CHRISTINA HAGAN TOO BUSY TO MEET WITH CONSTITUENTS IN PIKE TWP ON FRACKING ISSUE. AND ANYWAY, PIKE WON'T EVEN BE IN HER DISTRICT COME JANUARY 1, 2013!

One reason of a number that many of us have such a low opinion of politicians is that once they figure you are no longer a factor in their political future:  So Long! 

Such seems to be the case for state Rep. Christina Hagan (Republican - Marlboro - the 50th).

Seems like she's learning quick though only in her early to mid 20s to become an accomplished, calculating politico.

When she got appointed by the Ohio House Caucus (with daddy's help - former state Rep. John Hagan, the 50th 2000 - 2008) in March of 2011 on her predecessor Todd Snitchler (about three months after he was re-elected to his second term as representative for the 50th) vamoosing to Columbus for green$$er pastures in Columbus as Republican Governor John Kasich's man in charge of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, she was all hep on representing the folks in the 50th.

Then came September, 2011 and the creation of a new 50th which cut out some of the townships and villages from the map of the old 50th.

Here is a comparison of the "new with 2013" and "current - 2012" maps.  (Pike Township is dashed ( - - - - -) in to show approximately where Pike is located in Representative Hagan's current district.

The noteworthy thing is that in the "new" map on the right Pike Township not being in red indicates that it is NOT in the "new 50th."

So no wonder Hagan is not all that interested in showing up in Pike.  More reason for Hagan to be disinterested in showing up is that some of her constituents want to confront her about her "all-out" support of fracking.

The moral of this story for folks in Canal Fulton, Tuscarwas Township, parts of Perry Township, Bethlehem Township and Sugarcreek Township is that they will not have a state representative paying much, if any, attention to their needs to have the ear of state government through the end of 2012.

But, of course, Hagan doesn't mind collecting her $60,000 plus annual state rep. income.

Representative Hagan recently made headlines in the Cleveland Plain Dealer and derivatively in the SCPR for her being the third highest recipient in the entire Ohio General Assembly in campaign contributions. ($7,500 - unheard of for an appointed representative who has never been elected to anything)

Originally, she was scheduled to be at Pike Township Hall on April 16, 2012.  That was canceled.  Then it was to be May 7th.  That was canceled.  Then it was May 21st.  That was canceled.

Now there is no date.  A constituent who is the SCPR's source for the on, off, on again, off again meeting charade says that he is being told that she is too busy working on - get this - working on "energy" issues in Columbus to meet with her Pike Township constituents.

While she may not look like it on the surface of things, state Representative Christina Hagan is well on her way to becoming a crusty, self-serving and politically jaded politician that Stark Countians, Ohioans and Americans loathe.

PRESS RELEASE COVERAGE OF STATEHOUSE DOES NOT SERVE STARK COUNTIANS WELL. FORMER REP STATEHOUSE REPORTER PAUL KOSTYU SURFACES AT THE CINCINNATI ENQUIRER

Up until April, 2007 and the arrival of GateHouse Media, Inc on the local newspaper scene in its purchase of The Repository, Stark Countians had first rate coverage of the political machinations going on in the Ohio Statehouse in the personage of the then-Repository Columbus Bureau Chief Paul Kostyu (now Statehouse reporter for the Cincinnati Enquirer).

However, as part of GateHouse's cost cutting paradigm (which continues to this day with its common stock selling 6 cents a share and its annual report saying that a bankruptcy could be in its future ), Kostyu's position was eliminated.

Ever since, it seems to the SCPR, the The Repository has endeavored to cover the Stark County delegation to the Ohio General Assembly via press releases issued by delegation members.

As election time approaches, the likes of Christina Hagan (Republican - Marlboro), Kirk Schuring (Republican - Jackson), Scott Oelslager (Republican - Plain) and Stephen Slesnick (Democrat - Canton) crank up the press release machine and inundate any media outlet with their political propaganda.

Of course, Slesnick has/had two problems in this regard.  First, he is in the minority in the Ohio House and therefore is not allowed by Republicans to getting anywhere with legislation that he proposes and, secondly, he is by virtue of his personality so laid back that even when the Democrats had a majority in the House for two years, he demonstrated that he wasn't particularly adept at using the press release propaganda mechanism.

But the Republicans have proven to be highly accomplished at this art and they appear to have a willing accomplice in the powers that be who run The Repository.

Accordingly, Stark Countians do not get a clear picture of what their representatives are doing in Columbus.  It seems to the SCPR that The Rep pretty much publishes the varnished press releases verbatim.  Very few if any critically framed questions are asked as a follow up to the releases.  And The Rep's editorial board provides very little in thoroughgoing analysis of the import/significance/deficiencies of the public relations-eque nature of the bills being championed.

Of course, the likes of Hagan, Schuring and Oelslager do not press release out votes that might prove embarrassing in front of the folks back home.

An example of "mum is the word" is the shenanigans revealed in the droppings along the legislative trail of House Bill 194 original passage of which was supported by Stark's three Republican representatives.

As far as the SCPR can determine, The Repository (being without the likes of Kostyu) did not provide its Stark County readership with any meaningful insight into the processes of passing HB 194 and collateral efforts to salvage "important to Republicans" in a presidential election year (Obama and Romney are neck-and-neck in recent polls) in HB 224 and in the sham repeal legislation passed earlier this week (HB 295).

Republicans claim that HB 194 was overall designed to protect the integrity of elections and to simply the voting process and specifically instituted the following reforms:

• eliminating provisions whereby citizens could register and vote in one a to z process,
• eliminating provisions allowing citizens to vote "absentee" during the the weekend days immediately preceding election day,
• the beefing up of requirement of voters to ensure they were entitled to vote, and
• the shoring up of standards on absentee and provisional ballots so as to make their eligibility for being counted more stringent.

Democratic politicians aided by some non-partisan types called "foul ball," saying that the bill:

• reduced access to voting (especially for minorities),
• (e.g. in eliminating early voting during the weekend preceding an election),
• made it more difficult for voters (who do not have Ohio drivers licenses or valid ones) to produce "qualifying to vote" identification,
• reduced the scope and depth of help that poll workers can provide voters having difficulty in voting, and
• increasing the barriers which absentee and provisional ballots must surmount in order to qualify to be counted

The Ohio General Assembly passed HB 194 (June 29, 2011) and Stark's Republican legislators all supported it.  As they did the passage of HB 224 (see vote tally below) and HB 295 (see vote tally below).

In reaction to HB 194 passing, a coalition formed under the banner of Fair Elections Ohio.  The organization successfully circulated a referendum petition to put the matter of HB 194 before the voters of Ohio coming this November as to whether or not it should stand as the law of Ohio.

Much like with Senate Bill 5 (the bill which would have adversely impacted collective bargaining rights of fire, police and teacher public employees along with a few other categories of such), when it became apparent that the referendum was going to pass, the Republicans began rethinking the abrogation of voters' rights.

On SB 5, Governor Kasich tried to negotiate a deal to salvage the bill.  But he proved to be "a day late and a dollar short" and voters overwhelmingly defeated the bill (Tate Issue #2 on the ballot).

On HB 194, the Republicans (including Stark Countians Hagan, Schuring and Oelslager) did two things.

First, they passed HB 224 as emergency legislation and got a supermajority of votes (making it referendum proof), which proves how stupid the Democratic minority in the Ohio General Assembly is (i.e. by voting with the Republicans they undermined the referendum on HB 194).

In HB 224, which was primarily designed to affect military and overseas voting, some provisions of HB 194 were incorporated thereby getting these provisions into law through the backdoor and referendum proof.  To repeat, Stark Countians Hagan, Schuring and Oelslager all supported this "sleight of hand" legislation.

Then in HB 295 which was advertised by the Republican Ohio General Assembly leadership as "repealing" HB 194 did nothing of the sort.

Left in HB 295 was the elimination of the weekend before an election voting opportunity.

In all the Machiavellian political twists and turns involving HB 194, HB 224 and HB 295, the Republicans believe that they have mooted the Fair Elections Ohio referendum on HB 194.

And they could be determined to be correct.

So in addition to curtailing access to the ballot box they have conspired to deprive you and I (the political base of Ohio in a democratic republic) the right to overturn decisions of those that a majority of Ohioans elected in the first place.

Part and parcel of these anti-democratic-republican political maneuvers were guess who?

You've got it:  Hagan, Schuring and Oelslager.

Of course there was no press release on it.

And, of course, no Repository scrutiny of their unpublicized partisan politics coup.

After all, Paul Kosytu is gone.

But GateHouse and derivatively The Rep did save money.

So what that Stark Countians would have been, but for the SCPR, uninformed about the backroom politics of our local representatives to the Ohio General Assembly.

And The Rep is an award winning newspaper?

HOPE FOR A UNIFIED STARK COUNTY CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT? DOES THIS PROSPECT UPSET STARK GOP'S "PARTY LOYALTY OVER STARK COUNTY INTERESTS" JEFF MATTHEWS & CHRISTINA HAGAN?

The "rule of law" may turn out to be the saving grace for Stark County in terms of all of it ending up in the same congressional district after all.

However, an Ohio Supreme Court ruling instituting the rule of law may be upsetting to Stark County GOP Chairman Jeff Matthews and state Rep. Christina Hagan (Republican - Marlboro - the 50th) because both indicated that they were "pleased as punch" with an Ohio General Assembly redistricting plan fracturing Stark County into three districts.

Contrary to most Stark Countians, being the consummate partisans they are, Matthews and Hagan saw a silver lining in the gerrymandering of Stark in that (in their minds) it comes out that Stark has three times as much clout in Congress being in three different districts.

The SCPR's take is that, in fact, Stark residents in the lesser (in terms of Stark geography) districts, will likely take a huge back seat, if not shut out altogether, under the fractured plan.

On September 26th, Ohio Republicans jammed down the throats of all Ohioans (Democrat, Republican, and Independent) a U.S. Constitution which required every 10-year redistricting plan designed to keep Republicans in control of the overall political makeup of the Ohio delegation to the United States Congress.

Under the likely direction of Ohio Democratic Party Chairman Chris Redfern, a group called Ohioans for Fair Districts formed, and filed a lawsuit in the Ohio Supreme Court to require Republican Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted to accept petitions, preliminary to gathering a required larger number of valid voter signatures, to permit rank-and-file Ohioans to weigh-in on the Republican plan.

On Thursday last, the Ohio Supreme Court followed legal precedent established by itself in 2009 in LetOhioVote.org v. Brunner and Taft v. Franklin Cty. Court of Common Pleas (1998) in arriving at its decision of Ohioans for Fair Districts v. Husted.

As things stand now, Ohioans for Fair Districts needs to collect a total of 231,149 votes in order to get the measure on a statewide ballot (get this - the November, 2012 ballot) by December 26, 2011. 

However, Ohioans for Fair Districts say they plan to ask the court to extend the amount of time within which they are required to collect and submit signatures to Husted.

It would be interesting to watch Matthews and Hagan in the eventuality that Ohioans for Fair Districts get the redistricting enabling legislation (Ohio House Bill 319) on the ballot.

Would they stick to the Ohio Republican Party line, or will they bend to local pressure and fall into line with the predominant view (Republicans and Democrats alike) in Stark County?

The Report uses "would" rather than "will" because the SCPR does not believe that a vote will actually take place even if enough valid signatures are collected.

What "will" happen is that Republican Ohio Speaker of the House will call a special session of the Ohio General Assembly and Republicans will be forced - by virtue of the Supreme Court ruling - to compromise with Democrats to the extent that Democrats will prevail on the Ohioans for Fair Districts to withdraw the planned referendum.

That, folks, is political reality!