On Saturday afternoon, I had the chance to speak over the telephone with Congressman Ted Strickland (D-OH), one of of two leading contenders for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in the Buckeye state (the other being former Congressman Eric Fingerhut, the party's 2004 senatorial nominee in the state and a current member of the state Senate).

Strickland and I spoke about a range of topics, including his decision to leave the House; the conduct of the 2004 presidential election in Ohio; ethics and lobbying; Medicare; Medicaid; and why the blogosphere should become involved in the race. You can listen to the interview here (warning: a 28.7 megabyte large wav file) or read the rush transcript below.

Jonathan Singer: Despite the fact that you represent one of the most competitive districts in the country, it’s fairly clear that were you to run for reelection to the House, you would win reelection quite handily. So why run for governor now?

Ted Strickland: Leaving the House was a difficult decision for me because I am terribly troubled at national policies being pursued by the Bush administration, and I obviously would like to remain in the House so that at least I could be part of the loyal opposition.

Having said that, the governor’s office in Ohio is terribly important to the future of our state, which is made up over eleven million people, and perhaps to the future of the country, because I believe if the Democrats win the governor’s race in ’06 it makes it much more likely that we will win the presidency in ’08. So I’m running for governor because I feel like I have an obligation to do so.

I think for reasons that are, perhaps, not related to any of my personal qualities or skills or abilities but for reasons related to geography and history and experience and political positioning, I’m the person in Ohio who is most likely to be able to win the governor’s race as a Democrat, and I think that means that I’ve got a responsibility to make the effort.

Singer: Getting a little more in depth into your decision-making process, the Democrats seem to have a shot at retaking the House next year, but the party’s task is made somewhat more difficult by the problems retaining your seat. How much did that play into your decision-making process?

Strickland: I think that we’ll be able to hold this seat. It’s not something that’s assured, certainly, but – I don’t mean to sound arrogant here – but I think the people in my current congressional district have a lot of confidence in me, Republicans and Democrats alike. And I think two things make it more likely that we’ll be able to hold this seat. First of all, I think I can have an influence on who people choose to vote for just by my strong support and endorsement. And secondly, I think if I’m the Democratic nominee for governor, it is likely that Democratic constituencies, supporters or voters, are likely to turn out in that district in very large numbers in support of me, and I think that makes it much more likely that they will retain the Democrat in the House.

[Cell phone interference]

I realize the effort that it’s going to take to hold onto that seat, but I think we will hold that seat.

Singer: Let’s talk a little bit about the 2004 election and election issues in general. There’s a lot of outrage within the blogosphere and the progressive world in general about the way that the 2004 presidential election was run in your state. Some even believe that the election was, in one way or another, taken from the Democrats. What do you think?

Strickland: I think there were purposeful efforts to suppress the vote in different ways. Whether or not they were illegal activities associated with the election, I think it’s hard to know for sure. I think certainly, especially Mr. Blackwell our Secretary of State and the likely Republican nominee for governor, I think he certainly as Secretary of State took actions and made decisions that resulted in a suppressed vote, and I think that very well could have had a significant effect on the final outcome.

Singer: I know you’re not running for Secretary of State, the position that officially has domain over such electoral issues, but what would you do as governor to improve Ohio’s elections?

Strickland: One of the things I’m doing is trying to make sure that in ’06 we not only elect a governor, and I hope that I’m that person, but that we also elect a Secretary of State that has respect for this most precious of our rights as citizens, and that’s to cast a ballot with confidence that it will be accurately counted.

We have a superb candidate for Secretary of State as a Democrat, a woman, former judge whose name is Jennifer Brunner. And as I run for governor, I’m going to do everything I can to make sure that we elect a Secretary of State and an Auditor and a Treasurer and an Attorney General – that we have a slate of candidates that are credible. I think it’s very important that if I’m the nominee for governor that I not only think of my own win but I understand that, as the head of the ticket, that I have a responsibility to try to make sure that the Secretary of State and these other offices are held by credible Democrats.

Singer: I’m calling you from Oregon right now, and here we conduct our elections entirely by mail. Four of your Democratic colleagues have been elected that way in the House. We tend to have some of the highest voter turnout rates in the country. Would you consider pushing for such a system for Ohio?

Strickland: I think we should consider that and every other way to increase voter turnout. I’ve voiced support for at least looking at the possibility of having the voting hours extended, having votes over a two day period of time. I think mail-in voting certainly has worked well in your state and elsewhere. So I think whatever we can do to expand the participation of people while at the same time upholding the integrity of the process we ought to do.

Singer: Let’s move on to the topic of lobbying and ethics. In the past few months, the gritty details of the dealings of Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff have become public, implicating many Republican members of Congress, including one of your fellow Ohio Representatives, Bob Ney. Has this culture of corruption overtaken Washington, or are these just a few bad apples?

Strickland: I think there is a culture of corruption here in Ohio, as well as in Washington, DC, and I think it is due, in part, to the arrogance that comes with extended periods of one-party rule, where there are no real checks and balances, where there is not the opportunity to hold investigative hearings into potential wrongdoing. I think part of it is the result of one-party domination of government for such a long period of time.

But I also think you can’t legislate character. You can be really smart and really politically savvy and be really crooked at the same time. I just think what we’ve seen happen with the Abramoff case – and, quite frankly, it looks now as if Mr. Jefferson, who’s the Democrat from New Orleans, has behaved in a terrible manner. I don’t know if you’ve read that story recently.

So political corruption is something that we ought to find intolerable and we ought to hold political figures to a higher standard of behavior due to the fact that they’re in public office.

It is my hope that what’s happening with the current investigation, and the investigations that are underway in Columbus, Ohio, will result in those who are guilty being exposed and being held accountable. Having worked in a maximum security prison for over ten years, I’ve always been disturbed with the fact that we have different standards of justice and punishment for so-called “white collar” criminals versus those who may engage in other kinds of criminal behavior.

The bottom line is if some of the accusations that we are reading about in the media are true, the people involved, if they’re found guilty, should go to jail. I think that’s an appropriate way of dealing with people who have been given high positions of public trust and then violate that trust in order to enrich themselves.

Singer: Your state, as you referenced, has been home to some of the biggest lobbying problems and corruption issues. Your Republican Governor pled no contest to four misdemeanor counts related to dealings with lobbyists. A very insider Republican, a Bush “pioneer,” in fact, Tim Noe enriched himself, it seems, through public investments and perhaps even laundered money to the Bush campaign. What would you do as governor to clean up Columbus?

Strickland: As I said, you can’t legislate character. I would act honestly and ethically if I were the governor of Ohio, and I will choose people to serve in my administration who see public service as a sacred trust rather than a way to advance themselves or to enrich themselves. I have said over and over that I will be looking for people who have a Peace Corps spirit. I think there are people who are very competent and very skillful and very bright and capable who are anxious to serve for the public good rather than self enrichment. Those are the kind of people that I would identify and place in positions of responsibility.

And then I will hold people accountable, including myself. I’ve been in the Congress for twelve years. I’m really proud of how I’ve served in that Congress. I’ve chosen voluntarily, for example, to pay for all of my healthcare rather than accept subsidized healthcare, which I’m entitled to receive as a Congressman, simply because I represent a lot of people who don’t have access to any healthcare. I have felt that when you’re elected for a term of office that you know what the salary is, so I have returned mid-term pay raises. I have voluntarily taken from my own personal resources and given back over $49,000, nearly $50,000, of resources that I could have personally kept, legitimately and legally kept. But I’ve done those things because I’ve tried to demonstrate to my constituents that I don’t ever want to allow myself to forget what life may be for many of them. As their Representative, I have tried to always remain sensitive to the problems that they are facing in their daily lives, and as governor, I would to make sure that the people of Ohio saw me and came to experience me as someone who did not hold himself in any superior way or place above them, and that while governor is an important position, I would not allow myself to get carried away with myself.

I just think it comes down to the character and the motivation of the person in office, and I have really worked hard not to come close to that ethical line but to stay back from it, because I’ve seen too many of my colleagues get as close to crossing the ethical line as possible without actually stepping over it, and I never want to govern in that kind of way.

Singer: You referenced healthcare issues. Maryland has just enacted legislation –

Strickland: Wall Mart.

Singer: – specifically aimed at Wall Mart, but I suppose for any company with more than 10,000 employees (in the state).

Strickland: It affects only Wall Mart, but it could affect other companies if they fit the criteria that’s in the law.

Singer: Would you consider such a law as governor?

Strickland: I just read about what Maryland has done within the last day or so. I haven’t had a chance to really look at the specifics of the law, but I can tell you I’m intrigued by it.

I have, in the past, supported legislation that would require companies who have employees that are receiving public assistance to be publicly identified as such companies, and that would, in most cases, involve at least Wall Mart and maybe others.

But I think there is a problem when highly profitable companies are paying their employees so little with such few benefits that they’re forced to be recipients of public benefits like Medicaid. So I’m intrigued by what’s been done in Maryland. I don’t want to commit myself specifically what they’ve done without understanding and looking at the specifics of the legislation, but I’m very interested in that. I find it very intriguing. It sounds like something that I would really be interested in pursuing, but I don’t want to say that until I know specifically what’s in the legislation.

Singer: What’s the balance between healthcare and jobs? Some say that forcing a company to provide healthcare would be a disincentive to move into a state, but others would say that putting public resources towards better healthcare in the state would draw in more companies. What’s the correct balance?

Strickland: I think we need a national system that includes everyone, that makes provisions for everyone to have access to quality and affordable healthcare. I say that just to emphasize that I think the ultimate solution to this problem that you’ve identified must be a federal solution.

In the meantime, however – and I think we will ultimately get there because we’re going to be forced to get there because our domestic industries really are being forced into non-competitive situations. In Ohio, the Delphi Corporation recently went into bankruptcy. They’ve been pretty clear that one of their major problems is that their Canadian competitors can undercut them because they don’t have the same horrendous healthcare costs that would face the Delphi Corporation in this country. I think there is a growing awareness that this is a problem that is seriously hurting our economy.

In regard to what can be done at the state level, I think several things can be done, but none of them are sufficient to really solve the problem. I think the state can use its purchasing power to try to bring down the cost of prescription medications, for example, I think the state can use its bargaining power in different ways to reduce costs, and the state can choose to allocate its Medicaid dollars and to match those federal dollars in a more robust manner. But in my judgment, nothing that is possible at the state level will fully speak to the healthcare dilemma that is faced by so many citizens and the business community. I think it ultimately has to be a comprehensive federal program

Singer: One of the real problems that the states are finding with the prescription drug benefit provided through Medicare is that seniors are either not getting the type of coverage that they’ve been promised or they’re being forced to pay more than necessary for the coverage they’re receiving. Is there much that can be done on the state level to fix that, or is this something that you would need to do in the next (few months while you are still in Congress)?

Strickland: I think the so-called “Medicare Reform Bill” that provided for the prescription benefit is a disaster. I think it’s a bill that was written primarily by the pharmaceutical industry. I think it is, for many citizens, worse than no benefit at all. I am appalled at what is being forced upon our seniors.

I was in the committee that that bill went through – the Health subcommittee of the Commerce Committee. I sat through literally hours, probably 40 hours or more of complex discussion and debate on that bill and still find it almost impossible to describe to a senior what plan would be most helpful to them, what plan would cost them the least, what plan may in fact end up costing them more than they are already paying.

So it’s a disastrous piece of legislation. It was the first step towards ultimately privatizing Medicare, as many people on the right would like to see done. As far as I’m concerned, that legislation should be repealed and we should start all over by making prescriptions a part of a traditional Medicare system where seniors could simply pay a reasonable monthly premium and an affordable deductible and have access to medications through the traditional Medicare program.

Unfortunately, Billy Tauzin, who was the chair of our committee, helped force that bill through, left the committee soon thereafter, took on a job that has been reported to pay him about $2 million per year working for the pharmaceutical industry. Tom Scully, who was in charge of the Medicare program at the Department of Health and Human Services, at the same time that bill was passing, Tom Scully was negotiating for a new job. So he left and went to work for the pharmaceutical interests.

So that bill is a pathetic piece of legislation. It was a sellout to the pharmaceutical industries. And I think some very unethical behavior was entered into by Mr. Tauzin and Mr. Tom Scully, and the welfare senior citizen in this country was sold out.

I mean there were provisions in that legislation that you probably know about that specifically prohibit the reimportation of safe drugs from Canada and that specifically prohibits our government from negotiating discounts with the pharmaceutical industry, discounts for our senior population.

So it’s a terrible piece of legislation. It’s just almost unbelievable.

Singer: It would almost be funny if it weren’t so scary that such a bill could pass.

For all of the problems currently facing Medicare, Medicaid seems to be causing even more problems for states, largely because of funding cuts on the federal level. Do you have any thoughts on how to ensure that the most needy in Ohio are able to get healthcare?

Strickland: It’s a huge problem because we just cut billions of dollars out of Medicaid over the next five years while we gave tax cuts to the richest people in this country.

What happened in the budget reconciliation bill that was passed a few weeks ago is immoral; it is, in my judgment, sinful. It’s going to make it increasingly difficult for states to meet the needs of the most vulnerable citizens, in terms of healthcare: children, disabled people, senior citizens. And it’s going to make it tough for governors to meet these most basic needs for the most vulnerable population.

So it’s going to require terrible choices. It will require that some people who are in desperate need of healthcare and are poor and who cannot afford it go without. That is immoral in my judgment.

Over the next several months while I’m still in the House of Representatives, I’m going to be continuing to raise the alarm about what’s happening with Medicaid, and it is my hope that there can be some reversal. I don’t know that it’s possible because the Republican leadership and President George W. Bush not only have a problem with their heads, they have a problem with their hearts. When it comes to poor people and sick people and vulnerable people, they are heard-hearted and they don’t seem to give a damn.

So I think those of us who care about those who are in desperate need of these services must do is continue to expose what’s happening and call attention to what’s being done and then try to still the conscience of our country so that they demand some reversals of these decisions.

Singer: I know you have to run here. There are some other issues that I would have liked to cover: jobs and education… things like that. But let’s just wrap up. Is there anything you’d like to say specifically to members of the blogosphere to get them more involved in your campaign?

Strickland: I’d just like to say to them that much is at stake.

The future of Ohio is important, and our state is suffering under corrupt Republican leadership. But I really believe that if we can win the governor’s race in Ohio in ’06 that we could put in place the kind of political infrastructure that will prevent another electoral disaster in Ohio, and it will make it much more likely that we’ll be able to elect a Democrat to be the next president of this country.

I’m concerned if we don’t start really changing the leadership in our nation soon that we’re going to lose this country as we know it, and that, both domestically and in terms of our foreign policy, that we’re going to experience a disintegration of our standing in the world and of our quality of life here in the good old USA.

Ohio seems to be at the eye of the storm, politically, right now. It’s where the larger political struggle that’s going on across the country may be decided. When they think of the race for Ohio’s next governor, I would like for them to think of the race within the context of what’s happening to the larger country and how best to try to bring some sanity to our political leadership at the national level.

Singer: Well good luck and have a wonderful Martin Luther King Day weekend.

Strickland: I have enjoyed talking to you. I hope we can talk again some time.


Singer: Likewise. I really enjoyed it.

[THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.]