Ohio Citizen Action Follows the Money: Cash From Cincinnati-Based Insurance Cos. Flows To GOP Supreme Court Candidates

Cincy Cash Floats GOP Justices

CINCINNATI (TDB)-- Half the money raised by Republican Justice Maureen O'Connor -- who is campaigning for the chief justice slot this year -- has come from insurance companies.  Justice Judith Lanzinger, the GOP nominee who is seeking reelection, got 49% of her campaign kitty from insurers.  And a significant chunk of the campaign cash raised by the two judges flowed in from insurers who have their home offices in Cincinnati.  Ohio Citizen Action pored over campaign contribution reports and compiled data about who is financing the Supreme Court campaigns this year, and The Daily Bellwether has the complete text (pdf) of the 14-page report available here. Citizen Action says that Ohio should stop judges from presiding over cases that involve their financial backers -- the money raises the possibility of bias.  A sample of the findings:

"Insurance companies dominated the contributions to the Republican candidates. In fact, insurance companies just from Cincinnati (American Financial Group, Cincinnati Equitable Corp, Cincinnati Financial Corp, Cincinnati Insurance Company, Hukill Hazlett Harrington Agency, Ohio National Financial Services, Ohio National Life Insurance, Schiff, Keidler-Shell, Inc., Stay Focused Insurance, Union Central Life Insurance Co., and Western & Southern Life Insurance) together contributed $157,845 to the contested Republican candidates for Ohio’s high court."

Draft Code Of Conduct For Ohio Judges: Discrimination Against Gays Is Banned

COLUMBUS (TDB) -- A proposed new code of conduct for state judges makes it clear that discrimination based on sexual orientation is unacceptable. It also says Ohio's judges are banned from membership "in any organization that practices invidious discrimination on the basis of race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, or sexual orientation." The draft code adds the words sex, ethnicity and sexual orientation.

There are no organizations listed as examples. Perhaps judges would have to stay clear of the Boy Scouts, who have been accused of bias because gays are kept at bay. And there are numerous ethnic clubs that require some proof of heritage to become a member. There is an exemption for the military, which does discriminate against gays via the don't ask, don't tell regulation. The complete text of the proposed code of conduct is available here on the Ohio Supreme Court Web site. Subject to revision and public hearings, the new rules are expected to go into effect sometime later this year.

The proposed rule seems to create a conundrum: Ohio is a state that has enacted a constitutional ban against gay marriage. Thus, some citizens are prohibited from taking part in a marital contract, which is now reserved by law for a man and a woman. Inquiring minds are wondering: Does the state ban against gay marriage mean Ohio has a government that practices "invidious discrimination . . . on the basis of sexual orientation?"

Another change in the code adds the words "domestic partner" to the rules that require financial disclosure and reporting of gifts to judges, their spouses and people living in their households.