Marty Schladen, Ohio Capital Journal

Pre-election research shows disturbing trend among Republicans

Public opinion research conducted in October shows a shift in one political party that might make Donald Trump’s election on Nov. 5 less of a surprise. A majority of the party now agrees with a sentiment about immigration that has previously been associated with organized hate — that they are “poisoning the blood of the country.”

While October marked the first time respondents were asked that question, responses to others indicated a hard shift against immigrants by Republicans and white evangelical protestants — especially after Trump became president.

The Public Religion Research Institute is a nonpartisan group that studies political issues alongside religious values. Since its founding in 2013, it’s conducted its American Values Survey and done more than 200,000 interviews in the process.

Among its most recent findings was a 50-point gap between Republicans and Democrats over how pressing an issue immigration is for the country. And there now is a huge difference between the parties about whether undocumented immigrants who meet certain criteria should be offered a path to citizenship.

In 2013, 71% of Democrats and 64% of independents believed a path to citizenship should be offered. The percentage for Democrats rose to 77% by October, while it fell to 55% for independents.

But for Republicans, the change was far more dramatic.

In 2013, most Republicans — 53% — believed that qualifying people should be offered a path to citizenship. As of October, just 36% did.

At a recent conference in Washington, D.C., Public Religion Research Institute Founder and CEO Robert P. Jones said that support for a path mostly held steady for Republicans between 2013 and 2019, “then it begins to drop, then it just fell off a cliff beginning last year.”

Jones said the partisan disparity indicates that we’ve entered a new era when it comes to the politics of immigration.

“This is a very, very different world than we were living in even 10 years ago,” he said.

Perhaps not surprisingly, there is a religious element to the disparity.

White evangelical protestants make up the only major religious group that does not have a majority supporting a path to citizenship. That support has fallen from 53% in 2013 to 40% now.

The Public Religion Research Institute survey seemed to find an element of hatred in some of the opposition to allowing more undocumented immigrants to become citizens.

“There were a number of questions that, as a social scientist, I found myself having to ask that I never thought I’d have to ask,” Jones said of the most recent survey.

One was prompted by Trump’s statement a year ago that immigrants are “poisoning the blood of our country.” The statement has ominous implications because Adolph Hitler, who murdered 6 million Jews along with millions of other targeted groups, made several versions of the statement, including that a male Jew “poisons the blood of others…”

In the survey, Jones asked, “Do you agree or disagree that immigrants who are entering the country today are poisoning the blood of our country?”

A full 34% of Americans agree.

“There is a gigantic partisan gap on this question,” Jones said.

Almost two-thirds of Republicans — 61% — 33% of independents, and just 13% of Democrats agreed that immigrants are poisoning the blood of a nation of immigrants.

Jones, who holds a Ph.D. in religion, said that so many Americans agree with such a statement should concern everyone.

“A racist and hate-filled conception of immigrants has really taken hold with a significant minority of the population,” he said.

Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David Dewitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on Facebook and X.

OH election chief’s own numbers say fraud is extremely rare — but  he says that’s a ‘bogus narrative’

When Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose’s latest effort to prosecute voter fraud last week showed once again that voter fraud is vanishingly rare in the Buckeye State — turning up a handful of indictments out of hundreds of case recommendations, representing a minuscule percentage of the millions upon millions of votes cast in recent Ohio elections — he called it a “bogus narrative” on social media.

He’s used that accusation before. In February 2022, the news organization The Hill published a story that accurately said LaRose’s office found possible instances of voter fraud in 0.0005% of ballots cast in the 2020 election. LaRose took to the social media site that was then Twitter to accuse the media of pedaling a false narrative — and to support former President Donald Trump’s lies about that election: “Here they go again,” LaRose tweeted. “Mainstream media trying to minimize voter fraud to suit their narrative.”

In a follow-up tweet, LaRose added, “President Trump is right to say voter fraud is a serious problem. More to come.”

Trump’s claims of voter fraud were rejected by 60 courts, Fox News had to pay out $787 million over false stories about vote rigging, and Trump incited a mob to attack Congress on Jan. 6, 2021 over bogus claims of a rigged election.

However, true to his word, LaRose has continued to beat the voter-fraud drum.

“It’s obvious to anyone paying attention that the integrity of Ohio’s elections is under attack!” he posted on X Friday as he continues to demand citizenship records from the federal government.

But over the past six years, LaRose has failed to make the case that significant levels of voter fraud are happening in Ohio.

Frustrated that county prosecutors weren’t doing more to pursue what his office thought might be cases of fraud, LaRose in September referred more than 600 to Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost. He made the referral after local prosecutors took up just 12 of the 633 cases he had referred to them.

On Tuesday, Yost announced the result: Just six indictments after a Lorain County grand jury declined to charge an Oberlin College student. And one of those who were indicted turned out to be dead.

The indictments address voting in elections stretching back to 2008. In presidential contests alone, more than 22 million Ohioans have voted since then, so 18 voter fraud charges show that despite LaRose’s aggressive investigation, phony voting just isn’t happening very much.

In announcing the charges, Yost said voter fraud was rare and he took LaRose to task over the quality of some of his referrals.

“I need to have a sit-down with the secretary of state about the value of those cases where there was no voting — I think that we ought to be focusing on the voting,” Yost said.

But that didn’t stop LaRose from claiming there’s actually a lot of voter fraud in Ohio.

“Also look for this bogus narrative: ‘It’s only six out of millions! Election fraud doesn’t exist!'” LaRose said last Tuesday on the social media site that is now called X. “That’s a spurious tactic by leftist operatives and their media allies who either want to ignore clear instances of fraud or outright want to make it easier to cheat.”

The secretary of state’s office didn’t respond when asked how it could be a “bogus narrative” when it was literally true that Yost’s work resulted in just six indictments out of tens of millions of votes cast.

Meanwhile, LaRose and his Republican allies on Capital Square have used the specter of widespread voter fraud to undertake a number of measures that critics say disenfranchise people who tend to vote Democratic:

A voter ID law enacted last year that is estimated to have already blocked more than 8,000 from voting.Tough restrictions on boxes for voters to drop off absentee ballots. LaRose had already limited the number of such boxes to one per county — regardless whether it has a million residents and tends to vote blue, or just 13,000 and tends to vote red.Despite the extreme rarity of voter fraud, LaRose also wants to require proof of citizenship in order for people to register. He’s now being sued over those actions. As with voter ID requirements, citizens who lack such documents tend to belong to groups such as people of color who tend to vote for LaRose’s political opponents.LaRose also has purged hundreds of thousands of voters from the rolls, including many because they haven’t cast ballots consistently. Critics say there’s no constitutional requirement that voters must be consistent to be eligible.

In addition to his claims about voter fraud, LaRose has done and said a number of other misleading things concerning elections and voting in Ohio.

For example, last year as he led the drive to make it much more difficult for voters to initiate amendments to the state Constitution, LaRose claimed the effort had nothing to do with blocking an abortion-rights amendment that passed by 14 last November or an anti-gerrymandering amendment that’s on the ballot next week. But then he told a group of Seneca County Republicans that the effort was “100% about” blocking the abortion-rights amendment.

As secretary of state, LaRose heads up the Ohio Ballot Board. That entity this year wrote a ballot summary of the anti-gerrymandering amendment that is on next week’s ballot that critics say is highly misleading.

Even though Ohio’s legislature and congressional delegation are among the most gerrymandered, LaRose’s ballot summary said the proposed reforms would “establish a new taxpayer-funded commission of appointees required to gerrymander the boundaries of state legislative and congressional districts to favor the two largest political parties in the state of Ohio.”

Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David Dewitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on Facebook and X.

Experts: Don’t necessarily expect to know the winner on Election Night

Anybody who lived through the 2020 election probably doesn’t want to hear this, but a panel of expert last Thursday said it’s likely that we won’t know who our next president is going to be on Nov. 5.

Results announced on Election Night are far from official. Those don’t come for weeks.

Rather, they’re projections made by media organizations once they’re confident that the trends they’re seeing will hold. In a close election, that can take a while.

For four agonizing days after the last presidential election, the networks hesitated to project the outcome because it was so close. With Republicans more willing to vote in person during the pandemic, the votes counted first tended to favor then-President Donald Trump, who declared victory while repeating false claims of fraud at 2:30 on the morning following Election Day.

Trump continued the lies right up to Jan. 6, 2020, when a mob he summoned to Washington, D.C., attacked the Capitol as Congress was certifying Joe Biden’s victory. Regardless of the harm it does to public faith in our democracy, the former president and many of his followers continue to repeat lies about the outcome of the last election.

Hopefully, we’ll avoid the violence this time around, but it’s unlikely that we’ll avoid the initial uncertainty, a panel convened by the National Task Force on Election Crises said on Thursday.

“We need to make sure that the public are aware that we may not have results for one race, for multiple races in a given state on Election Night, or even Wednesday, or maybe even Thursday,” said Tammy Patrick of the Election Center, a national group representing election officials. “It all remains to be seen.”

Celina Stewart, CEO of the League of Women Voters, was even more definite.

“We likely will not know the winner of the election on Election Night,” she said. “And we should be skeptical of candidates who claim victory before there’s a clear picture.”

Part of the reason is that certain swing states such as Pennsylvania and Wisconsin don’t allow early votes to be processed before Election Day. Michigan also didn’t allow the practice in 2020, but it does now.

Because so many Democrats voted early in those states, it created a “red mirage” and then a “blue shift” as votes for Biden overtook those for Trump in battleground states as early votes were counted, they said. Trump continues to exploit the phenomenon as part of his election falsehoods.

Stewart warned the public not to pass along dubious information until a clear winner can be projected.

“Being patient and staying calm and being careful not to share information that is false is really important,” she said. “I think we have a heightened responsibility in 2024 based on things that happened recently.”

A huge concern is that uncertainty and disinformation about the outcome of the election will exacerbate political violence that is already happening. Stewart called on the media to raise awareness that clear projections of the winner are not likely to be known on Nov. 5.

“I think there is a clearer role for media this round to contribute to maintaining calm by not calling for results too early, but waiting until there’s a better picture painted,” she said.

Patrick, of the Election Center, said everybody should just take a deep breath.

“Everybody wants the results to be in as quickly as possible,” she said.

Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David Dewitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on Facebook and X.

Politicians are parroting racist lie with ‘great replacement’ rhetoric: critics

Certain politicians try to dress up their rhetoric about immigration as a concern for national security. But they’re really peddling an old, racist theory that has already fueled several massacres in the United States, an alliance of eight anti-hate groups report.

They say a slew of public statements and some legislative and state actions are based on the “great replacement” theory — a belief that shadowy, often-Jewish actors are orchestrating mass immigration by people of color to break the dominance of white people in American society. The theory has been connected to racist massacres in El Paso, Buffalo and Pittsburgh in which Hispanic, Black and Jewish people were targeted, respectively.

The anti-hate groups include the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, the Western States Center, and the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee. Issued earlier this month, their report documents “a disturbing trend among a faction of the 118th Congress: the normalization and amplification of xenophobic ‘great replacement’ and ‘invasion’ conspiracy theories.”

Peddling the notion that immigrants are “invading” the United States as part of some nefarious plot is to promote a lie.

U.S. District Judge David Alan Ezra has defined “‘invasion’ as a hostile and organized military force, too powerful to be dealt with by ordinary judicial proceedings.” Even when the numbers of undocumented immigrants crossing the border peaked, there was never any evidence that they were part of a military force of any kind.

There’s also the fact that claims that immigration is a plot to subsume white power come from the most evidence-free precincts of the conspiracy world.

It’s also relevant to note that despite the fact that former President Donald Trump relentlessly hypes stories of crimes committed by the undocumented, that group commits crimes at substantially lower rates than the native-born.

People who study hate speech say claims of an invasion or a great replacement dehumanize immigrants and people of color and make them targets of violent extremists.

Despite their inaccuracy and their toxicity, many in the current Congress have made statements related to those theories.

“As of publication, the 118th Congress has held more than 30 Congressional hearings where bigoted conspiracies of cultural replacement or an invasion were espoused, and dozens of… immigration hardliners, far-right figures, and members of SPLC-designated anti-immigrant hate groups were called to testify,” the report said. “In total, there have been 1,411 unique social media posts from official congressional accounts promoting the same bigoted conspiracies.”

The report cited statements made by dozens of lawmakers, including several from Ohio.

For example, U.S. Rep. Warren Davidson of Troy on June 27, 2023 posted on X, “America welcomes about 1-million new citizens each year. An organized invasion and occupation is not the same thing. Border security is national security and Congress must restore our sovereign southern border with appropriations/impeachment.”

“Impeachment” referred to an attempt to oust Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. The effort failed, but Rep. Beth Van Duyne, R-Texas, all but accused him of plotting to destroy the United States.

She said Mayorkas “has inflicted great damage on our cities and families, the kind you would expect from a hostile foreign adversary looking to destabilize America,” the report said. “Criminal illegal immigrants are murdering, raping, and beating people in broad daylight. This is the death and destruction of our country and people, not just a policy difference.”

Never one to be outdone, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Georgia, took the floor during the impeachment debate and accused the Homeland Security secretary of actively working to take the country down.

“Mayorkas is guilty of aiding and abetting the complete invasion of our country by gang members, murderers, rapists, and thousands of immigrants,” she said.

The report also said that conspiracy theories about an invasion and the great replacement have spurred legislation.

For example, Rep. Lance Gooden, R-Texas, “introduced H.R. 552: ‘No Tax Dollars for the United Nations’ Immigration Invasion Act,’ which would prohibit the federal government from making contributions to the United Nations migrant and refugee agencies. The U.S. has given bipartisan support to the UN refugee agency for over 70 years,” the report said.

It adds that “coded versions of replacement-style ideas” are manifesting at the state level.

Despite Trump’s lies about the 2020 election, voter fraud of any kind is exceedingly rare. So rare that when expressed as a percentage, it’s usually a number that starts 0.000…”

Whipping up unfounded fears of fraud to justify measures that reduce minority voting isn’t new. But the New York Times in 2022 reported a new trend — Republican officials claiming that undocumented immigrants were voting in substantial numbers.

Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose has undertaken several potentially suppressive measures, supposedly to stop undocumented immigrants from voting.

Last week, he referred 597 cases of possible non-citizen registration for prosecution, but LaRose’s batting average in this arena isn’t good. An investigation by the Capital Journal last year found that of the 521 cases of noncitizen voting referred to law enforcement up to that point in LaRose’s tenure, just one resulted in prosecution. LaRose has been in office since the start of 2019, and the number of ballots cast in the state since then is well over 10 million.

However, LaRose continues to conduct voter purges that opponents say disproportionately target voters of color, and his office has improperly purged citizens from the voting rolls.

Yet he was back on X last week, again behaving as if noncitizen voting was a substantial problem in Ohio.

“It is my sworn-duty to ensure only U.S. citizens vote in Ohio’s elections,” LeRose said. “Following the most extensive citizenship verification audit ever conducted, our Public Integrity Division has now formally referred evidence of noncitizen voter registrations to the Ohio AG for potential prosecution.”

Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David Dewitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on Facebook and X.

For JD Vance, is not backing Ukraine more important than the fight against fentanyl?

Newly named GOP vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance made his mother’s struggles with opioid addiction a part of his public story, and he started a nonprofit to fight the scourge in 2017.

But earlier this year, the Republican senator from Ohio voted against an anti-fentanyl bill that he had co-sponsored. When asked why, Vance’s office said it was because the senator didn’t want to vote for $60 billion in support for Ukraine, which is under attack by Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

So does that mean that it was more important to Vance to oppose supporting Ukraine than it was to fight fentanyl in opioid-ravaged states like Ohio?

Vance’s office hasn’t responded when asked multiple times. But some critics say that Vance has taken several positions that have been convenient for Putin, while others say that the GOP VP nominee wasn’t serious about fighting opioids in the first place.

Vance published his memoir, Hillbilly Elegy, in the summer of 2016. It described growing up in Middletown in southwest Ohio, his mother’s drug and domestic struggles, and how he spent time with a more-stable grandmother in Eastern Kentucky.

The book purports to speak for a huge swath of left-behind America. And when Donald Trump won the presidency in a stunning upset four months after its publication, many in the chattering classes turned to it and its author to learn what they’d missed about the malcontented masses.

The following year, Vance, a graduate of Yale Law School, announced that he was moving back to Ohio to address the problems confronting communities oppressed by the feeling that the only way to get ahead is to get away — to someplace where opportunity actually exists. In a March 16, 2017, op-ed in the New York Times, Vance described living in Silicon Valley.

“It’s jarring to live in a world where every person feels his life will only get better when you came from a world where many rightfully believe that things have become worse,” he wrote. “And I’ve suspected that this optimism blinds many in Silicon Valley to the real struggles in other parts of the country. So I decided to move home, to Ohio.”

Vance didn’t mention an ambition to seek political office, but he did say in the column that he was “founding an organization to combat Ohio’s opioid epidemic.”

He ended up running for office and in 2023 began his political career from a lofty perch in the U.S. Senate. Once there, Vance continued to voice concerns about fentanyl.

“When we talk about fentanyl trafficking in particular, I worry a lot that we’re always… a few years behind what’s actually going on in our country, ” Vance said during a January hearing of the Senate Banking Committee. “And I think back to my own very personal experience with opioid addiction in my family. Ten years ago, what everyone was talking about was prescription painkillers. But of course, ten years ago prescription painkillers were sort of giving way to street heroin. Then five years ago, everyone was talking about street heroin, but heroin was kind of giving way to fentanyl and now, of course, we’re all talking about fentanyl.”

When Democratic Ohio U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown authored the FEND Off Fentanyl Act, Vance signed on as a co-sponsor. Becoming law in April, it declares the crisis a national emergency, creates new powers to disrupt money-laundering and distribution networks, and it creates new sanctions.

But before the measure came to a final vote, Vance had a change of heart. His office told Spectrum News 1 that the senator couldn’t support the $60 billion to help Ukraine defend itself against Putin’s invasion that was part of the package, and thus couldn’t vote yes.

Vance has said he opposes support for Ukraine because it doesn’t have the capacity to push Russia back across Ukraine’s pre-invasion boundaries. But Charles Kupchan of Georgetown University and the Council on Foreign Relations told the Capital Journal that simply cutting off support and telling Ukraine to negotiate would only embolden Putin.

And Bill Browder, one of Putin’s leading foes, said that Vance’s positions on support for Ukraine sound a lot like the Russian authoritarian’s own.

In any case, Vance placed stopping support to Ukraine over at least one front in the domestic fight against fentanyl, and his office won’t comment on why. A political opponent said that one reason is that Vance never really cared that much about the scourge of fentanyl.

His vote on the law is “entirely consistent with the fact that J.D. Vance has never cared about protecting Ohioans from fentanyl or opioid addiction,” said Justin Barasky, a national Democratic political consultant who managed Brown’s 2018 re-election campaign. Vance “launched his political career taking advantage of the fact that Ohio had a serious problem with (opioids.) He started a fake organization that he said was going to address the crisis. It spent zero dollars on treatment, and instead hired political advisors, did a poll, and even brought in a woman who was a mouthpiece for big pharma. So the vote was entirely consistent with his past actions.”

The nonprofit Barasky referred to was called Our Ohio Renewal.

The group drew criticism for hiring a doctor for a year-long residency who had long cast doubt on the role pharmaceutical opioids played in fueling the epidemic of illicit opioids such as heroin and fentanyl. She also worked for the American Enterprise Institute, a think tank that has received substantial funding from Oxycontin maker Purdue Pharma.

Some of the doctor’s claims relied on research that was funded by the opioid maker, ProPublica reported. In 2007 Purdue pleaded guilty to criminal charges related to misleading regulators about how addictive its products were, the New York Times reported.

Also, Our Ohio Renewal’s biggest expenditure was paid to Vance’s top political advisor, Business Insider reported.

Regardless of his motives, Vance’s actions on the FEND Off Fentanyl Act show that he prioritized blocking Ukraine aid over the fentanyl fight, said University of Cincinnati political science professor David Niven. He said he found that confusing.

“You’re a U.S. senator from Ohio, and you’ve got all kinds of Ohio battles to fight in a state that’s been economically trailing the nation and where you are out in front is” stopping aid to Ukraine, Niven said. “You’ve got a political message that’s your whole reason for being, and yet thwarting efforts to aid Ukraine wins the day in what he does and what he says.”

Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David Dewitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on Facebook and X.

Mark Cuban has a simple question for CVS’s drug middleman

Businessman and TV personality Mark Cuban has a seemingly straightforward question for the huge drug middleman owned by CVS: If you’re as transparent about drug pricing as you claim, why don’t you publish prices on your website?

The company didn’t answer directly.

Cuban, founder of Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drugs, last week raised that question to the Capital Journal in response to a paid column that appeared April 3 in Forbes magazine. It was written by David Joyner, president of CVS Caremark, CVS’s pharmacy benefit manager, or PBM.

The company is the largest drug middleman in the United States. It represents insurers in drug transactions by creating lists of drugs that are covered, negotiating deals with manufacturers, reconciling transactions at the pharmacy counter and reimbursing pharmacists.

The three biggest PBMs — CVS Caremark, OptumRx, and Express Scripts — are part of giant corporations that each own a top-10 insurer. Together they represent 80% of the patients whose prescriptions are covered by insurance. And they say they use that size to force the big pharmaceutical companies to reduce prices.

“Our size and scale allow us to go toe-to-toe with drug companies, driving competition and negotiating discounts that make the difference between someone affording their medication or going without,” Joyner wrote in his Forbes column.

However, those companies have for years been dogged by accusations that they’re not transparent and that they’re pocketing huge amounts from their position as middleman in lucrative pharmaceutical transactions.

For example, a special investigation by the Ohio Department of Medicaid showed that CVS Caremark and OptumRx in 2017 took nearly a quarter-billion dollars in previously unknown fees from the health program for the poor. Six years later, the companies are still in court, fighting to keep secret information that it redacted in the report — even though the media reported it in 2019.

Questions about the big PBMs reached the point that the Federal Trade Commission in 2022 mounted a major investigation of the companies’ practices. It’s ongoing.

Amid stories about seemingly arbitrary pricing in which the big PBMs were sometimes paying themselves 100 times as much for drugs as they could be gotten elsewhere, Cuban and others started opening businesses that take drug purchases outside the insurance/PBM system. Discarding the PBM model of using a dizzying array of “maximum allowable cost” lists, the pharmacies publish their cost for the drugs and charge that plus a set markup plus a set dispensing fee.

For example, pharmacist Nate Hux opened Freedom Pharmacy in Pickerington. Illustrating how arbitrary pricing in the insurance/PBM system can be, Hux in 2021 reported selling a patient Celecoxib — a generic version of the anti-inflammatory drug Celebrex — for $23.05. When the patient used her insurance, her copayment alone had been $141.

The Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company site reports other such disparities.

In his column, Joyner, the CVS Caremark president, points out that such operations deal chiefly in generics — the least expensive class of drugs that are no longer patented and thus available from multiple manufacturers. He said the idea behind such cost-plus businesses is old and outmoded.

“The reality is, the Cost Plus offering is neither novel nor unique — it is a generic sourcing business that is 10 years too late,” Joyner wrote.

Cuban appeared to tweak Joyner for claiming the Cost Plus idea is irrelevant, while simultaneously going to the trouble to write a column in a national magazine criticizing it.

“My only response is that we are honored that he would take the time to talk about us and we hope he continues to do so,” Cuban, an owner of the Dallas Mavericks, said in an email.

In his column, Joyner said Cuban’s operation couldn’t address “the real issue: This country has a brand drug pricing problem.”

Those are the more-expensive drugs that are still under patent. The big PBMs negotiate huge, non-transparent rebates and discounts from their manufacturers in exchange for covering them on behalf of the millions of patients they represent. Joyner blamed drugmakers for raising list prices of drugs, but research has shown that list prices go up in conjunction with rebates and discounts received by PBMs.

A spokesman for CVS Caremark didn’t respond directly to a question asking whether, through its negotiations, the company impacts the prices of branded drugs.

In his column, Joyner also said CVS Caremark was bringing sunlight to drug pricing. He wrote, “… we are creating a more transparent environment for drug pricing in this country, and it’s not just for 2,500 drugs; it’s for every drug from every manufacturer for every condition and every patient.”

That prompted Cuban to ask whether the company would publish drug prices on its website as his company had.

“All anyone has to do is go to costplusdrugs.com and look at our pricing and then go to their websites and do the same,” Cuban said. “Then they can make their own decisions.”

Asked whether CVS Caremark would publish prices, its spokesman, Phil Blando again didn’t respond directly.

“The point David (Joyner) is making is one we’ve talked to you and many others about: PBMs are the only enduring protection from high prescription drug prices for seniors, the disabled, and working families,” Blando said in an email. “Prior to the advent of PBMs, consumers were at the mercy of drug companies’ high list prices. Many patients could not afford their medicines and otherwise manageable conditions took a heavy toll. We remain confident in our model and our ability to deliver sustainable savings to our clients and their members without sacrificing access or quality.”

For his part, Hux on Monday said his Pickerington business has grown by the month. He said word-of-mouth, media coverage and Cuban’s venture have all raised awareness of the cost-plus pricing model.

He said that it not only allows him to offer many medicines much more cheaply, the model also creates fewer headaches than his insurance-using pharmacy does.

“We don’t have to fool around with chasing claims, all the extra administrative work,” Hux said. “The documentation, there’s a lot of paperwork to deal with. And the fees they charge the pharmacies. And the audits. It’s just very inefficient. I hate it.”

Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David Dewitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on Facebook and Twitter.

History’s hateful echo: Century-old Klan resurgence resonates today

He was a crooked, gaslighting sadist who a jury found guilty of sexually attacking a woman he’d chewed so savagely that the wounds he inflicted helped to kill her. He led a white-nationalist drive so successful that it could have landed him in the White House. And much of what he did happened right here in Ohio.

It’s important during Black History Month to highlight the struggles and successes of giants and martyrs who helped clear away barriers for all who came behind them. But as the commemoration draws to an end today, it’s also important to remember just how high and hateful those barriers really were, if we ever really knew that in the first place.

Fever

Fighting after 1915 to keep the most forbidding barriers in place was the resurgent Ku Klux Klan. It was led by one D.C. Stephenson, a man who came north seemingly from nowhere, set up shop on the Indiana portion of the Ohio River and began a rise that appalled much of the country while taking the rest of it by storm.

Author Timothy Egan paints a terrifying portrait of the utterly amoral Stephenson in his 2023 book “A fever in the Heartland: The Ku Klux Klan’s Plot to Take Over America, and the Woman Who Stopped Them.”

Stephenson was actually born in Texas, but he lied so relentlessly about his background — and everything else — that by the time he showed up in Evansville in 1920, he could have been from anywhere.

“His new life in Evansville was a dash and a dodge, just a few steps ahead of the multiple lives he’d left behind,” Egan writes. “He’d knocked around from town to town, selling linotype parts, stock in a coal company, but mostly selling himself. He could talk a dog off a meat wagon, as they said in those parts.

“His smile was toothy and his cheeks dimpled, his eyes blazed, his shoes sparkled and his clothing was impeccable. He liked heavy food, a good cigar and many a drink. He looked prosperous, even if he wasn’t. He sounded educated, an incontinent user of five-dollar words even if the college he attended changed with each telling. But the truth of his background didn’t matter; his swagger was convincing.”

Stephenson was, in other words, both a fraud and a born salesman. But he was also something more and much more sinister.

As he maneuvered his way into one of the top two slots in the Klan and the recruiter across a vast swath of the Midwest, Stephenson made himself rich by skimming off a hefty portion of the money members paid for dues and robes. And he hid the grift behind a veneer of respectability.

Stephenson made common cause with the Anti-Saloon League and other Christian conservatives while being such a drunkard that he at one point required medical treatment. He was also a bigamist, rapist and murderer.

Stephenson was hardly alone in his rank hypocrisy. Egan described how time and again, Klansmen paid off Protestant clergy to get them to spread the Klan message of hate from the pulpit. They dressed it up as “100% Americanism,” but through a mix of fear and greed, those erstwhile messengers of Jesus espoused a creed antithetical to any actual Americanism or any true Christianity.

Fear in a changing nation

Never one for humility, Stephenson boasted that he was the world’s “foremost mass psychologist.” And he understood that he wasn’t selling people anything new so much as appealing to something very old: a fear of the “other” that was already present in so many.

Stephenson’s new Klan continued the relentless, violent persecution of Black people that its earlier, Southern forebear did, with many highly racialized lynchings taking place through the 1920s.

But Stephenson expanded the circle of hate to encompass those he said were responsible for the country’s “national decline.” They included beer-brewing, wine-drinking immigrants, independent young women known as flappers, Mexicans, Chinese, Catholics and of course Jews — who were supposedly masterminding the “national decline” because… something.

Of course, the claim of decline was laughable. The economic engine that was the United States had just brought an end to the Great War and it was by far the richest nation in the world — and strong immigration played a vital role fueling that growth.

But the country was changing. Women were voting and smoking, dark-complexioned people who spoke scary-sounding languages were crowding the cities, kids were running around in cars and they were wild about music created by Black people.

By the time he was ensconced in a Klan-owned mansion in the Irvington neighborhood of Indianapolis in 1923, Stephenson was manipulating those anxieties like the master he was. People joined out of a fear of change or a fear of the Klan — extortion, to put it bluntly. For example, some farmers were advised that joining was a way to protect their livestock from a malady known as “bullet in the brain.”

Stephenson, known to his henchmen as “Steve,” was just as effective using carrots and clubs to dominate politicians and businessmen — especially in Indiana. By 1925, a Klan slate promising to keep Black children out of most city schools and to officially segregate Indianapolis neighborhoods swept to victory, giving the benighted city the nickname “Klanopolis.”

Metastasis

The power of Stephenson and the Klan radiated far beyond the Hoosier State and especially into Ohio.

Old clippings from The Columbus Dispatch show that as the organization rose in the Buckeye State, the paper had a hard time deciding whether that was a good or bad thing.

A brief published on May 23, 2021 described a Klan raid on an Akron home in which members cut the beard off of a man who was likely Jewish or foreign-born — or both — “after an alleged assault on his aged and crippled wife.”

But less than three months later, on Aug. 5, 1921, the paper published a brief extolling the group as a positive good.

“The Ku Klux Klan is a patriotic order, which stands for law enforcement and true Americanism,” it said, credulously.

As Klan chapters formed across the state, there was pushback. Ohio had done as much as any state to win the Civil War, and some veterans’ organizations were adamantly opposed to an organization that sought to undo the second founding of the nation that had come at the cost of so much blood.

On Oct. 2, 2021, the Rev. G.W. Hopewell, a member of a “colored” Ohio post of the American Legion, made a powerful speech against the Klan at the state convention. It was so well received that he was elected to be a delegate to the national convention in Kansas City.

“The resolutions committee in a report condemned all societies discriminating against race, color or religion ‘under the guise of 100% Americanism,'” the Dispatch story said.

But the fire continued to rage.

Some may want to forget it now. But racism was then so sweeping and so ingrained that even the president of Harvard University, A. Lawrence Lowell, embraced the pseudoscience of eugenics and sought to limit the numbers of Jews admitted to his university. So it’s not surprising that humbler people who felt more buffeted and bewildered by change would turn to racist nonsense to explain a world that scared the crap out of them.

Impunity

In Ohio, the predatory Klan leader Stephenson received a disconcerting welcome.

“Ohio was a second home for Steve during the warm months,” Egan wrote. “He’d purchase a showcase at Buckeye Lake, where many of the wealthy and powerful of the state passed their summers. He could count on Ohio judges, prosecutors, politicians as friends of the order. Youngstown, 170 miles from the site of the police encounter, was about to elect a Klan mayor.”

Egan was referring to a June 1923 incident just outside Columbus that foreshadowed what would lead to Stephenson’s downfall a few years later.

Two motorcycle-mounted Franklin County sheriff’s deputies stopped by a car parked alongside a dark, lonely road. In the back seat, they found Stephenson with his pants down and a young woman with her dress up.

Stephenson, who maintained a public persona of Christian virtue, at first refused to identify himself. Deputies only let him go when he pulled out a badge showing he was a deputy with the Horse Thief Detective Association.

Horses were mostly gone from midwestern roads in 1923. But Stephenson had built the detective association into a paramilitary force in Indiana. He swelled its ranks to 14,000 and used his troops to entrench his power much as Benito Mussolini’s Black Shirts did in contemporary Italy.

Stephenson escaped accountability on the outskirts of Columbus only to sin again. On July 12, 1923, even he was surprised that 75,000 showed up for a Klan rally at Buckeye Lake that was ridiculously known as a Klonklave. It was the largest Klan gathering in Ohio history.

“Three days later, Stephenson stumbled down his Buckeye Lake compound to a cottage that housed some of the women who worked for him,” Egan writes. “It was 3:30 a.m. He was naked but for his underpants and so drunk he could hardly stand. He barged inside and went to the bedroom of his stenographer, a 19-year-old from Indianapolis who had been an employee since April. She jumped out of bed, terrified at the sight of the glassy-eyed Klansman stumbling toward her.

“He grabbed the girl and tried to kiss her. He was her boss; she was told when she was hired that she should never cross the Old Man. He threw her on the bed and lowered his underwear. As he tried to pin the woman, she squirmed out of his grasp.”

Stephenson desisted when she threatened to scream. But Egan noted that it was at least his second attempted rape in two weeks — and the second for which he’d suffered no consequences.

To the contrary, just a few weeks later, Stephenson was hosting Ohio Gov. A. Victor Donahey and other high officials on his 98-foot yacht, Reomar II, as it sailed out of its home port in Toledo.

Another attack

Stephenson continued to consolidate his wealth and power — including by extorting Black, Jewish and Catholic business owners to pay up or face Klan boycotts.

His control over Indiana state government was so complete that he was able to force through a bill ordering a health-education curriculum. It was so specific that only he could control the content and publication of the textbook from which it would be taught.

But the woman to whom he dangled authorship of that text proved to be Steve’s downfall.

Madge Oberholtzer was a 28-year-old who had formerly been a student at Butler College, which was then in the Indianapolis suburb of Irvington near Stephenson’s Klan compound. She was known as lively and independent. She’d made, for example, a cross-country driving trip with a female friend at a time when rural roads were nothing like they are now and attitudes about what women could properly do on their own were even more primitive.

Stephenson was the most important man in Indiana and when she came to his attention and he dangled the book project, Oberholtzer took a wary interest.

After the two had become more familiar, a Stephenson aide made a nighttime telephone call to Oberholtzer’s parents’ Irvington home on March 15, 1925. The aide demanded that Madge come to the Klan compound for some sort of emergency. After some resistance, Oberholtzer got into a car driven by a Klan flunky.

At the compound, an intoxicated Stephenson ordered his henchmen to force Oberholtzer to take several drinks that turned out to be drugged. They then drove to Indianapolis’s Union Station and boarded a train to Chicago.

In a berth once the train was underway, Stephenson forced himself on Madge.

“He bit her neck, her face, her breasts — a burst of savagery,” Egan wrote. “Blood flowed out. He chewed her tongue and spit out blood. He chewed her breasts again. He moved on to her legs, her ankles, mutilating her body. The pain was excruciating.”

Stephenson and his party disembarked in Hammond, short of the Illinois state line. He knew he could control Indiana state law enforcement. But if he carried Oberholzer into Illinois, he would be subject to federal jurisdiction and Steve didn’t know if he could control that.

Courage and comeuppance

As Stephenson ate and slept in a Hammond hotel, Oberholtzer demanded to be taken to a drug store so she could get medicine for her wounds. Unbeknownst to her Klan escort she also bought bichloride of mercury, a poison used in the well-publicized death of a silent film star in 1920. Madge took six of the pills.

When Stephenson learned what Oberholtzer had done, he was furious and ordered an aide to get a car. On the way back to Indianapolis, Madge changed her mind about suicide and begged to be taken to a hospital.

Stephenson refused unless Oberholtzer agreed to marry him, thus giving him a way around a rape charge. There was no such crime as marital rape in Indiana until the 1990s.

A disgusted, suffering Oberholtzer doggedly refused, so Stephenson drove her back to the Klan compound. He told her it would be futile to report what he’d done to her.

“What’s done is done,” Steve said. “I am the law and the power.”

Back at her parents’ home, Madge Oberholtzer clung to life for nearly a month. And as she did, she dictated a painstaking account of what she suffered at the hands of Grand Dragon Stephenson, the most powerful man in Indiana.

In a state where Stephenson controlled most public offices from the governor down to sheriffs and judges, lawyers and prosecutors were understandably reluctant to take up Oberholtzer’s cause. But several did, anyway.

In a trial held months later just to the North in Noblesville, prosecutors were able to use Oberholtzer’s dying declaration to damn Stephenson from beyond the grave. And doctors testified that her death wasn’t just a suicide from the poison she took — a severe infection from the bites Steve had inflicted played an important role in killing her.

In the end, an all-male jury of stolid farmers convicted Stephenson of second-degree murder on Nov. 14, 2025. He was sentenced to life in prison two days later.

Worry and hope

Surely reinforcing prosecutors and jurors against the phalanx of threats they faced was a large group of women who attended court day after day in support of Oberholtzer’s cause.

“Here was a crime that strikes at the very foundations of our life as Christian people,” reads a statement by the Irvington Women’s Club that Egan quotes in his book. “If we permit perpetrators of such acts to go unpunished it will show that our ideals have become obscured or that our sense of justice has been blunted.”

The women’s advocacy and their attendance at the trial were brave in their own right. But they surely also bespeak a long history of abuse that mostly went unreported and unpunished, as Stephenson’s many other depredations had.

In the end, the horror and thievery exposed at trial — and in the Klan more broadly — irreparably harmed a gang that tried to pretend that it was protecting Christianity and “Americanism.” And Stephenson himself brought down Indiana Gov. Ed Jackson when that official refused to pardon the Klansman.

But during the trial, as Stephenson’s monumental cruelty was being exposed to the world, many refused to believe what they read or heard. In jail, the grand dragon was flooded with letters of support and gifts of food. Those supporters included Stephenson’s jailer, Hamilton County Sheriff Charles Goodling, a “lawman” who continued his fealty in the face of Stephenson’s utter lawlessness.

It’s worrying to think that a monster such as Stephenson achieved unaccountable power in states like Indiana and Ohio, which sent thousands to die in a war against his kind. It’s even more disturbing that such a man had a plausible path to the American presidency.

But it’s inspiring to think that principled citizens — including humble farmers, downtrodden minorities, and a woman who was uncowed even when facing death — were able, even if just barely, to turn the tide against Stephenson and the fear and hatred he hid behind.

SUPPORT NEWS YOU TRUST.

DONATE

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

SUBSCRIBE

Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David Dewitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on Facebook and Twitter.

Ohio indictments provide a better picture of squalid relationships that spurred massive scandal

An Ohio grand jury has handed up a 44-count indictment against three players in what is likely the biggest bribery scandal in state history. And when the 50-page indictment was unveiled Monday, it provided new details about a decade of payoffs and conflicts as one of them — who became the state’s top regulator — allegedly did a huge electric utility’s bidding.

The indictment concerns a $1.3 billion dollar bailout that Akron-based FirstEnergy has already admitted to the federal government that it paid more than $60 million in bribes to purchase.

Former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder, R-Glenford, and former state GOP Chairman Matt Borges are serving federal prison sentences for their roles in the 2019 passage of the bailout and the dirty-but-succesful fight to thwart a voter-led repeal.

When federal prosecutors in 2021 charged those two and three others, they said their investigation continued. But it wasn’t until December that they charged another in the case — Sam Randazzo, a lawyer and longtime energy consultant whom Gov. Mike DeWine nominated to chair the state’s top regulator, the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio.

That left the people who paid the alleged bribes — FirstEnergy’s top executives — uncharged in a scheme that took place more than four years ago.

Double dealing

All that changed Monday when Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost announced state charges against Randazzo and former First Energy CEO Chuck Jones and former Vice President Michael Dowling for their alleged roles in the criminal conspiracy. The three were arraigned in Akron on Tuesday and each pleaded not guilty.

They were charged in an indictment that alleged shady dealings between the them stretching back 13 years.

“It all began with a well-lawyered theft in 2010,” the indictment said.

It went on to describe how Randazzo was general counsel for a group of large FirstEnergy customers — the Industrial Energy Users of Ohio — while also working as a FirstEnergy consultant. Only, the Industrial Energy Users didn’t know that Randazzo was also being paid by the company they were paying him to fight, the indictment said.

It accuses Randazzo of settling the industries’ claims against FirstEnergy on terms acceptable to FirstEnergy and running the settlements through Randazzo-controlled shell companies where he took a skim — again, unknown to the industrial energy users.

“His clients, the industrial members of IEU-Ohio, did not know he was a consultant for FirstEnergy,” the indictment said. “Randazzo did not tell them. Years later, some of the money would make its way to IEU-Ohio. Some of it would end up in Randazzo’s pocket.”

The Industrial Energy Users appear to have engaged in some cynical conduct of their own, however. The indictment describes a 2015 agreement in which FirstEnergy was to pay Randazzo’s company $8.5 million for “consulting services.”

It was really a cash “side deal” in which FirstEnergy paid the industrial users to drop their objections to a rate hike FirstEnergy wanted, supposedly in the name of “energy security,” the indictment said. In other words, prosecutors said that with Randazzo’s facilitation, FirstEnergy paid off a wealthy, powerful group of electricity users in order to raise rates on everybody else.

Such arrangements proved quite profitable for Randazzo.

“Between 2016 and 2019, FirstEnergy paid… $13,152,639.94 to Randazzo’s two shell companies,” the indictment said. “Of that total, Randazzo gave $7,756.903.84 to his IEU-Ohio Client and kept $5,395,736.10 for himself.”

Cozy relationships

This is the guy the incoming DeWine-Husted administration thought would be a good candidate to regulate utilities — companies to which Ohioans have little choice in paying their billions.

The state indictment describes how, on Dec. 18, 2018, FirstEnergy execs Jones and Dowling met with Gov.-elect DeWine and Lt. Gov.-elect Jon Husted at the Columbus Athletic Club and discussed whether the executives wanted Randazzo to regulate their massive electric utility.

The notion that a governor would ask a huge utility who might be acceptable as a regulator might itself seem startling. But after the dinner, according to the indictment, Jones and Dowling did something even more brazen.

They went to Randazzo’s German Village condo and pursuant to that, Randazzo solicited a $4.3 million payment from Jones and Dowling, the indictment said. FirstEnergy paid the money “without ever having received an invoice for the payment and without any work or consulting services being performed,” the indictment said. It added that the executives made the payment over the objections of a company lawyer.

Randazzo told Laurel Dawson, DeWine’s chief of staff, about the payment, calling it a “consulting agreement.” But he didn’t tell her of the other millions he’d gotten from the utility he was seeking to regulate, the indictment said. Randazzo also never told the Ohio Ethics Commission about any of the money he’d gotten from FirstEnergy, the indictment said.

In Dawson, Randazzo might have had a sympathetic audience. Her husband, Michael Dawson, was a “paid FirstEnergy lobbyist” in 2016, when he’d gotten a $10,000 loan from Randazzo, the indictment said.

But if his chief of staff told DeWine about the huge payoff Randazzo got from FirstEnergy, it must not have fazed the new governor. DeWine nominated Randazzo to be chairman of the Public Utilities Commission — the ratepayers’ supposed protector — on Feb. 4, 2019.

Versatile player

During Householder’s six-week trial in Cincinnati last year, federal prosecutors put on exhaustive evidence of how the FirstEnergy executives financed Householder’s bid to become speaker and to pass the notorious bailout known as House Bill 6.

“Together, Jones, Dowling, Randazzo and his shell companies worked in concert to steal the power of government and bend it to the will of FirstEnergy,” was the way the state indictment unveiled on Monday put it.

Most of the details of Randazzo’s involvement in the creation and passage of HB 6 are already known from the federal trial. They show him acting in multiple, conflicting, often-undisclosed capacities — similar to those the state indictment alleges he had already played with FirstEnergy and the industrial energy users.

Even though he was supposed to be a regulator, Randazzo drafted portions of the bailout legislation and passed them between FirstEnergy officials and a Householder employee who had recently worked for the PUCO. They sometimes only shared printed copies of the huge bill, out of an apparent apprehension about leaving electronic fingerprints.

According to text messages between Jones and Dowling, Randazzo went so far as to actively lobby for passage of the bailout — which would seem a big departure from the traditional duties of a disinterested regulator.

Jones and Dowling discussed a meeting about HB 6 that Randazzo had with Sen. Steve Wilson, R-Maineville, and the Senate’s counsel. “We have a good plan to help,” Dowling told his boss.

Other officials

Despite the fact that DeWine had reason to know Randazzo was connected to FirstEnergy, the governor made him the state’s top utility regulator and he signed the billion-dollar bailout that benefitted the company the day it passed. And on July 21, 2021 — the day Householder was arrested — DeWine said he wasn’t in favor of repealing the measure.

The governor subsequently walked that back, but HB 6 is still on the books and Ohio utilities are still getting hundreds of millions in ratepayer subsidies as a result.

DeWine wasn’t the only state official to act at least peripherally in the scandal.

Secretary of State Frank LaRose has refused to explain the “private” updates that FirstEnergy CEO Jones said the state’s chief elections official was providing during an attempt to gather signatures to put an HB 6 repeal on the ballot.

And Yost himself dealt a mortal blow to the signature gathering when he initially rejected the ballot language — cutting nearly in half the time HB 6 opponents had to gather a quarter-million valid signatures. And in text messages presented in the federal trial, Borges told a co-conspirator that Yost thought HB 6 was a bad law, but wouldn’t speak up because of help he’d gotten from FirstEnergy in the past.

Beyond the bailout

Randazzo’s alleged help to FirstEnergy wasn’t limited to HB 6. He also thwarted a PUCO look into the company’s books that was likely to force a cut in electricity bills. That would have caused falling stock prices and a hit to Jones’ and Dowling’s portfolios, the indictment said.

The erstwhile regulator was apparently so helpful that Jones at one point told a FirstEnergy subordinate to back off for fear of being too obvious. In a text message included in the indictment, Jones told Dennis Chack that Randazzo’s pro-FirstEnergy conduct “has a lot of talk going on in the halls of PUCO about does he work there or for us?”

Even so, Randazzo’s behavior at the PUCO continued to be shameless, urging fellow regulators to join him in lobbying for the corrupt bailout, the indictment said.

Randazzo “began internally lobbying PUCO staff members between July 2020 and September 2020 to generate strategies to save HB 6, despite facing internal objections about the inappropriateness of the effort to save HB 6,” it said.

The indictment included a Sept. 15, 2020 email in which Randazzo told subordinates, “One option (and I really think we need to get other commissioners and staff into a proactive mode): We could, on our own initiative, issue a show-cause order to (FirstEnergy) directing (FirstEnergy) to show that no costs associated with HB 6 have been included in any riders or base rates.”

Had such an order been issued, the result would have been misleading. While the bill didn’t raise consumer costs through riders or base rates, it included a provision that ensured FirstEnergy would collect at least as much as it did in one of its best years and it created a massive subsidy for money-losing coal plants.

Randazzo’s efforts seemed finally to end two months later, when the FBI searched his condo.

Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David DeWitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on Facebook and Twitter.

Ex-First Energy executives, Ohio utility regulator charged in bailout and bribery scandal

Ohio law enforcement authorities on Monday filed numerous felony charges against two former First Energy executives and a former top utility regulator in what has been called the biggest bribery and money-laundering scandal in Ohio history.

Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost announced scores of felony charges against a former regulator who also has been charged federally, and against two people who haven’t — former top executives for Akron-based FirstEnergy whom the company admitted paid more than $60 million in bribes between 2016 and 2020 in exchange for a $1.3 billion ratepayer bailout.

Charged were Sam Randazzo, former chairman of the Public Utilities Commission. Already facing felony charges in federal court, the state indictment charges him with 22 more, including grand theft, bribery, and money laundering. The indictment accuses him of taking bribes from FirstEnergy from 2010 until just before he became chairman of the commission in 2019.

Also charged were former FirstEnergy CEO Chuck Jones and Vice President Michael Dowling. Between them, they face 22 felony charges similar to those faced by Randazzo.

“This indictment is about more than one piece of legislation,” Yost said Monday. “It is about the hostile capture of a significant portion of Ohio’s state government by deception, betrayal, and dishonesty.”

The state charges that were announced Monday didn’t deal with much of the activity addressed in the federal case. They instead focused on the relationship between Jones, Dowling, and Randazzo between 2010 and early 2019, when they paid him $4.33 million just as he was becoming the state’s top utility regulator.

The House Bill 6 scandal

Back in 2019, former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder took $61 million in bribes in exchange for legislation to give FirstEnergy a $1 billion bailout, named House Bill 6, all at the expense of the ratepayers.

The scheme was revealed in three main ways — two separate whistleblowers and a phone wiretap.

In March 2023, a jury found Householder and former Ohio Republican Party leader Matt Borges guilty beyond a reasonable doubt for their involvement in the racketeering scheme that left four men guilty and another dead by suicide.

In late June that year, federal judge Timothy Black sentenced Householder to 20 years in prison. Borges got 5 years. The two surviving defendants took plea agreements early on, helping the FBI, and are still awaiting their sentencing. The feds are asking for 0-6 months for them.

Until Monday, only federal indictments had been handed out.

HB 6 mainly benefited FirstEnergy’s struggling nuclear power plants, but those provisions were later repealed. There are aspects of the bill still in place, though.

The Ohio Valley Electric Corporation (OVEC) got a handout from the scheme. It expanded a bailout of the OVEC plants and required Ohioans to pay for two 1950s-era coal plants— one in the Southern area of the state and the other in Indiana. The main beneficiaries of this are American Electric Power Company (AEP), Duke Energy and AES Ohio.

Despite this scandal becoming public years ago, ethics laws in the state have not changed to prevent schemes like this from happening.

There are numerous bipartisan efforts to repeal HB 6 totally and to put forward ethics laws. None are going anywhere, it seems.

Monday’s indictments

AG Yost was joined by Summit County Prosecutor Sherri Bevan Walsh and Sheriff Kandy Fatheree for the announcement Monday.

“The crimes committed by these individuals impacted the pocketbooks of every hard working Ohioan and further shook our faith in the institutions and organizations that we count on to represent us and to provide us with essential services,” Fatheree said. “Today, we take another important step in ensuring that justice is served for these crimes and that those who took advantage of the public’s trust are held accountable.”

FirstEnergy as a company has already admitted in a deferred prosecution agreement to bribing public officials in Ohio, including a $4.3 million bribe to Randazzo. Jones and Dowling allegedly paid this to him.

Randazzo pleaded not guilty to the federal charges against him in December.

The Sustainability Funding Alliance of Ohio and IEU-Ohio Administration Company are also named in the filing. Randazzo controlled each of them, and they were allegedly shell companies created to further his criminal activity.

Reactions

While Monday was probably not the best day for Randazzo, Jones and Dowling, it was a great day for whistleblower Tyler Fehrman.

Fehrman is the Republican operative-turned-FBI informant who is credited with exposing this mass public corruption at the Statehouse — and he is cheering the AG and Summit County for these arrests.

“These guys deserve to have everything taken away from them,” Fehrman said. “They deserve it.”

Borges attempted to bribe Fehrman, and threatened him, to be a part of the scandal — even at one point telling him that if he snitches, Borges would “blow up his house.”

That conversation was actually set up and recorded by the feds. Instead of staying quiet, Fehrman testified, helping the jury to return guilty verdicts in the federal trial.

Fehrman ended up having to change careers and flee the state due to fears of retaliation — and because he was ostracized — but now he gets to watch as the scheme continues to unravel.

“You can hide your actions in the dark for a little bit,” Fehrman said Monday. “But the sun always rises and the truth always comes out. Every time one of these guys gets indicted, especially the people that made it possible for Matt and Larry to have the opportunity to do what they did to me — to see them get in trouble, it’s extremely vindicating.”

He agreed with Yost’s statement that there can be no justice without holding the check-writers and the masterminds accountable.

Case Western Reserve University law professor Mike Benza believes these charges are going to be hard to fight. When asked the best possible scenario for them, other than pleading guilty, he said their best bet could be to argue this is politics as usual.

“It seems that the focus from the defense side is going to be much like the focus from Householder and Borges — this is just how things get done in Columbus,” Benza said. “This is just the normal sausage-making of public policy and it may not be pretty and you may not like it, but this is the reality and it doesn’t equal corruption.”

Clearly, that wasn’t a winning argument in federal court.

Part of the reason why it may have worked so poorly in Black’s federal courtroom is because Householder went against the advice of the vast majority of criminal defense attorneys and decided to testify in his defense.

The now-convicted felon used the bribe money to put himself and his allies into power, demolishing and threatening anyone in his path, as well as paying off credit card debt and renovations to his home in Florida.

Benza believes Randazzo, Jones, and Dowling are facing difficult days ahead.

“Randazzo is probably going to be looking at dying in prison,” Benza responded. “Jones and Dowling are probably in that same boat.”

Ferhman is hoping for more indictments, including high-profile names.

“The clock is ticking for the other people that were involved,” Fehrman said.

He named Gov. Mike DeWine Lt. Gov. Jon Husted as people of interest for him.

DeWine has been complying with a subpoena he received in a civil case connected to the scandal, he said.

FirstEnergy investors are suing for being negatively impacted financially by the scandal. They have subpoenaed documents from DeWine, and they’re scheduling a sworn deposition with Husted.

In a one-on-one interview with the governor, DeWine was asked if he was nervous about the scandal, or, more importantly — if was he worried for Husted. DeWine said no to both.

Randazzo has been named as the mastermind behind HB 6, due to him being one of the creators of it — according to the feds. But DeWine was how he came into power.

DeWine was asked in the same interview if he regretted naming Randazzo the state’s top utility regulator.

“Oh, look, if I knew what I know now, if I knew that — I certainly would not have appointed Sam Randazzo to that position,” DeWine responded.

DeWine said he was the best person for the job, claiming that he wasn’t aware that Randazzo was FirstEnergy’s handpicked man.

“While our office was not privy to the indictment and have not yet reviewed it, the indictment alleges very serious acts,” DeWine’s spokesperson Dan Tierney said Monday afternoon. “Our office has full faith in the criminal justice system to adjudicate these serious allegations in an appropriate manner.”

Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David DeWitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on Facebook and Twitter.

J.D. Vance slams 'elites' despite shared backgrounds: analysis

While it’s impossible to know what’s in his heart, Ohio Republican J.D. Vance has been taking some positions against so-called elites that would seem to be squarely opposed to… guys like him.

They include statements he’s made about people trying to disqualify former President Donald Trump from running again.

It’s widely thought that Vance is lobbying to be Trump’s running mate. And last week he received a lot of attention by telling ABC host George Stephanopoulos that in 2020 he would have given Trump’s phony slates of electors a chance to contest the election in Congress.

Former Vice President Mike Pence, of course, refused to do such a thing. So Trump attacked him via Twitter during a violent insurrection at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. That prompted some of the marauders to chant “Hang Mike Pence!” while Pence was still in the building.

Vance’s current statements contrast with the time before Trump took power. “My god what an idiot,” Vance tweeted of soon-to-be President Trump in 2016.

And his statements to Stephanopoulos last week were part of a series of head-scratchers Vance has made in recent months. On Jan. 4, for example, he published a 494-word post on X, the social media site formerly known as Twitter.

In it, Vance bitterly criticizes “elites,” who he says got their positions not through working hard and being smart, but because they “checked a box.”

Vance starts with Claudine Gay, the Harvard University president who was forced out amid multiple allegations of plagiarism.

“The most important point about Claudine Gay’s plagiarism isn’t that she was fired, but that she had the job — the most prestigious job in higher education — after an extremely thin record of accomplishment,” Vance wrote of Gay, who is Black. “Claudine Gay has never published an article — even a plagiarized one — that really mattered, or significantly advanced scholarship. She got her job not through merit, but because she checked a box.”

Vance then cast a wider net, writing, “Our entire elite is like this. People who got their jobs because they checked boxes, not because they achieved something amazing or accomplished something meaningful.”

Vance’s despised “elites” apparently don’t include Trump, who inherited at least $413 million, only to declare six bankruptcies, be indicted on 91 felony counts, lead the Trump Organization to a criminal tax fraud conviction, and to be found to have committed sexual abuse in a civil proceeding.

Ohio’s junior senator also wouldn’t talk about where he falls in the privilege scale.

His office didn’t respond on the record when asked how, as a sitting U.S. senator and a graduate of Yale Law School, Vance himself is not an “elite.” And in terms of “box-checking,” his office didn’t respond to a question asking whether he played up his Appalachian ancestry on his Yale admission essay — thereby checking a “box” of his own.

But where his argument perhaps is most confusing is when Vance turns his attention to lawyers trying to keep Trump off the ballot on the rationale that the former president violated 14th Amendment by engaging in insurrection. It seems to be a reasonable question, given Trump’s lies about his loss, his elaborate attempts to overturn it, and the violent attack he stoked as Congress met to certify Joe Biden’s victory.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday heard arguments on the issue. During them, the justices seemed poised to reject Colorado’s attempt to disqualify Trump for fear of sowing chaos by allowing individual states to decide presidential elections.

But the debate didn’t delve very deeply into a pretty important issue: whether Trump had engaged in insurrection and what looms for the country if he’s allowed to run again, win or lose.

In his post last month, Vance himself tried to disqualify lawyers for even making the argument that Trump had disqualified himself by attempting to overturn the election results and the will of 80 million American voters.

“This is why you should scorn the attorneys who tell you that Donald Trump committed ‘insurrection’ and should be thrown off the ballot,” Vance wrote. “They have no special legal knowledge. They are political hacks pretending to be lawyers, and they are not smart or accomplished, they have a credential from an institution that cares more about box checking than merit.”

That’s an interesting claim when you look at the credentials of three attorneys who have played major roles in the effort to disqualify Trump.

Two are Michael Stokes Paulsen and William Baude.

In August, the conservative law professors wrote an article. It said that Section 3 of the post-Civil War 14th Amendment was written for just such an eventuality as Trump seeking reelection after doing so much to overturn the result of one he’d already lost.

The Colorado Supreme Court cited the pair’s argument when it ruled that Trump couldn’t be on the ballot in that state and their article came up again in Thursday’s oral argument.

As for the professors having “a credential from an institution that cares more about box checking than merit,” that’s a surprising statement for Vance to make.

Both hold law degrees from Yale University, the same school that awarded one to Vance. His office didn’t respond when asked in a follow-up question if Vance believed his degree came from an institution that is more concerned with “box checking” than merit.

Then there’s the senator’s claim that proponents of the 14th Amendment argument “have no special legal knowledge” and “are not smart or accomplished.”

Before he was elected to the Senate in 2022, Vance worked in corporate law, then in venture capital, and wrote a memoir about his Ohio roots. Baude is a law professor at the University of Chicago and Paulsen at the University of St. Thomas.

Whatever their relative merits, all three resumes seem to pale next to that of another prominent believer that Trump should be disqualified from the 2024 election.

That would be J. Micheal Luttig. In 1991, George H.W. Bush appointed him to the 4th U.S. Court of Appeals — a bench on which he sat for 15 years. Before that, Luttig served as assistant attorney general, assistant counsel to then-President Ronald Reagan and clerk and special assistant to then-Chief Justice to Warren E. Burger.

Instead of ad-hominem attacks against people who disagree with him, Luttig made an argument on historical and constitutional grounds.

“The January 6, 2021 insurrection sought to prevent the vesting of the authority and functions of the Presidency in the newly-elected President,” said a brief Luttig co-authored urging the Supreme Court to disqualify Trump. “The Civil War generation certainly understood that the threat and use of force to prevent a newly-elected President from exercising executive power is an insurrection. Indeed, the activities of federal officials to prevent Lincoln’s inauguration were one basis for Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

That’s an argument with which Vance doesn’t seem to have engaged.

Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David DeWitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on Facebook and Twitter.

White House takes a stab at lowering drug prices, but ignores a big piece of the puzzle

The Biden White House continues to promote its effort to lower prescription drug prices by going after “Big Pharma.” But while that industry is guilty of well-documented abuses, the effort so far mostly ignores another important part of the supply chain.

That would be drug middlemen known as pharmacy benefit managers. Each is part of a corporation that also owns a top-10 health insurer, and each corporation is one of the 15 largest in the United States.

The effort the White House is talking up is part of President Joe Biden’s landmark legislation, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Amid sweeping policies aimed at incenting clean energy and going after wealthy tax cheats is a long-talked about attempt to slow the rising cost of prescription drugs: by using the huge purchasing power of Medicare to negotiate directly with drug manufacturers.

The administration started by capping the cost of insulin for Medicare recipients at $35, and by selecting 10 other drugs for which to negotiate prices. That list is expected to expand, and meanwhile, the White House last week kicked off negotiations by making initial offers for the original list of drugs.

“A new era in Medicare has begun with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services launching negotiations for better, fairer prescription drug prices,” HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra said in a conference call with reporters. “… This effort is a direct result of President Biden’s commitment to lower drug costs for the American people.”

Superficially, it makes sense. If the cost of prescription drugs is high, the obvious culprits would seem to be the companies that make them.

The statements issued by the White House reinforce that notion.

“After decades of opposition, President Biden enacted a law that finally takes on Big Pharma and gives Medicare the power to negotiate drug prices,” a White House memo dated Feb. 1 says.

A Dec. 7 fact sheet goes even further, seeming to imply that drugmakers are solely responsible for inflating prescription costs.

“President Biden believes that health care should be a right, not a privilege,” it says. “For too long, corporate special interests and trickle-down economics have allowed Big Pharma to make record profits, while millions of Americans struggle to afford health care and prescription drugs to treat common and chronic conditions.“

However, that ignores another huge player in the drug supply chain.

The fact sheet noted that the 25 top drugmakers control about 70% of revenue in that sector. But it didn’t even mention pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs. In that sector, just three companies — CVS Caremark, OptumRx and Express Scripts — control an estimated 80% of that marketplace, and they play at least as large a role in setting drug prices as the drugmakers themselves.

That’s because they represent insurance companies in drug transactions. Each is also part of a corporation that owns top-ten insurer: CVS/Aetna, Cigna/Express Scripts, UnitedHealth/OptumRx.

When the PBMs represent those and other insurers, they have great leverage negotiating with drugmakers.

Pharma companies abuse the system through stratagems such as “product hopping.” As the patent on one drug winds down companies sometimes make meaningless changes, extend the patent, and quash competition from generics.

But in their negotiations with drugmakers, the big PBMs wield an even bigger weapon — access to tens of millions of patients.

As insurers’ representatives, the PBMs control drug “formularies” — the lists of drugs that are covered by insurance and which get the most favorable treatment. In exchange for such treatment, drugmakers pay them huge rebates and give other discounts in a system that is far from transparent, so it’s hard to know how much PBMs are pocketing and how much they’re passing along to payors such as Medicare, Medicaid or private insurers.

It’s long been suspected that to pay for those discounts, manufacturers increase the “list price” of their products. That’s what you pay if you don’t have insurance. In addition, copayments and coinsurance are often based on list prices.

Research has shown a correlation between increasing rebates and list prices. In 2020, researchers at the University of Southern California’s Schaeffer Center found that a $1 increase in rebates on a drug was associated with a $1.17 increase in its list price. In other words, however quickly the rebates drugmakers give manufacturers grow, list prices grow even more quickly.

However, the Biden administration has said next to nothing about PBMs as it touts its efforts to lower drug costs. During last week’s conference call, a senior administration official didn’t seem to want to even talk about the industry.

“We are talking today about the implementation of a statute that gives (the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) the power for the first time ever to negotiate prescription drug prices, and that is what CMS is focused on and those are the announcements we are focused on today,” she said. “Those announcements don’t stand in isolation. The president has been focused on stimulating competition throughout the health care sector and we look forward to continued conversation about how to lower health care costs.”

The White House didn’t respond to a follow-up question asking whether it would require PBMs to give equitable formulary treatment to the drugs for which the government is negotiating with manufacturers.

However, pharmacy benefit managers are being scrutinized by another arm of the government. In 2022, Biden appointees to the Federal Trade Commission led the way in opening a major investigation into possible anticompetitive practices by the industry.

But the administration might have a financial incentive not to get too tough on PBMs. That’s because Medicare gets a portion of the rebates PBMs extract from drugmakers. In 2022, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the federal government would net about $180 billion in such rebates over the course of a decade.

Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David DeWitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on Facebook and Twitter.

Ohio Supreme Court dismisses congressional redistricting cases

The Ohio Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed two cases over congressional districts in Ohio.

The decision isn’t a complete surprise because the groups filing the complaints asked for the dismissals earlier this week. But struggles over partisan gerrymandering in Ohio and elsewhere are far from over.

The complainants continue to maintain that Ohio’s congressional districts — as well as its legislative districts — are unfairly gerrymandered. They simply calculate that it’s better to dismiss the cases in light of other developments and because the state Constitution already requires that districts be redrawn after next year’s General Election.

In claiming that Ohio is extremely gerrymandered, the plaintiffs appear to have a point. Former president Donald Trump won the state with less than 54% of the vote in 2020, yet Republicans control 66% of the state’s congressional seats — a 12-point differential.

Many political scientists and other experts say extreme gerrymandering is a problem because by making general elections uncompetitive, it incentivizes candidates to pander to the most extreme elements of their primary electorate. Also, by imposing one-party rule, it creates unaccountable, corrupt majorities, they say.

In May 2018, an amendment to the state Constitution that banned extreme partisan gerrymandering and gave the Ohio Supreme Court the power to throw out maps on that basis passed with an overwhelming 75% of the vote.

Yet the Republican-dominated Redistricting Commission created by the amendment twice ignored rulings by a bipartisan majority on the Ohio Supreme Court rejecting maps it drew in the wake of the 2020 Census. With the clock effectively run out, a panel of three federal judges kept the unconstitutional congressional maps in place for the 2022 election.

Ohio Republicans argued to the U.S. Supreme Court that the state judiciary has almost no power to regulate how legislatures draw congressional districts — no matter what state law says or how gerrymandered those legislatures might already be. That’s known as the “independent legislature doctrine” — which Carolyn Shapiro blasted as “an unprecedented, unconstitutional, and potentially chaos-inducing intrusion into state election law,” in an article this year in the University of Chicago Law Review.

On June 27, six members of U.S. Supreme Court agreed in Moore v Harper. The ruling said the North Carolina Supreme Court had the power to enforce a state law banning excessively partisan congressional maps.

However, gerrymandering foes in Ohio might not find much solace in the decision.

Former state Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor, a Republican, repeatedly joined the court’s three Democrats in ruling that Republican-drawn congressional and legislative maps were excessively partisan. But then she was forced to retire last year because of her age and the new court has a more partisan makeup.

Other recent developments might not hold much hope for Ohio’s anti–gerrymandering groups, either.

The U.S. Supreme Court last October struck down Alabama’s congressional maps in Allen v Milligan. The surprise ruling said that the state’s congressional districts violate the Voting Rights Act by being unduly gerrymandered against Blacks.

It ordered that the state legislature redraw maps so that Alabama Blacks will have a chance at a second seat in the state’s six-seat delegation in which they can select a representative of their choice.

That doesn’t necessarily mean picking a Black representative — or that by merely being Black, a representative meets the requirements of the Voting Rights Act. The law requires that minority communities have a legitimate shot at picking representatives in numbers proportional to their own.

Blacks make up about 27% of Alabama’s population and the ruling in Milligan would give them a chance at power over 33% of its congressional seats, as compared to the current 17% they have power over now.

However, the state’s Republican-dominated legislature twice defied orders to comply with the ruling. On Tuesday, a panel of federal judges rebuked the body and ordered that the new map be independently drawn.

The ruling in Milligan has implications for several other states, such as Louisiana, which have large, underrepresented minority populations.

But Ohio might not be one of them because it doesn’t have the diversity those states do. Whites make up 80% of the state’s population, while Blacks make up just over 13%. The next closest group, Latinos, make up 4.5%.

Louisiana, by contrast, is 63% White, but that group controls 80% of the state’s five congressional districts.

In her role as now-retired chief justice, O’Connor is helping to lead an effort to build even more stringent anti-gerrymandering amendments into the Ohio Constitution. The amendment she’s working to put on the November 2024 ballot would do what the federal panel did to the Alabama legislature on Tuesday — take district drawing out of the hands of partisans and give it to an independent commission.

Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David DeWitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on Facebook and Twitter.

CEOs who pay poorly do fabulously: report

Ticketmaster isn’t just crappy to its customers and to the musicians whose shows it manages ticket sales for.

As a dominant event middleman, it tacks on hefty fees and has the effrontery to call them “convenience charges.” And bands complain that by the time parent company Live Nation Entertainment deducts its many cuts for their shows, they’re left struggling to survive while others profit from their work.

Turns out, Live Nation also pays its employees poorly while paying its CEO, Michael Rapino, like a pharaoh. In 2022, the median Live Nation employee earned just $25,673, while Rapino hauled in a tidy $139 million, or more than 5,400 times as much as the employee who fell in the middle of his company’s income distribution, according to a report that was released today.

The findings were part of the 29th annual “Executive Excess” report by the Institute for Policy Studies, a progressive Washington, D.C. think tank. While companies complained about the lack of available workers during the pandemic, this year’s report says that for at least 100 corporations, executives managed to keep worker pay down while giving themselves huge raises.

“In response to strikes and union organizing drives, corporate leaders routinely insist that they simply lack the wherewithal to raise employee pay,” the report said. “And yet top executives seem to have little trouble finding resources for enriching themselves and wealthy shareholders.”

The report said that in the case of Live Nation, the company wants investors to know that the situation isn’t as unfair as all that. If you take into account the fact that most of the company’s employees are part-time and and set them aside — and if you set aside a mammoth payment Rapino received in 2022 — the CEO only made 350 times as much as his median-paid, full-time worker did.

“In its (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) proxy statement, the company takes great pains to point out that if you nix the CEO’s $109 million stock grant and all of the company’s primarily part-time employees from the calculation, the Live Nation pay ratio would be merely 353 to 1,” the report said.

The mechanism CEOs have often used to boost their pay over the past few years has been the stock buyback. Instead of reinvesting profits in research, equipment or in rank-and-file employees, companies often use a hefty chunk of that money to repurchase shares of company stock — which increases the value of those shares and those that remain outstanding.

Companies say they do stock buybacks to consolidate ownership, stabilize stock prices or return value to shareholders. But by happy coincidence, the executives deciding to do the buybacks are often huge shareholders in their companies because much of their compensation is in the form of company stock.

In other words, when company leaders undertake stock buybacks, they’re usually giving themselves big raises.

The huge, plutocrat-friendly Trump tax cuts in 2017 sparked a wave of stock buybacks that seems to have continued through 2022. But while they boosted executive pay, at least in the early going, the average worker saw little benefit.

In fact, workers’ share of corporate income continued its decades-long slide — while executives were lavishly rewarded for enacting mass layoffs and keeping down workers’ pay.

The Institute for Policy Research report compiled a list of the “Low Wage 100” — the 100 firms listed on the S&P 500 who paid the worker that fell in the middle of their pay range the least. When the researchers looked at this group, they found that it bought back $340 billion worth of stock in 2022 and their CEOs’ stock holdings increased at three times the rate of their median workers’ pay.

At the top of the buyback list was home-improvement mega-store owner Lowes, which bought back $35 billion in stock. While its median employee made just less than $30,000 in 2022, CEO Marvin Ellison made $17.5 million, the report said.

While many workers for Low Wage 100 companies effectively subsidized their CEOs’ gargantuan salaries with under-compensated work, employees with half those companies were also subsidizing them with their federal tax dollars.

Fifty one of the companies received a combined $24 billion in federal contracts between fiscal years 2020 and 2023. During the same period, those companies engaged in $160 billion worth of stock buybacks, the report said.

Amazon was the biggest in the group, getting more than $10 billion in federal business, much of it for classified work for the National Security Agency and the Department of Defense. As it did, Amazon’s top corporate leadership has done quite well.

“Under CEO Andy Jassy’s two years at the helm, Amazon has spent $5.9 billion on stock buybacks, an outlay that has helped inflate Jassy’s personal stock holdings to $265 million,” the report said. “These millions do not include the bulk of his 2021 mega-grant, a reward that will vest over 10 years.”

There have been steps taken to address the interconnected problems of stock buybacks, skyrocketing executive pay and depressed wages.

As part of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, Congress passed and President Biden signed a 1% excise tax on buybacks and Biden proposed raising it to 4% in this year’s State of the Union address.

The Department of Commerce also plans to give preference for subsidies under the CHIPS Act to semiconductor makers who don’t engage in buybacks, the Institute for Policy Studies report said.

Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David DeWitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on Facebook and Twitter.

BRAND NEW STORIES
@2024 - AlterNet Media Inc. All Rights Reserved. - "Poynter" fonts provided by fontsempire.com.