Matt, I love you big guy, but you’re wrong on this – that full “Treasurer” disclaimer section in the ORC applies to printed materials. Read the ORC section. Check out any other candidate’s site and you’ll see it’s exactly the same.

The best part is that his treasurer teaches Election Law at Akron. JB Hadden. Wonder how Mr. Hadden feels about his candidate violating Ohio election law right out of the gate.

@Danngoingdown
Also, Danngoing is 100% incorrect.

Ohio Elections Committee Advisory Opinion 96ELC-10 states unambiguously that “World Wide Web” pages “are subject to the disclosure requirement set forth in R.C. §3517.20.” You can get the opinion here http://elc.ohio.gov/AdvisoryOpinion/AdOpinion.stm

So yes, Mike has already violated Ohio election law.

Dewine can’t be troubled by such trivialities such as the Revised Code (or the Second Amendment).

This Mike DeWine bashing is already getting out of hand. You should know that “uber-conservative savior” Richard Cordray faced an elections law complaint regarding this exact issue in 2008. He failed to report or list a treasurer on a bunch of football schedule magnets with Cordray for Ohio plastered all over it.

The matter came before the Ohio Elections Commission and do you know what they did? They voted to find no violation.

Hmm – I stand corrected, I had previously never seen that OEC opinion.

Regardless, missing/inaccurate disclaimer problems occur literally hundreds of times in every election cycle. They are largely ignored, and the Commission generally seems to not levy a fine unless someone is a repeat offender.

@Danngoingdown
Danngoingdown, you’re correct about the frequence of these sorts of violations.

Usually for these sorts of violations the commission will enter a violation of election law into the record against the candidate, but will not fine them. However, if the candidate has future election issues, even small ones, then the candidate may be subject to more scrutiny and fines where they normally would be let off. More importantly though, it just does not look good for certain officeholders/candidates to have these sorts of “boardgame” violations. When you’re the secretary of state regulating the state’s laws, or when you’re running for AG to be the “top cop” it doesn’t look good that you can’t follow the rules.

@Ryan
Ryan,

And in 2007 city council candidate Bill Brownson faced a complaint for failing to put a disclosure on his webpage. And you know what the OEC did? They voted to find a violation.

However, the severity of the violation in all of these cases certainly is not that great.

It’s funny. In 2006, when it was clear to everyone, except the most diehard Petroista (i.e, the staff at the AG’s office), that Blackwell was going to win the primary, the bluebloods refused to concede and Petro didn’t drop out of the race.

Now, when it’s their candidate who appears to be the favorite to get the nomination, these same people want Yost to drop out and have everyone support DeWine.

And they wonder why conservatives are fed up with the Republican elite.

My point wasn’t the severity of the violation. My point is that the conservative blogosphere, in their rush to denounce Mike DeWine, is giving Richard Cordray and others a ton of undue credit.

For example, in Matt’s interview with Rich he goes on and on about how he was so principled in dismissing the state’s lead paint lawsuit. What he doesn’t tell you is how big of a flip-flop that is for him. During the 2008 AG campaign Mike Crites first announced that he would dismiss the lead paint lawsuit if he was elected.

Do you know what Ricahrd Cordray did? He issued a press release claiming that Crites was only saying this because he had received a contribution from an Ohio industrial company that he incorrectly claimed made lead paint. He steadfastly refused to come out and say anything about Marc Dann’s silly lead paint lawsuit until it was politically favorable to do so.

He’s doing the exact same thing on gun control issues. Anyone who has seen his 1990s campaign arm in arm with Sarah Brady, his bold declaration that “I’m the only gun control candidate in the AG race,” his ACTUAL defense of the Brady Bill in the Supreme Court, and his far left trade, family, and security views is just BLOWN AWAY that the conservatives are falling all over themselves to vote for Rich.

If nothing else, answer me this: how is it that some Conservatives are willing to support pro-choice Richard Cordray over Mike DeWine (owner of a 100% pro-life rating)? Are family issues only important when it’s not Mike DeWine championing them?

Please please please, listen to Kyle Sisk and the folks over at 3BP about the Ohio AG race. Don’t let Rich smooth talk you.

Oh, Elections Commission issues aside, any conservative who supports Cordray over Mike DeWine is a total idiot – doing so makes it far more likely that Kasich, Mandel, et al lose in 2010.