A recent meeting with Janetta King and Dale Butland of Innovation Ohio, a progressive think tank based in Columbus, concluded with a discussion about the difficulties Democrats often have in communicating effectively.
Republican talking heads stick with the script in opposing, for example, President Obama’s health-care plan or his ideas for stimulating the economy. They frame the debate in simple, emotional terms, arguing against “a government takeover of health care,” or against more stimulus spending “when the country is broke.”
Democrats are left to explain the complexities of how to fix a health-care system that costs too much and leaves too many uncovered, or how boosting the economy in the short run sets the stage for long-term growth (and the tax revenues needed to cut deficits and pay down the debt).
The irony in the campaign over Issue 2 on Tuesday’s statewide ballot, a referendum on Senate Bill 5, is that those roles have been reversed.
After a petition drive by Democrats and unions, Republicans were stuck with defending a complicated bill rolling back collective bargaining rights for public employees.
Polling results and campaign finance reports indicate the possibility of a blowout on Election Day, Issue 2 going down to defeat by as much as 20 percentage points, a stunning defeat for Gov. John Kasich and his Republican allies. A defeat by 10 to 12 percentage points would represent a big setback for Ohio Republicans, who swept to power in Columbus this past November.
A recent Quinnipiac University survey showed 57 percent against Issue 2, with 32 percent in support. A poll released Friday by the Ray C. Bliss Institute of Applied Politics at the University of Akron showed a similar result, Issue 2 defeated 58 percent to 39 percent, based on a “momentum model” that assumed a higher turnout among the “firm no” voters than among the “firm yes.”
The institute’s analysis noted that the “no” vote could go higher if undecided voters break to that column, as often happens in issue campaigns. In other words, doubt and confusion about an issue usually translates into a “no” vote.
What’s interesting is that the Bliss Institute poll shows voters closely divided on major arguments for and against Issue 2. When presented with the statement that Issue 2 should fail because it undermines the right of public employees to bargain collectively, 49 percent agreed and 38 percent disagreed.
But the results on other arguments were closer. Proponents of Issue 2 came out ahead, just barely, on two.
When faced with the argument that Issue 2 should pass because it would require public employees to pay 15 percent of their wages for health care and 10 percent for retirement, 44 percent agreed and 42 percent disagreed. And when faced with the argument that Issue 2 should fail because it would hurt the quality of public services, such as public safety and education, 46 percent disagreed, with 44 percent in agreement.
The final agument presented in the poll was that Issue 2 should pass because it would reduce the cost of government and keep taxes from increasing. That was another close call, with 45 percent in disagreement and 43 percent in agreement.
So how could Issue 2 end up getting thumped?
The Bliss Institute poll indicated voters across the spectrum of opinion for and against Issue 2 were getting far more information from opponents than supporters. Campaign finance reports filed last week showed why: We Are Ohio, the Democratic and labor group opposing Issue 2, has raised about $30 million, while Building a Better Ohio, the group supporting Issue 2, has raised about $8 million.
John Green, director of the Bliss Institute, says two arguments appear to be driving the “no” vote on Issue 2. One is that the bill would undermine collective bargaining rights of public employees. Ohio voters don’t like it when rights are taken away.
The other, he suspects, is that television ads airing after the poll concluded on Oct. 23 pounded home fears that public services, particularly public safety, would be compromised by a “yes” vote on Issue 2 because police and firefighters would not be allowed to bargain on staffing levels.
Proponents of Issue 2 never had the money to re-emphasize their more nuanced side of the argument, that sticking with current bargaining practices, including binding arbitration for safety forces, often forces cities to use layoffs as their only means to balance budgets, reducing staffing.
Beyond that, We Are Ohio played on the fears of a worried middle class. They were able to do so by framing Senate Bill 5 as an overreach, which it is, generating fears about who would be the next target of Kasich and fellow Republicans when it comes time to cut.
Hoffman is a Beacon Journal editorial writer. He can be reached at 330-996-3740 or emailed at slhoffman@thebeaconjournal.com.
