Smaller communities are taking similar steps.

In Illinois, both Bloomington and Normal earlier this month approved six-month moratoriums, and Morgan County took the same action in April. In Michigan, Huron County this week approved a three-year moratorium, joining roughly 20 other Michigan communities that have paused data center construction.

In Georgia, Camden County enacted a six-month moratorium earlier this month, becoming the first community on the state’s coast to do so. And a cluster of counties in North Carolina have hit pause, including Chatham County in February and Orange County (which includes Chapel Hill) in April.

But not all cities are souring on data centers: Cheyenne, Wyoming, this week opted not to proceed with a one-year moratorium after a lengthy public hearing.

A study released at the end of 2024 by researchers at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory estimated U.S. data centers used about 4.4% of U.S. electricity in 2023, with projected use rising to between 6.7% and 12% by 2028.

A March Gallup poll found that seven in 10 Americans would oppose the nearby construction of data centers for artificial intelligence (AI), higher than the 53% of respondents who said they would oppose living near a nuclear power plant.

Stateline reporter Robbie Sequeira can be reached at rsequeira@stateline.org

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Ohio Capital Journal, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

All seven critical violations were noted as corrected during the inspection. State food code defines a critical violation as one with a direct connection to foodborne illness risk.

Inspected Monday, May 18, 2026, the Tiffin ice cream shop received one critical and two non-critical violations. Health district inspectors cited the facility under Ohio code 3717-1-03.4(G) for refrigerated, ready-to-eat, time/temperature controlled for safety (TCS) foods not properly date marked, with unlabeled food observed in the cooler. The violation was corrected during the inspection.

Non-critical violations included working food containers not properly labeled—a repeat violation—and a mop observed in the warewashing sink, which was also corrected on-site. An inspector note indicated the soft serve machine had been recently refilled before the visit and temperatures were moving toward compliance.

Read the full story at https://tiffinohio.net/posts/7-seneca-county-restaurants-cited-for-critical-health-violations-in-may/.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

The answers are not flattering.

The Alzheimer’s drug that made him rich — and wiped out everyone else

In December 2014, a company under Ramaswamy’s Roivant Sciences umbrella bought an experimental Alzheimer’s drug, intepirdine, from GlaxoSmithKline for just $5 million. GSK was done with it; the drug had already failed in earlier trials. Ramaswamy saw an opportunity that had nothing to do with curing anyone.

Six months later, before running a single new late-stage trial to completion, he took the drug’s parent company, Axovant, public. The 2015 IPO valued the company in the billions — a record for a biotech debut at the time — even though Axovant reported having only a handful of employees, two of them Ramaswamy’s own mother and brother. That year, Ramaswamy reported roughly $38 million in income, most of it capital gains.

Then reality arrived. In September 2017, intepirdine failed its late-stage trial, and Axovant’s stock dropped more than 70% in a single day. It never recovered. The company was eventually wound down. Ordinary investors who had bought the hype were left holding next to nothing.

Ramaswamy was not among them. He had structured his personal stake through the parent firm, Roivant, insulating himself from the wreckage at the subsidiary. Heads, he wins; tails, the retail investors lose.

A pattern, by his critics’ account

This is where I will be careful, because the harshest words here belong to other people, not to me. Yale management professor Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, reviewing Ramaswamy’s biotech career, told Fortune the fortune was built by “basically a version of pump and dump.” A 2023 Newsweek opinion column went further, calling him a fraud outright. No regulator ever charged Ramaswamy with a crime, and he has never been convicted of one. Those characterizations are opinion and accusation, not court findings, and readers deserve to know the difference.

What is not in dispute is how Ramaswamy himself frames it. He has called Axovant his “single greatest failure” and said he has no regrets about how it was run. When pressed on whether he profited from a venture that cost others their savings, his campaign at first denied he made money on the failure, then acknowledged he had sold shares — saying he was “forced to sell a tiny portion” in 2015 to bring in an outside investor.

So here is the argued judgment, and I will own it as mine: a business model that reliably enriches the founder whether or not the product works, while leaving small investors to absorb the downside, is a scam in every sense that matters to the people on the losing end — even when it is perfectly legal. Legality is the floor, not the standard Ohio should accept from its next governor.

He already told Ohio what he thinks of it

Ramaswamy is running on a promise to make Ohio more competitive and more prosperous. Ohioans should weigh that pitch against what he did with his own company.

Ramaswamy co-founded Strive Asset Management in Columbus in 2022, marketing it as an “anti-woke,” anti-ESG investment firm. It grew fast. Then, in late 2024 — months before he announced his run for governor — Strive moved its headquarters from Columbus to Dallas, taking roughly $1.7 billion in assets under management and most of its Columbus staff to Texas.

When a candidate’s own firm votes with its feet and leaves the state he now wants to lead, that is not a detail. That is a tell.

Amy Acton served a Republican governor — and he says so himself

Now to the attack at the center of Ramaswamy’s campaign. He and the Ohio Republican Party have spent months branding Amy Acton “Dr. Lockdown” and accusing her of spreading dangerous “COVID ideology.” Here is the fact that branding is built to make you forget: Acton ran the Ohio Department of Health under a Republican governor, Mike DeWine, and signed the orders DeWine asked her to sign.

DeWine has endorsed Ramaswamy. He has also defended Acton’s work — and he personally knocked down the campaign’s central attack on her. One Ramaswamy ad blamed Acton for suspending Ohio’s in-person primary voting in March 2020. DeWine told the Associated Press that was his own call, not Acton’s, after a judge declined to delay the election. PolitiFact rated the ad “Mostly False.” When the Republican who appointed your opponent and endorsed you says your headline attack is wrong, that is not a close call.

Ramaswamy helped run the response he now calls disqualifying

The deeper problem is that Ramaswamy was not a bystander to Ohio’s pandemic response. He was inside it.

In a 2021 op-ed, Ramaswamy wrote that, as CEO of Roivant, he “worked with the lieutenant governor as an adviser on COVID-19” during 2020. The lieutenant governor then was Republican Jon Husted — now a U.S. senator — who stood alongside DeWine and Acton at Ohio’s daily pandemic briefings.

His positions at the time were not the civil-libertarian stance he sells today. Ramaswamy supported vaccines and mask-wearing and was vaccinated himself. According to a 2020 recording and Associated Press reporting, he also backed mandatory testing and a national COVID-19 registry that would have sorted Americans by immunity status to decide who could return to normal life. Ramaswamy says he never supported government mandates and that his proposals were about restarting the economy. Fine — but that is an argument about which restrictions to impose, not whether to act at all. It is the same debate Acton was in, and he was in it with her.

It was also lucrative. A Roivant subsidiary, Genevant Sciences, announced a $2.25 billion settlement with Moderna over patents used in COVID-19 vaccines. The pandemic Ramaswamy now invokes to disqualify Acton was, for his own companies, extraordinarily profitable. TiffinOhio.net detailed that record in earlier reporting.

Then he tried to erase his part in it. Before his 2024 presidential run, Ramaswamy paid a Wikipedia editor to remove a reference to his service on Ohio’s “COVID-19 Response Team,” along with a mention of his Paul and Daisy Soros Fellowship. He called it a correction and said the panel never met. The instinct is consistent across his whole career: take the upside, then scrub the receipt.

Ohio doesn’t have to be the next mark

Ramaswamy won the May 5 Republican primary and will face Acton, a physician and former state health director, on November 3. Acton spent the worst months of the pandemic at a podium next to a Republican governor, asking Ohioans to look out for one another — “don the mask, don your cape.” Ramaswamy spent that era, and the years around it, advising the same response and turning the pandemic into a payday, and now asks voters to believe he was on the other side of it the whole time.

None of this is hidden. It is in the SEC filings, the tax-record reporting, the relocation announcements, his own op-ed, and the governor’s own words. The record is the argument. Ohio can read it for itself — and it cannot afford to be sold one more time.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

Judge Leonie Brinkema in the Eastern District of Virginia issued a brief order halting the Department of Justice, the Treasury Department and other high-ranking administration officials from taking any additional actions to create the fund or make payments from it.

The order came in a lawsuit filed by a former federal prosecutor and a California professor. The plaintiffs are represented by the legal advocacy groups Democracy Forward and Common Cause. The lawsuit is part of a flurry of legal challenges against the fund.

The Justice Department on May 18 announced a nearly $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization fund” that will make payments to individuals who believe they have been wronged by past administrations. The fund came as part of a settlement agreement in a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump over the leaking of his tax return information by a former IRS contractor.

Trump’s settlement agreement provides for the creation of the fund overseen by a board of five members chosen by acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who previously served as Trump’s personal attorney. Trump can fire the members for any reason.

Brinkema, a President Bill Clinton appointee, took no position on the legality of the fund in her order. She wrote that her order is to ensure no money is “irreversibly disbursed” while the plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order is pending.

She also set a hearing for June 12 — likely ensuring the fund will remain blocked for at least the next two weeks.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit include Andrew Floyd, a former federal Jan. 6 case prosecutor who was fired by the DOJ in June 2025, and Joseph Caravello, a California university professor who was charged with felony assault on a federal officer after protesting an immigration raid last summer. A jury acquitted Caravello in April.

The nine-count lawsuit alleges in part the fund violates the plaintiffs’ First and Fifth Amendment rights, and violates the authority of Congress.

“Since its inception, this fund has been on a collision course with the United States Constitution,” their complaint says.

Trump has written on social media that the fund will help those “who were so badly abused by an evil, corrupt, and weaponized Biden Administration” receive justice.

Ashley Murray contributed to this report.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

Among the top concerns: Could pardoned Jan. 6, 2021, riot defendants who assaulted police officers claim a slice of the pie and essentially be rewarded for committing political violence? 

Advocates are also legally challenging the fund’s structure that will conceal details from the public, including claimants’ names and amounts paid out.

Nikhel Sus, chief counsel for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, otherwise known as CREW, which has filed suit against the fund, told States Newsroom the administration’s order is a “flagrant power grab of congressional authority.”

The fund, established by the Department of Justice to settle Trump’s multibillion dollar lawsuit against the IRS, has also complicated Senate Republicans’ plans to pass a simple majority immigration enforcement funding package. Some GOP senators are withholding votes unless guardrails for the fund are included in the legislation.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche met with Republican senators on Capitol Hill on May 21 to defend the fund, but many GOP lawmakers left unconvinced and with multiple questions remaining.

Retiring Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., told reporters the fund is “stupid on stilts” and resembles “tyranny.”

Others were sweating out questions at town halls during the congressional recess. 

“I do not think one penny of any fund should ever go to any January 6 insurrectionist that was in the Capitol on January 6, 2021 … I want to be very clear … I clearly think Congress needs to have an oversight role in this before I can sign off or support this,” U.S. Rep. Mike Flood, R-Neb., said at a town hall in Norfolk, Nebraska, on May 26.

The fund hit a road bump on May 29 when it was temporarily blocked in the courts. Judge Leonie Brinkema in the Eastern District of Virginia, in a suit in which plaintiffs are represented by the advocacy groups Democracy Forward and Common Cause, issued a brief order halting the Department of Justice, the Treasury Department and other high-ranking administration officials from taking any additional actions to create the fund or make payments from it.

Brinkema, who made no decisions on the merits of the case, set a June 12 hearing.

What is the “anti-weaponization” fund?

In exchange for Trump and his family dropping a $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS for the 2019 leak of tax returns, the DOJ ordered the establishment of a settlement fund in the amount of $1.776 billion — a nod to the country’s founding. 

As part of the arrangement, Trump also agreed to drop an administrative claim for damages related to what Blanche described as an “unlawful” FBI raid of the president’s Mar-a-Lago residence, part of the Biden administration’s case against Trump for allegedly hoarding classified documents after leaving office. 

Trump also agreed to drop a claim for damages related to the DOJ’s 2019 inquiry into Russian meddling in Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. 

Blanche introduced the fund on May 18 as a path to restitution for “victims of lawfare.”

“The machinery of government should never be weaponized against any American, and it is this Department’s intention to make right the wrongs that were previously done while ensuring this never happens again,” Blanche said in a press release. 

The fund will be led by five commissioners chosen by the attorney general, one of them in consultation with Congress. The president has the power to remove any member, according to the DOJ.

The department maintains the fund is nonpartisan. In addition to money, the DOJ will also issue formal apologies to eligible claimants, according to officials. 

Who is trying to limit or shut down the fund?

House Democrats tried to intervene in the president’s IRS case settlement, but U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams dismissed the case on Trump’s terms. Williams was appointed to the bench in the Southern District of Florida in 2010 by President Barack Obama.

On May 27, nearly three dozen former federal judges urged Williams to reopen the case, arguing the Trump administration “deceived” the court by not sharing with the judge details of the “anti-weaponization” fund. 

Further, the judges argued, the DOJ also claims the settlement forever absolves Trump and his family from tax audits and any other claims by a federal agency.  

“The parties to this case are using this lawsuit as the legal justification for these actions,” the judges argued.

Legislative proposals have also popped up in the House and Senate.

A bipartisan bill from Reps. Tom Suozzi, D-N.Y., and Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., both up for re-election in swing districts, proposes to ban the use of federal money to pay claims submitted to the “anti-weaponization” fund.

“The Bipartisan Transparency for American Taxpayers Act ensures federal funds cannot be used for this fund without the transparency, oversight, and legal safeguards the American people deserve. Taxpayer dollars will not become a discretionary payout fund. Transparency is not optional. Accountability is not negotiable,” Fitzpatrick said in a press release.

Suozzi characterized the arrangement as a “slush fund to pay off January 6th criminals and other maladjusted minions!”

When pressed during a May 19 Senate hearing on whether Jan. 6 defendants who were convicted of assaulting police officers would be eligible for the fund, Blanche said “anybody in this country can apply” and final decisions will be made by the fund’s commissioners.

Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., announced plans to introduce painful amendments when and if the Senate GOP brings its immigration enforcement funding bill to the floor.

Van Hollen said he will call for votes on an amendment to block payment to Jan. 6 defendants who have been convicted of violent crimes and sexual abuse of children.

The Maryland senator also said he will introduce an amendment that would prohibit members of Congress from receiving payouts.

“And as it currently stands, Members of Congress have the chance to benefit from this corrupt scheme. If Republicans won’t put an end to this fund entirely, they should at least join with us to bar Members of Congress from cashing in on it,” Van Hollen said May 21 in a written statement.

Who is suing?

Multiple lawsuits have been filed against the fund.

U.S. Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn and Washington Metropolitan Police Officer Daniel Hodges, who defended the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, argued in federal court that the pardoned rioters could use payout money to organize.

“In the most brazen act of presidential corruption this century, President Donald J. Trump has created a $1.776 billion taxpayer-funded slush fund to finance the insurrectionists and paramilitary groups that commit violence in his name,” they argued in a complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. 

Legal advocacy groups, including CREW, Democracy Forward and Common Cause have also challenged the fund in court.

Through the order, the administration has granted itself “final unreviewable authority to disperse nearly $1.8 billion in money that Congress did not appropriate for that purpose to people that they subjectively determine are victims of so-called lawfare or weaponization,” Sus, of CREW, said in an interview.

The fund’s structure also flouts transparency laws, Sus said, not least of which includes moving $1.776 billion from the government’s legal judgment fund in a single transaction to a separate, unaccountable pot of money.

As the law stands now, the Department of Treasury publicly updates a website at least once per month with judgment award amounts paid to claimants by the U.S. government.

By withdrawing one lump sum, “they are wholly circumventing disclosure law that Congress passed specifically for that purpose to require disclosure for each settlement,” said Sus, whose organization filed the complaint in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

CREW also argues DOJ’s order is arbitrary and capricious.

“I think arbitrarily picking 1776 as the number for their (fund) valuation is the definition of an arbitrary precious action — like they just did it because they thought it was cool,” he said.

“And that’s not how the government’s supposed to operate. They’re supposed to actually consider the facts, they’re supposed to have a reasoned explanation for why they’re doing things.”

In the Virginia case, another group of plaintiffs is represented by Democracy Forward and Common Cause.

Among the plaintiffs are Andrew Floyd, a former federal Jan. 6 case prosecutor who was fired by the DOJ in June 2025, and Joseph Caravello, a California university professor who was charged with felony assault on a federal officer after protesting an immigration raid last summer. A jury acquitted Caravello in April.

The nine-count lawsuit alleges in part the fund violates the plaintiffs’ First and Fifth Amendment rights, and violates the authority of Congress.

The fund “does not offer benefits to victims of ideological targeting by Democrats and Republicans alike; instead, it offers benefits to those who have espoused views that were, or were perceived to be, oppositional to Democratic administrations, but not to those who have espoused views that were, or were perceived to be, oppositional to Republican administrations,” according to the complaint filed in the Eastern District of Virginia.

Juan Salinas II of the Nebraska Examiner contributed to this report.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

Taken together, the speakers sought to downplay and displace concerns about the expansion of data centers around Ohio.

Ohio is now home to more than 200 data centers, with another 77 planned by the year 2030.

“We are all driving data center demand,” Dan Diorio from the Data Center Coalition told lawmakers.

Sure, artificial intelligence is a significant and growing driver, he said, but basic cloud computing infrastructure makes up the biggest share of data center computation. The number of people who are online now has almost doubled since 2018.

“The average household has 21 connected devices,” he said, between phones, laptops, watches, TVs, and thermostats. “My oven is connected to Wi-Fi. I can preheat it from here.”

And anyway, Diorio added, data centers are good for local economies, creating jobs in construction and upkeep, while placing limited demands on local services like schools.

Polling from Gallup shows 7 in 10 Americans oppose data center construction in their neighborhood.

Lawmakers expressed more concern with how to move forward than how to divvy up blame.

“What I also heard him say,” Ohio state Sen. Brian Chavez, R-Marrietta said after the hearing, “is they’re absolutely willing to pay for everything that they use.”

“They said it’s up to us to figure out how we allocate that, and it’s a very difficult calculus,” the committee’s Senate co-chair went on, “but I heard them say they are going to pay for it,”

The committee’s Ohio House co-chair, state Rep. Adam Holmes, R-Nashport, chimed in that it’s a question of determining “cost causation.”

“We just want to be fair,” Holmes said. “But it’s a demand of society as we grow, so just being fair on who pays for it.”

None of the speakers who addressed lawmakers Wednesday took a particularly oppositional stance to data centers. Instead, they said Ohio should welcome the industry, even if lawmakers should create guardrails to protect consumers.

Power impacts

Data centers place massive demands on the power grid and that demand will only grow over the next several years. The data center industry insists that it is ready and willing to pay for the new infrastructure necessary for its roll out.

Ohio state Sen. Shane Wilkin, R-Hillsboro, pressed Diorio on that point.

“So, does that mean data centers are going to cover that cost of the increase in the need for utilities for them specifically?” he asked.

“Yes, data centers are fully committed to paying our whole cost,” Diorio replied. “So, all the costs attributed to us, data centers are committed to paying.”

Ohio Consumers’ Counsel Maureen Willis said the central question facing lawmakers is how to encourage data center growth while protecting ratepayers from subsidizing that expansion.

“Ohio can and should do both,” she said. “We can welcome investment, we can support innovation, we can compete for economic growth, but we must also protect Ohio families that are already struggling with rising utility bills, and that balance matters.”

The problem, however, is that assigning costs to a specific customer class can be difficult. The cost of a new transmission line is relatively straightforward, but incremental increases in cost of power? That’s harder to parse.

Asim Haque from the regional grid operator PJM explained that in some states, utility regulators have begun to develop separate customer classes for data centers.

Public Utility Commission of Ohio Chair Jenifer French explained that’s exactly what Ohio regulators are weighing right now.

“They are not currently in their own class,” French said. “So we have communicated to the Ohio utilities and stakeholders that we will be evaluating how costs are allocated across the different customer classes, with the main goal again of ensuring that existing and future data centers are being properly allocated their share of FERC-approved transmission costs.”

But this also comes with a challenge, Haque told lawmakers.

“The challenge is, is that it takes a year or two to construct a data center, and it takes to be generous four to seven years to construct the corresponding supply.”

That means even with data center operators committing to cover their costs, there’s still a potential mismatch in supply and demand. Haque explained that, in the short term, PJM’s reserve margin of power will get “chewed up” by data centers and other power users, and that consumption might outpace the grid’s ability to replace it.

“There may be periods of strain on the grid,” he said, “where we are going to have to ask the data centers to effectively get off the grid and move to their backups, so as to not have to shed likely residential consumers.”

The environment

One of the biggest environmental concerns about data centers is their demand for water to cool their servers. But Diorio said data centers aren’t actually using that much water.

“Data centers are amongst the most efficient water users within the economy,” he claimed.

The 39 billion gallons the industry used in 2025 is less than the 59 billion gallons used by the semiconductor industry, and it pales in comparison to the 533 billion gallons used by the food and beverage industry, he said. Not to mention, he added, “the 2,500 billion gallons of water per year that were lost to water leaks in municipal water systems on an annual basis.”

But the scope of data center water usage in Ohio is at best murky.

Mary Mertz, who heads up the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, explained that her agency regulates the quantity of water in the state. The agency requires registration and licensing from high-capacity water users, but has no real ability to identify data center specific use.

“If you tie into a public water system, you do not register separately,” she said, “and all of Ohio’s data centers currently tie into a public water system, so there are no separate registrations for data centers. So, that is just something we do not have visibility into their actual water use.”

She explained the agency has seen rising demand from public systems with nearby data centers, but they’re unable to quantify how much of that increase is tied to the data centers themselves.

John Logue from the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency explained that most data centers don’t have to get a wastewater permit because they’re connected to a municipal water treatment system. If they discharge to a river or stream, however, the data center would need a permit for limiting and monitoring pollutants.

“Ohio EPA has only issued one such (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permit for a data center at this time,” Logue said.

What’s next?

Committee co-chair Chavez laid out four further committee hearings in the coming weeks.

He warned the schedule could change, but lawmakers plan to take public comment June 1.

Following that, the committee plans to hold hearings for testimony from data center operators on June 4, local government officials on June 8, and companies associated with the data center industry on June 11.

Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Nick Evans on X or on Bluesky.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

In November, Ohioans will vote for a new governor, attorney general, auditor, secretary of state, and treasurer, as well as one U.S. Senate race, and two Ohio Supreme Court races.

The Gongwer/Werth Legislative Survey is a recurring survey put out to members of the Ohio General Legislative Assembly to gather lawmakers’ views on current policy and legislative issues, according to the survey’s website.

For its most recent addition, the survey collected responses from 35% of Ohio legislators on the potential outcomes of six critical midterm elections.

Key Ohio U.S. Senate race

As former Ohio Democratic U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown tries to regain his congressional seat following a 2024 loss to Ohio Republican U.S. Sen. Bernie Moreno, the odds are split on if Ohioans will ride the blue wave this November.

Legislative respondents said there was a 35% chance Brown wins the race, with 8% being undecided and 56% choosing Republican candidate U.S. Sen. Jon Husted.

Husted, former lieutenant governor of Ohio, was appointed to his Senate seat following Vice President JD Vance’s election in 2024.

Brown has reentered the campaign trail running on a platform of affordable healthcare and worker protections.

Ohio governor race

Ohio’s race for the top desk has already been singled out as one to watch as November draws closer.

With Democratic candidate Dr. Amy Acton winning her primary uncontested and Republican candidate Vivek Ramaswamy running away with his own, both candidates move towards Election day with no prior experience as elected officials.

Legislative respondents said Ramaswamy has a 64% chance of winning, giving Acton 29% with 7% of respondents being undecided.

Notably, no Democratic respondents chose Ramaswamy, while 6% of Republican candidates said Acton would win.

Acton and Ramaswamy are already curating a record-breaking expensive election.

Ramaswamy is running primarily on a platform of cutting taxes, reducing government waste, and advocating for more energy independence, according to his website.

Acton’s platform includes creating more affordability in housing and healthcare, improving public education, and supporting small businesses, according to her website.

Ohio congressional races

The U.S. Congressional race in Ohio’s 9th district has also been highly watched, with current Ohio Democratic U.S. Rep. Marcy Kaptur facing off against former Ohio state Rep. Derek Merrin in a rematch, this time with the district’s lines drawn more to favor Republicans after Merrin lost by just a little over 1% in 2024.

Kaptur has represented the district since 1983, making her the longest-serving woman in congressional history.

Polled legislators have predicted another tight race for the pair. The survey said 52% of legislators chose Kaptur to retain her position, with 43% choosing Merrin to win, and 5% being undecided.

Kaptur’s platform emphasizes her priority to strengthen the economy and expand border security, according to her website.

Merrin’s platform includes lowering income and property taxes, reducing health regulations for patients, and promoting price transparency, according to his website.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.

In a truly audacious (or desperate) publicity stunt, Candidate Ramaswamy called on the legislature to speed a proposed constitutional amendment (that duplicates the state’s voter ID law) onto the November ballot.

The next day, both the Ohio House and Ohio Senate introduced identical resolutions to do just that — and fast-tracked the measures for passage by mid-June.

Why the mad rush to amend the Ohio Constitution with a voter ID provision — only three years after the GOP-controlled legislature passed the nation’s strictest photo identification requirements at the polls?

Good question.

The Ramaswamy-Statehouse narrative for suddenly putting the same mandates in the state constitution via a slapped together legislative amendment boils down to partisan insurance. 

The toughest voter ID law in the country needs to be constitutionally protected from “the whims of state lawmakers, judges and the political winds that blow them in,” wrote Ramaswamy in a recent op/ed.

A mere statute in the Ohio Revised Code enacted by Republican supermajorities, signed by a Republican governor, and enforced by a Republican secretary of state is “fragile” said the former hedge fund/bio tech executive, so the voter ID statute must be enshrined in the state constitution for added protection.

If that’s not a convincing case to make for a ballot amendment to replicate established law — and it’s not even in the ballpark of persuasion — Ramaswamy recycled assertions that “public faith in elections is at an all-time low” and “restoring public trust in elections” is important, yada, yada, yada.

In a telling sign, the Republican running for governor suggested his voter ID amendment should be easy to achieve because polls show voter ID proposals are widely popular — which, ironically, is also how Ohio Republicans sold their extreme voter ID law in 2023.

In 2026, Ramaswamy — and obliging Republican lawmakers expediting makeshift legislation for their de facto leader — intend to exploit that voter ID popularity to goose turnout in a toss-up election.

How else to explain a major constitutional change that makes no sense?

Stumping for a superfluous constitutional version of established voter ID requirements in Ohio will require fancy footwork on the campaign trail to market redundancy as a necessary amendment, but Ramaswamy, who tap danced his way to a fortune as a shrewd marketer, will spin away. He is already acting as if he’s governor with a compliant legislature in tow.

Ramaswamy’s running mate, Ohio Senate President Rob McColley, kicked off the impromptu legislative mission to enshrine settled voter ID law into the state constitution “to secure the fundamental right of voting and maintain that confidence in our election system.”

Pay no attention to the glaring cognitive dissonance of Ohio Republicans who boast of the state’s secure, “gold standard” elections while manufacturing gratuitous restrictions to “safeguard” voting and restore confidence in a system they acknowledge is above reproach.

“Voter integrity” is the tired mantra they repeat every time they move to restrict voting access.

They never address the lie that fuels legislative remedies for non-existent problems or reverse deliberately seeded distrust. Donald Trump tried to overturn a free and fair election he lost with an aggressive propaganda campaign built on deceit about rampant voter fraud and rigged elections.

He and his lackeys cultivated baseless doubt about the 2020 election even after it had been reviewed, recounted, audited, adjudicated and verified ad nauseam.

Trump is still lying about the election his own cybersecurity chief called the most secure in U.S. history. Those lies undermine the legitimacy of elections at the core of our democracy. 

Republicans perpetuate those lies with ongoing legislation that reinforces the perception Trump cemented about fraudulent elections that are, in fact, run by the book.

Ramaswamy credited the twice-impeached felon who tried to seize unearned power for recognizing the problem of depleted trust in elections and the solutions to “strengthen faith” in voting.

Pretty rich considering it was Trump who conspired to trample that trust and weaken that faith.

But it is the legislative maneuver in the Ohio General Assembly, synced to Ramaswamy’s ambitions, that most deserves voters’ scorn and rejection if the dual resolutions to amend the constitution (on a campaign whim) make it to the ballot this fall.

We’ve seen this movie before. Republican lawmakers tried to affect the outcome of another election with a last-minute legislative amendment thrown on a special election ballot in August 2023. It attempted to raise the threshold for passing constitutional amendments in the state from a simple majority to 60%.

The same legislative leaders — who just proposed a legislative amendment on a whim — claimed the constitution was revised too frequently and should be harder to amend.

It was a ruse to defeat a citizens’ initiative on the ballot three months later to enshrine abortion rights in the constitution — which passed overwhelmingly.

But Ohio voters saw through the Republican scheme to cancel their century-old majority voting rights to keep a majority of Ohioans from weighing in on constitutionally protected reproductive freedom.

Even in a sleepy summertime election, furious voters showed up to overwhelmingly reject the underhandedness of GOP leadership in the state.

This story is republished from the Ohio Capital Journal under a Creative Commons license. View the original article.

Originally published on TiffinOhio.net.