County coroners' future as elected officials sees signs of life
The Tuesday amendment comes less than a week after the Senate indicated it would go along with the House's plan to do away with elected county coroners.
Senate Finance Chair Jerry Cirino, R-Kirtland, said the change was a result of robust debate within the Senate's supermajority GOP caucus.
"I think it came to a point of like, look: There wasn't a compelling enough reason represented to change the way it's currently done," Cirino told reporters Tuesday.
The late change adds another item to a list of hundreds of differences between the House and Senate's version of the state's two year spending plan. Those changes will be sorted out in a so-called conference committee in coming weeks.
The Ohio House argued that making coroners an appointed position was necessary to counteract a growing scarcity of qualified Ohioans who were interested in running for office. If the state removed the campaigning requirement, the logic goes, then more Ohioans might be interested in becoming coroner.
But the House plan met staunch opposition from the Ohio Coroners Association, whose executive director David Corey told this outlet that the change was unnecessary.
"Commissioners already have the authority to appoint a physician to be coroner if no one runs," Corey said. "So they already have this authority — so why subject this as a blanket on everyone?"
Corey said the plan could create a dynamic where coroners are more beholden to the county commission than the voters of the county.
The appointment plan, if implemented, could have repercussions for coroners in positions similar to longtime Montgomery County Coroner Kent Harshbarger, a Republican serving alongside a majority Democratic county commission.
------
For more stories like this, sign up for our Ohio Politics newsletter. It's free, curated, and delivered straight to your inbox every Thursday evening.
Avery Kreemer can be reached at 614-981-1422, on X, via email, or you can drop him a comment/tip with the survey below.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
28 minutes ago
- New York Post
Democratic governors face a school-choice reckoning: Kids or unions?
Republicans in Congress achieved a historic breakthrough last month — and Democratic governors should jump at the chance to take advantage of it. It's the first-ever nationwide school choice program, included as part of President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The program aims to give every child in America a shot at a better future by funding private- and parochial-school scholarships through a dollar-for-dollar federal tax credit. Advertisement But each state's governor has to choose to join it — and nowhere is the need more urgent than in New York, where Gov. Kathy Hochul has a golden opportunity to make good on her own words. In 2022, in her gubernatorial debate with GOP nominee Lee Zeldin, Hochul said she supported lifting New York's charter school cap. But in the years since, she's let the leftist state Legislature handcuff charter expansion, leaving too many poor kids stuck in a one-size-fits-all government school monopoly that's failing them spectacularly. Advertisement Empire State families are demanding more choices to escape from failing district schools. Tens of thousands of kids are on charter-school waitlists in New York City — and 78% of New York parents support Education Savings Accounts like the school choice initiative passed by Congress. New York spent about $37,000 per student in 2023 — 66% higher than the state's average private-school tuition — yet only 13% of NYC's black 8th graders are proficient in math. Statewide, inflation-adjusted per-student spending has skyrocketed 209% since 1970. Have outcomes gotten 209% better? Advertisement Of course not: Test scores have stagnated or declined, proving that throwing more money at the problem without competition is a fool's errand. But now Hochul can't blame the Democrat-controlled state Legislature as an excuse to keep poor kids from accessing better schools, whether charter, private or religious. The new federal school-choice program puts the decision squarely in her hands, and in the hands of her fellow governors. Advertisement Other states' Democratic leaders are showing signs of cracking under the pressure of common sense. Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro's team has said he's considering opting in to the federal program. Even more encouraging is North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein, who vetoed a bill passed by the state's GOP-controlled legislature demanding he sign on to the program — calling the bill 'unnecessary,' since he 'intend[s] to opt North Carolina in.' Stein's veto message explicitly stated that 'school choice is good for students and parents,' and pledged to allow North Carolina's public-school students access to the funding. Stein's stance could encourage other Democratic governors to jump on the bandwagon. Speaking of which, California's Gov. Gavin Newsom should opt in, too. He sent his own kids to private school, and attended one himself in his early years. It's hypocritical to oppose school choice for other families while enjoying it for your own. Advertisement What makes the new federal program so compelling — even for Democratic governors beholden to teachers' unions — is a built-in incentive that's impossible to ignore. If states don't opt in, their constituents — whether they know it or not — will be subsidizing scholarships for families in the red states that are already rushing to sign on. All American families and taxpaying individuals can donate to K-12 scholarship-granting organizations and receive a dollar-for-dollar federal tax credit in exchange, even if their state doesn't join up. Advertisement All the governors can decide is whether kids in their state can access those scholarships. Opting out means shooting your state in the foot: Your taxpayers' donations will flow to other states' kids, leaving your own students behind. The ongoing crisis in our schools amplifies the urgency. Last week a new FBI report revealed 1.3 million crimes committed at schools from 2020 to 2024, including about 540,000 physical assaults. Advertisement The statistics prove what parents already know: Too many kids are getting beaten, bullied and traumatized in environments that should be safe havens for learning. Democratic governors can no longer do the bidding of teachers' unions by locking children in failing schools infested with violence. The unions' iron grip has protected mediocrity and danger for too long. School choice breaks that stranglehold, giving parents the power to vote with their feet and demand better. Trump's bill puts children first and champions freedom, opportunity and accountability in education. Advertisement It's time for Hochul and her peers to free our kids from the public school monopoly by helping families find better education opportunities. If she doesn't, she risks cementing a legacy of statewide failure and decline. Corey DeAngelis is a senior fellow at the American Culture Project and a visiting fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research.
The Hill
28 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump's GOP allies warn against Ukraine entanglement
President Trump's Republican allies are putting pressure on him not to entangle the U.S. militarily in Ukraine after he signaled an openness to helping craft security guarantees for the embattled nation in its war against Russian aggression. Trump and the White House on Tuesday insisted the U.S. would not put boots on the ground in Ukraine, but floated the idea of providing air support using U.S. pilots and warplanes. That came after a meeting on Monday at the White House with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and seven other European leaders, during which they discussed security guarantees for Kyiv in lieu of allowing it into NATO, a red line for Russian President Vladimir Putin. While the summit resulted in few specifics about what those security guarantees would entail, at one point a reporter asked Trump if the U.S. would send troops to Ukraine. Trump didn't answer directly but said the U.S. would 'help them out.' That, combined with special envoy Steve Witkoff saying the U.S. could participate in ' Article 5-like protections ' for Ukraine, has set off alarm bells for some of Trump's 'America First' supporters. Top allies are warning him not to go too far, citing a key MAGA tenet of not getting involved in any lengthy conflicts or 'forever wars.' 'I'd have to look at what the responsibilities would be. We don't want another war,' Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) told reporters at the Capitol on Tuesday. 'People in this country, they can't fathom that after 20 years of war over in the Middle East and then getting into another. I know the president's not into that, but we don't want anything to happen in terms of having to fight and lose more lives.' When asked how big of an ask that would be to constituents and voters, the Alabama senator — a top MAGA supporter — was blunt. 'It would be an impossible sell,' said Tuberville, who is currently running to become governor of his home state. 'The American people aren't going to go for it, I'm just going to tell you that right now. The people in Alabama would be definitely against it. … I know President Trump's trying to do the right thing, but people in Europe have to take responsibility for this.' 'President Trump enjoys taking over and trying to help, but he knows he can only go so far with all this. … [He's] trying to do what's right for us,' Tuberville added. 'But there's no appetite for war or us getting involved with this anyway with troops on the ground that would actually fight. We're talking about security, which might be different.' Pressed during a phone interview with 'Fox & Friends' Tuesday morning about any 'assurances' he could make that there will not be any U.S. troops on the ground in Ukraine as part of any deal, Trump sought to quell any eruption by supporters. 'Well, you have my assurance, and I'm president,' he said, suggesting that France, Germany, and Great Britain might do so instead. Trump's latest remarks came a day after marathon meetings with the European cohort, during which Zelensky specifically referenced progress towards a deal on security guarantees. They are among the most prominent Ukrainian demands for any deal that may include ceding territory to the Russians. Zelensky also noted that as part of a potential security guarantee agreement, Kyiv would purchase $90 billion in American weapons, including sophisticated systems for air-defense support and war planes. The U.S. would buy Ukrainian drones in return. Some of Trump's top supporters almost immediately warned him against getting involved militarily. 'Right now, it's all predicated on American cash, American arms, and now they're going to need American involvement,' former White House strategist and conservative firebrand Steve Bannon said on his radio show Monday, adding that European leaders and Senate GOP hawks cannot be trusted on this issue. Bannon said the group is 'trying to get America sucked into a deep involvement' in the region. 'These are tripwires,' Bannon said. 'This is where things go from regional conflicts to world wars.' The battle also marks the latest one where Trump has had to straddle the concerns of key MAGA figures. He has had to manage similar situations in Iran after the U.S. struck against their nuclear capabilities and backed Israel's war against Hamas in Gaza. Jack Posobiec, a right-wing activist and editor at Human Events, also pressed White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt about the questions about the security guarantees being discussed. 'The president understands the security guarantees are crucially important to ensure a lasting peace,' Leavitt said at Tuesday's press briefing. 'He has directed his national security team to coordinate with our friends in Europe, and also to continue to cooperate and discuss these matters with Ukraine and Russia as well.' The Ukrainians are seeking security guarantees akin to those afforded to NATO nations via Article 5, which Witkoff, Trump's envoy to the Middle East and Ukraine, floated over the weekend. That would potentially draw the U.S. into a larger conflict if Moscow attacked the peacekeeping effort. Russia has vociferously objected to security guarantees even though Trump indicated recently that Putin would be open to the idea of a peacekeeping force by NATO nations in eastern Ukraine. 'We reiterate our longstanding position of unequivocally rejecting any scenarios involving the deployment of NATO military contingents in Ukraine, as this risks uncontrollable escalation with unpredictable consequences,' said Maria Zakharova, a spokeswoman for the Russian Foreign Ministry. Trump and European leaders are expected to continue discussion in the coming days in a bid to keep up the momentum. Secretary of State Marco Rubio is set to head up a U.S.-European-Ukrainian commission to draft a proposal of potential security guarantees as part of a final accord, and Trump is seeking a meeting with both Putin and Zelensky.
Bloomberg
29 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Trump's ‘Chinese Model' Is Making the US a Corporate Stakeholder
Donald Trump may be the leader of the Republican Party, but when it comes to the free market—the very economic foundation of the modern GOP—he appears to be headed in the opposite direction of long-held doctrine. Trump is now directly intervening in corporate matters, ostensibly to achieve his economic and foreign policy goals. This includes demanding a government cut of AI chip sales to China from Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices. He's also said to be in talks to grab a 10% stake in the beleaguered chipmaker Intel. And last month, the Pentagon snapped up a $400 million preferred equity stake in a rare earth mining company.
