Saturday, August 04, 2007
Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati
 Photo courtesy of here.
COAST had an important role in the collection of signatures to place the jail tax on the ballot, but that does not excuse them from other bad behavior. Recently, The Enquirer’s “Politics Extra” blog posted this item, which is a bit hard to follow, detailing a controversy surrounding abortion and the indigent care levy. A closer look at the timeline demonstrates that COAST and DeWine mounted a smear attempt, hoping to rally a frenzy of conservative anti-abortion voices against Portune and Pepper. I am disappointed in COAST.
While I do not like how Portune and Pepper have responded to the jail-tax vote by invoking the rhetoric of fear, I am even more disappointed that COAST has taken that to a new level, totally manufacturing outrage over a hot-button topic unrelated to the jail entirely, in an attempt to mobilize voters against the Democrats.
(There are plenty of reasons to be mobilized against the Democrats without fabricating issues!)
On Monday, DeWine sent Pepper and Portune a memo between 4:00 p.m. and 5:00 pm, noting that a change (removal of the abortion prohibition from the indigent care levy) had somehow taken place.
Neither Pepper nor Portune knew about this (the details of the contract are negotiated by the prosecutor’s office), and immediately they made clear that they did not support a change in the old policy, for various reasons (it would never pass if this prohibition were not included).
Portune wrote DeWine at 5:00 p.m.:
I am also writing to discuss Commissioner DeWine’s Memo about the new contract and language therein that removes the prohibition on the use of taxpayer funds for the performance of abortions. I am specifically asking of Administrator Thompson to determine the origin of that request inasmuch as it was not Board initiated. The Indigent Care Levy has routinely won voter approval by a large margin in part because controversial issues have not been interjected into the agreement. This has served the interests of Hamilton County well over the years and is likely to continue to do so, with the public service of providing indigent care for virtually all services outweighing any public interest in including abortion services into the contract, or creating issues that complicate the ability of Indigent Care levies to succeed at the polls. I see no reason to alter that dynamic today and have not sought to do so here.
Pepper wrote DeWine at 5:15 p.m.:
Thanks for your memo, Pat.
I too was surprised by the removal of the prior contractual language regarding abortion services. I am sure many voters supported the levy believing that policy would continue as it was. For this reason, and to continue the broad and healthy public support of the critical health services the levy provides, I agree that the language regarding abortion services (with the “life” exception) should remain as it has been.
David
Despite these very clear statements, COAST distributed a flaming email at 9:38 p.m.
At Monday’s staff meeting for the Hamilton County Commission, Commissioners Portune and Pepper released their draft contract with the Health Alliance that will delete a decade-old exclusion from the contract for indigent health care to allow that will now require tax dollars be spent on abortion coverage.
“Abortion is a horrific practice,” said COAST Chairman Jim Urling. “To force taxpayers who have a deep-seated moral objection to this holocaust, to spend their hard-earned tax dollars on this murderous practice is a sheer outrage. We urge COAST members to quickly spring in to action to stop this waste of monies by writing letters to the editor and calling their Commissioners.”
This prompted Portune to ask for clarification from the Health Alliance. Tony Condia wrote the following in a memo (which you can download from the Politics Extra blog):
To refresh your memory, we began our contract negotiations and discussions with the County Administration and the Prosecutor’s office late last year and only recently concluded them. When we initially negotiated the levy amount with former County Commissioner Phil Heimlich and former Deputy County Administrator Ron Roberts, they agreed to restructure the levy agreement, moving it from a fee-for-service arrangement to a block-grant arrangement. Given the significant reduction in the levy, Messrs. Heimlich and Roberts offered to recast the agreement in such a way that many of the reporting and administrative requirements would be reduced, thereby softening the magnitude of the reduction.
As we continued our negotiations exclusively with the Administration and the Prosecutor’s office after the November election, adhering to that original approach became University Hospital’s chief goal. And once we started putting pen to paper, we started entirely from scratch (as opposed to amending the existing contract). There was however no intent by anyone to remove that prohibition. I hope this clarifies The University Hospital’s position on this issue and provides some historical context. Thank you.
Next up, COAST sends out —which is not currently posted on their website—calling Pepper and Portune “scalded dogs”:
In the face of massive protests lodged by members of COAST and Cincinnati Right to Life, Commissioners Todd Portune and David Pepper Tuesday announced that they would restore the provision banning abortion funding to the County contract with the Health Alliance for indigent health care in Hamilton County. Commissioner Pat DeWine brought the issue to COAST’s attention, and fought to retain the abortion funding ban.
“They retreated from their unconscionable position like scalded dogs,” said COAST Chairman Jim Urling. “Once the scheme to fund abortions was revealed, the Commissioners immediately backed off and agreed to put an abortion funding restriction back in the contract.”
In , COAST presents a “timeline,” but it contradicts the record of memos sent by Pepper and Portune to Pat DeWine:
4) For the first time since the horrific Roe v. Wade decision, the County Commission contains a militant pro-abortion majority in Portune and Pepper.
5) A new contract with University Hospital had been prepared for this new pro-abortion majority by staff and lawyers working at their direction.
6) Todd Portune had personally taken the lead for the Commission in negotiating that document, including personally participating in discussions with the Health Alliance about that Contract.
So here are the facts: DeWine said he was concerned about the abortion prohibition being removed. Immediately, Portune and Pepper shared his concern and agreed that the prohibition should continue as it has traditionally existed. A few hours later, COAST said there was a pro-abortion conspiracy afoot by Portune and Pepper, who then obtained clarification about how the prohibition got dropped from the contract, and how the Commission had nothing to do with the oversight.
I am not happy with Portune and Pepper’s jail plan. I think they have gone about it the wrong way. And I don’t like the rhetoric of fear they are using the scare people into supporting it. Still, that kind of politicking seems less hateful than the name-calling, rumor-spreading, campaign of lies mounted this week by COAST.
• Share This Article!
 Listen to this article
Help The Cincinnati Beacon Grow! Participate in Social Networking!
Members
Register
Tell us what you think!
Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can log in above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.
|