Setting the Record Straight and Standing Up for Candidates Who Are Committed to Sharpening Ohio’s Competitive Edge and Growing Our Economy.

Note to Visitors Seeking Candidate Questionnaire Responses

Every election cycle, candidates are asked to complete a survey, sponsored by four statewide business organizations, that asks them for their views on important issues affecting employers, their employees, and our economy. The responses to this business issues questionnaire are typically posted on OhioBusinessVotes.org. This year, however, several candidates have seen their questionnaire responses used against them by outside groups who have twisted their answers in order to give voters a negative and false impression. Because of these tactics, and in hopes of preventing additional, similar attacks, we have decided to suspend access to our candidate questionnaires. Should you wish to register your disapproval of the way these groups have mischaracterized or distorted questionnaire responses for their own political gain, we invite you to contact them directly at:

With the November 4th election fast approaching, several candidates and their allies are resorting to mischaracterizations, and deception about candidates who are committed to pursuing policy objectives that will strengthen our ability to compete for investment and jobs. And they’re using responses given on the Ohio Chamber’s candidate questionnaire as the basis for many of their misleading attacks.

But we’re not going to let them get away with it. We’re exposing these distortions and giving voters the facts. Click on the name of one of the candidates below to see the claims made against them…and to learn the truth.

This website isn’t the only thing the Ohio Chamber is doing to combat these political tactics. The Ohio Chamber of Commerce Political Action Committee is also responding aggressively, with radio ads, our own direct mail, and other campaign activities. If you’d like to assist OCCPaC in standing up for these candidates, please consider making an immediate contribution to OCCPaC.  Just click here.

If you receive a piece of mail that isn’t listed here and needs to be refuted, please fax a copy to 614-228-6403 or e-mail it to klake@ohiochamber.com.

 

The Target: Rep. Chris Widener (R-Springfield)

The Culprit: The Ohio House Democratic Party

The False Claim: “Chris Widener believes insurance companies should be allowed to deny coverage for autism screening and treatment.”

This claim is based on Rep. Widener's response to a question from the Ohio Chamber's candidate questionnaire. The question asks, "Should the legislature mandate that additional benefits, such as the diagnosis and treatment of ...autism, be covered in private health insurance plans?" Rep. Widener's response was "No".

The Truth: Rep. Widener's answer says he opposes additional government mandates; it does not say he would let insurance companies deny coverage for autism screenings and treatment. Clearly, if a policy purchased by an individual or an employer contains such coverage, the insurance company pays the claim. The question is whether the government should mandate that individuals or their employers purchase coverage even if the increased costs will force them to drop their health insurance altogether.

 

The Target: Colleen Grady (R-Strongsville)

The Culprit: The Ohio House Democratic Caucus Fund

The False Claim: “Colleen Grady supports a plan to allow health insurance companies to deny coverage for early detection and treatment of autism.”

This claim is based on Grady’s response to a question from the Ohio Chamber’s candidate questionnaire. The question asks, “Should the legislature mandate that additional benefits, such as the diagnosis and treatment of diabetes or autism, be covered in private health insurance plans.” Grady’s response was “No.

The Truth: Grady’s answer says she opposes additional government mandates; it does not say she would let health insurance companies deny coverage. Clearly, if a policy purchased by an individual or an employer contains coverage for these conditions, the insurance company pays the claim. The question is whether the government should mandate that individuals or their employers purchase coverage even if the increased costs will force them to drop their health insurance altogether.

 

The Target: Michael Keenan (R-Dublin)

The Culprit: The Campaign for the Moderate Majority (SEIU District 1199, OEA)

The False Claim: “Keenan seems to think it’s okay for insurance companies to reject treatments for diabetes or autism.”

This claim is supposedly based on Keenan’s response to a question from the Ohio Chamber’s candidate questionnaire. The question asks, “Should the legislature mandate that additional benefits, such as the diagnosis and treatment of diabetes or autism, be covered in private health insurance plans.” Keenan’s response was “Don’t understand question – diabetes is not excluded.

The Truth: Keenan didn’t even answer the question, so to make the claim being made is to put words in his mouth. In fact, only by assuming that any answer other than “Yes” to more government mandates could such a conclusion be reached. Using this tortured logic, the same conclusion could be drawn about Keenan’s opponent, who didn’t answer “Yes” either. Keenan’s answer most certainly does not say he thinks it’s okay for insurance companies to reject treatments for diabetes or autism.

 

The Target: Tim Rankin (R-Upper Arlington)

The Culprit: The Campaign for the Moderate Majority (SEIU District 1199, OEA)

The False Claim: “Rankin can’t be counted on to require insurance companies to cover tests for common conditions like diabetes or autism.”

This claim is based on Rankin’s response to a question from the Ohio Chamber’s candidate questionnaire. The question asks, “Should the legislature mandate that additional benefits, such as the diagnosis and treatment of…autism, be covered in private health insurance plans?” Rankin’s response was “No".

The Truth: The question is not whether an insurance company must cover the costs associated with conditions like autism or diabetes. Clearly, if a policy contains coverage for these conditions, the insurance company pays the claim. The question is whether the government should mandate that individuals or their employers purchase coverage even if the increase cost will force them to drop their health insurance altogether.

 

The Target: Rep. Richard Nero (R-Hudson)

The Culprit: The Campaign for the Moderate Majority (SEIU District 1199, OEA)

The False Claim: “Richard Nero seems to think it’s okay for insurance companies to reject treatments for diabetes or autism.”

This claim is based on Rep. Nero’s response to a question from the Ohio Chamber’s candidate questionnaire. The question asks, “Should the legislature mandate that additional benefits, such as the diagnosis and treatment of diabetes or autism, be covered in private health insurance plans.” Rep. Nero’s response was “No.

The Truth: Rep. Nero’s answer says he opposes additional government mandates; it does not say he thinks it’s okay for insurance companies to reject treatments for diabetes or autism. Clearly, if a policy purchased by an individual or an employer contains coverage for these conditions, the insurance company pays the claim. The question is whether the government should mandate that individuals or their employers purchase coverage even if the increased costs will force them to drop their health insurance altogether.

 

The Target: Rep. Barbara Sears (R-Sylvania)

The Culprit: The Ohio Democratic Party

The False Claim: “Barbara Sears would cut state funding for job training and workforce development.”

The claim is based on Rep. Sears’ response to a question from the Ohio Chamber’s candidate questionnaire. The question asks, “Do you support re-directing workforce development dollars, from the state agencies that currently control these funds, directly to employers for use in training current and potential employees?”  Rep. Sears’ response was, “Yes, not all dollars, but a high percentage.”

The Truth: The question does not ask about funding levels.  It specifically asks about support for re-directing the same dollars, thus it is absolutely false to equate Rep. Sears’ response with being a cut in state funding.  In fact, if workforce development dollars were re-directed in the way supported by Rep. Sears, it is possible that the amount of money going directly to jobseekers would increase.

 

The Target: Todd Snitchler (R-Uniontown)

The Culprit: Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee

The False Claim: “Todd Snitchler would let insurance companies deny health care coverage for Autism and Diabetes.”

This claim is based on Snitchler’s response to a question from the Ohio Chamber’s candidate questionnaire. The question asks, “Should the legislature mandate that additional benefits, such as the diagnosis and treatment of diabetes or autism, be covered in private health insurance plans.” Snitchler’s response was “No.”

The Truth: Snitchler's answer says he opposes government mandates that increase the cost of health insurance; it does not say he would let insurance companies deny health coverage for autism or diabetes when individuals or their employers purchase such coverage.

 

The Target: Todd Snitchler (R-Uniontown)

The Culprit: Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee

The False Claim: “He’ll even let Ohio businesses get away without having to provide a minimum level of health insurance coverage for their employees. Snitchler says we should just let the free market straighten that out.”

Though the piece cites Snitchler’s response to a question from the Ohio Chamber’s candidate questionnaire as evidence for this claim, it is unclear which response is being referred to.

The Truth: None of the health care questions ask about the role of the free market and Snitchler's responses do not say the free market should straighten anything out. Snitchler never says he would let Ohio businesses get away with not doing something they are required to do. The truth is Ohio businesses voluntarily provide health care coverage - they are not mandated to do so by the government.

 

The Target: Rep. Carol-Ann Schindel (R-Painesville)

The Culprit: The Campaign for the Moderate Majority (SEIU District 1199, OEA

The False Claim: “Carol-Ann Schindel seems to think it’s okay for insurance companies to reject treatments for diabetes or autism.”

This claim is based on Rep. Schindel’s response to a question from the Ohio Chamber’s candidate questionnaire. The question asks, “Should the legislature mandate that additional benefits, such as the diagnosis and treatment of diabetes or autism, be covered in private health insurance plans.” Rep. Schindel’s response was “No.

The Truth: Rep. Schindel’s answer says she opposes additional government mandates; it does not say she thinks it’s okay for health insurance companies to reject treatments for diabetes or autism. Clearly, if a policy purchased by an individual or an employer contains coverage for these conditions, the insurance company pays the claim. The question is whether the government should mandate that individuals or their employers purchase coverage even if the increased costs will force them to drop their health insurance altogether.

 

The Target: Rep. Ross McGregor (R-Springfield)

The Culprit: The Ohio House Democratic Caucus Fund

The False Claim: “Ross McGregor supports a plan to allow health insurance companies to deny coverage for early detection tests for autism…(and) breast cancer screenings.”

This claim is based on Rep. McGregor’s response to a question from the Ohio Chamber’s candidate questionnaire. The question asks, “Should the legislature mandate that additional benefits, such as the diagnosis and treatment of…autism, be covered in private health insurance plans?” Rep. McGregor’s response was “No.”

The Truth: The Truth: Rep. McGregor’s answer says he opposes additional government mandates; it does not say he would let insurance companies deny coverage. Clearly, if a policy purchased by an individual or an employer contains such coverage, the insurance company pays the claim. The question is whether the government should mandate that individuals or their employers purchase coverage even if the increased costs will force them to drop their health insurance altogether.

 

The Target: Jill Thompson (R-Athens)

The Culprit: The Campaign for the Moderate Majority (SEIU District 1199, OEA)

The False Claim: “Jill Thompson doesn’t want us to get even 1 paid sick day to care for our families.”

The mailing doesn’t even bother to substantiate this statement, but it presumably refers to Thompson’s opposition to State Issue 4, the SEIU-crafted, job-killing, mandated paid sick leave issue. The proposal was pulled from the ballot due to intense opposition from employers, virtually every major newspaper in the state, and political leaders of both parties, including Gov. Ted Strickland.

The Truth: Thompson didn’t support the harmful SEIU proposal that would have mandated that all employers with 25 or more employees provide paid sick leave to their employees because she understood that such a mandate would have driven businesses from Ohio and compromised jobs. Being opposed to the government forcing employers to provide paid sick leave is far from the same thing as not wanting “us to get even 1 paid sick day.” Thompson doesn't say she's against employers voluntarily providing their employees with paid sick days.

The False Claim: “Jill Thompson won’t demand that insurance companies cover our families for illnesses like diabetes or serious conditions like autism.”

This claim is based on Thompson’s response to a question from the Ohio Chamber’s candidate questionnaire. The question asks, “Should the legislature mandate that additional benefits, such as the diagnosis and treatment of diabetes or autism, be covered in private health insurance plans.” Thompson’s response was “No.”

The Truth: The question is not whether an insurance company must cover the costs associated with conditions like autism or diabetes. Clearly, if a policy contains coverage for these conditions, the insurance company pays the claim. The question is whether the government should mandate that individuals or their employers purchase coverage even if the increase cost will force them to drop their health insurance altogether.

 

The Target: Troy Balderson (R-Zanesville)

The Culprit: The Ohio Democratic Party

The False Claim: “Troy Balderson believes insurance companies should be allowed to deny coverage for autism screenings and treatment.”

The claim is based on Balderson's response to a question from the Ohio Chamber's candidate questionnaire. The question asks, "Should the legislature mandate that additional benefits, such as the response was "No".

The Truth: Balderson's answer says he opposes additional government mandates; it does not say he would let insurance companies deny coverage for autism screenings and treatment. Clearly, if a policy purchased by an individual or an employer contains such coverage, the insurance company pays the claim. The question is whether the government should mandate that individuals or their employers purchase coverage even if the increased costs will force them to drop their health insurance altogether.





Copyright 2005, © All Rights Reserved • Powered by DigiKnow