(upbeat music) - The State Board of Education will likely vote next month on a resolution opposed by vocal LGBTQ+ advocates.

The Ohio Debate Commission has scrapped planned debates for governor and United States Senate.

And a judge says he intends to further delay Ohio's Heartbeat Bill.

"Ideas" is next.

(orchestral music) Hello and welcome to "Ideas," I'm Mike McIntyre.

Thanks for joining us.

The Ohio State Board of Education has delayed voting on a resolution that would encourage schools to ignore proposed federal protections for LGBTQ+ students.

Dozens of people showed up this week at the board's meeting to urge a no vote on the resolution.

The Hamilton County judge who temporarily paused Ohio's so-called Heartbeat Bill says he plans to extend the order until at least early October.

The Ohio Debate Commission canceled debates for governor and United States Senate after Republican candidates declined to participate.

And the MetroHealth System has a new CEO to replace outgoing Dr. Akram Boutros.

We'll talk about those stories and the rest of the week's news on the Reporter's Round Table.

Joining me this week from Idea Stream Public Media, senior reporter Nick Castele.

From the Buckeye Flame, editor Ken Schneck.

And in Columbus, Ohio Public Radio State House News Bureau Chief, Karen Kasler.

Let's get ready to round table.

A resolution by the Ohio State Board of Education opposing the expansion of federal Title IX protections for LGBTQ+ students will not come up for a vote until at least October.

The board this week put off an immediate vote on the resolution as an emergency measure.

Dozens of people testified against the resolution at the board's meeting.

It'll now go through the normal committee process.

Karen, let's talk first about the Biden Administration's plan to expand Title IX protections and how that would impact schools.

- Well Title IX is a 50 year old federal law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in any education program or activity that receives money from the federal government and so what the Biden administration is trying to do is expand those Title IX protections to prevent school districts that receive federal funds for food programs, and from what the administration sees as discrimination against LGBTQ students.

Violations can mean that there would be a loss of federal funds and this resolution would say that the state would then backfill those federal funds if they are lost.

Conservatives think that this new guidance kind of opens the door for access to trans athletes to be in girls and women's sports and the whole bathroom debate, which bathroom should trans students use, and so that's why the resolution's come about.

- [Mike] Ken, what specifically does the resolution aim to do?

- It does a lot and it also doesn't really do anything 'cause it's a resolution so it doesn't necessarily have the force of law.

I think that you have to go immediately into the introduction to the resolution and there's a whole bunch of language that rejects the very existence of trans identity.

That's the entire introduction.

And then it gets into what the resolution is calling for, and so the resolution calls for an endorsement of Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost's lawsuit against the Biden Administration to allow this LGBTQ discrimination.

And then there's instruction in the resolution to have the superintendent of public instruction here in Ohio issue letters to all the school districts across the state saying, "Hey, you do not have to enforce Title IX "and there's some language saying, "and if you get fined for it "we'll find you the money to pay for the fines "for not complying with Title IX."

So, it does have some meat in that way, but then there's also these other parts of the resolution that endorse the Ohio General Assembly to pass some of the legislation that's currently on their slate that's pretty anti LGBTQ.

- So the resolution has a lot of folks who are opposed to it, and many of them testified at this hearing, What is their opposition?

What damage do they say this will do?

- Right, and you just had to listen to speaker after speaker, so as you said, over 60, I think it was 61 speakers and then tons more submitted testimony and the ratio was something like, maybe a hundred pieces of testimony, something like 92, 93 were against this resolution and you just had to hear the passion in these speakers and there were trans students and there were educators and there were parents of trans children and there were school board members from other municipalities across Ohio who spoke who said, this is a mount and akin to state-sponsored bullying that trans students are already struggling so much in schools, in Ohio and certainly across the country, and so to have a resolution that, again, has this opening that denies their very existence and then has all of these other calls to further restrict their existence within education only make schools more unsafe for them.

- Karen, did that opposition, did that change anything?

Would this have been voted on immediately this week and enacted and was pushed back because so many people came and gave that testimony?

- You know I've been here for 18 years and I don't think I've ever seen a situation where a group of people showing up really made that much of a difference.

I mean, it's sad to say.

I think this resolution, there were some questions among board members about this resolution, and perhaps it was because of what Ken just said, that there's no real teeth to it.

It is a resolution but it does promise some things and encourage some things and so the board members wanted to learn more about it because the resolution only came out, what, Wednesday or Thursday of last week.

So it wasn't a whole lot of time to look at a resolution that potentially could have an impact and was telling school districts they could go ahead and not enforce this guidance and so I think there were some legal questions there potentially as well.

- Karen, there are also some concern from food banks about this resolution, how does that come into play?

- Well food banks have been struggling since the pandemic.

They got some relief then, some of that relief has obviously fallen off and now they're struggling with the same price increases in inflation that all of us are struggling with, and so the idea of potentially restricting food programs to kids or somehow the state back filling that money if they lose the federal funding for it, well that of course will affect food programs down the line, and so yeah, there's a real concern here.

- Ken, this is another example, it seems, increasingly of schools, school boards, students, being pulled into culture wars.

The election is not too far away so maybe there's not a coincidence in terms of the fact that this is coming up now, but what about that, the schools being at the center of this culture war and it continuing?

- Right, and you can look at the school board member.

So Brendan Shae, he's from my favorite school district, well at least the school district that represents my favorite story of 2021, this is the school district where the Board of Education banned rainbows, which was just a story that I like talking about all the time because people think it's fiction.

It's not, they banned rainbows and any display of rainbows in the classroom.

And he's also, as some of the speakers pointed out, he's someone who doesn't have any involvement with public education, I spoke to another member of the Ohio Board of Education and she highlighted to me that this is someone who has no connection to public education.

He home schools his children.

He is the president of the Right to Life organization in his area that he founded and there is no division, it seems, between some of the faith aspects that are coming into play and the culture wars, as you say, working with LGBTQ students.

But what we do know from the research that comes up over and over and over again is that when LGBTQ students are in a safe and supported school, they go to school more, their grades are better, they experience less bullying.

And so a lot of the fears are that the opposite will be true, that if we have this, as many of the speakers called it, state sanctioned bullying, it's gonna make it even worse for these LGBTQ students.

- They banned rainbows so I guess ROYGBIV is not a teacher there?

- It really was, and people read the story and thought, "Oh, is this just LGBTQ representation?"

No, they wanted to just null it out completely and not even risk it, so any and all rainbows.

You went right over my rainbow- - I know because it's fun to teach meteorology without rainbows.

- Red, orange, yellow.

(Ken chuckling) (orchestral music) The decision by St. Vincent Charity Medical Center to close its emergency room and inpatient services on November 15th leaves questions about the future of its psychiatric emergency room.

The unit is the only psychiatric ER in the city and one of only two in the state.

Nick that's the place the police will take somebody.

If somebody's in the middle of an episode we need this kind of an emergency room.

There's a real question about whether it'll exist.

What's the equation here?

How could it possibly persist?

- So, St. Vincent has said that although they're closing inpatient care, they're looking for possibilities for keeping some psych ER services open.

The ADAMHS Board, which is sort of the quasi government agency that deals with addiction, mental health treatment, they're looking at being a partner in this and providing funding but nothing is really for certain.

And like you said, this is the place where people are taken if they're in crisis and so there's a real question as to where will someone go if they're having a crisis, there's no one to help them and they need some sort of medical help.

Are they taken to just another ER that may not have the specialists readily on hand?

Are they taken to the diversion center, which is really about people who are being diverted from the criminal justice system?

MetroHealth is embarking on a new facility in Cleveland Heights that's dealing with mental health issues.

Do they go there?

A lot of questions still to answer about what happens because this is a critical service in the county and it's been there for a long time.

- The Cuyahoga County executive candidates debate, which you moderated, but that was a question that you posed to them and I heard afterward from a couple of people saying that probably was the most important question in this debate because that is a real high priority for the community.

What did we hear about that?

- Well, I mean, I think you heard from both candidates that they see this as a priority, to try to keep it open.

I think the proof will be in the pudding as to, well first of all, you'd have to get through the November election and get someone inaugurated next year, and so really the responsibility falls on current leadership at the ADAMHS Board, or in county government, but I think you heard both Chris Ronayne and Lee Weingart say, this is an important service, we want to keep it open somehow.

(orchestral music) - The judge in Hamilton County who issued a temporary restraining order pausing Ohio's so-called Heartbeat Bill says he plans to issue a second order extending the pause through at least early October.

Judge Christian Jenkins is overseeing the case brought by abortion access supporters, including the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio.

Karen, the plaintiffs in this case argue that Ohio's Constitution confers abortion protections while pro-life advocates disagree.

The judge in this case seems to be leaning toward the plaintiffs.

- Yeah, and the access that they're talking about is through an amendment that was passed in 2011, interestingly enough, that was intended to be an amendment against the Affordable Care Act.

And so they're saying that that language actually is broad enough that it protects abortion access in Ohio.

The judge, again, is apparently at least interested in this line of argument and so he's extended the stay on the ban so abortion clinics and abortion providers can still provide services to women through at least probably October 12th.

My Statehouse News Bureau colleague, Jo Ingles, has a long story on our website about all of this and how it's affecting abortion clinics.

But one of the things that we're finding out in the filings in this case is some of the stories that have come out of women who have been seriously impacted by the ban, women who had cancer but were pregnant and couldn't get the cancer treatment, but also couldn't get abortions, other minors who had to leave the state to have abortions because that goes back to the story about the 10 year old girl who had to leave the state, you'll remember, this summer.

There is a lot of issues involved in this and I think that the judge wants more time to look at everything, all these different angles.

It's gonna go to the Ohio Supreme Court though.

Don't kid yourself.

This is not gonna be the end.

- We did hear about that one 10 year old and we talked about that on this show and now I read in the Ohio Capital Journal two affidavits filed saying there were other minors that had to go out of state.

- Yeah, that's what I'm talking about here, that Jo Ingles looked at those and has those in her story as well, yeah.

- Interesting.

The balance of the court, you said it's gonna go to the Supreme Court, but Karen, the whole balance of the court is on the ballot this November.

- Absolutely and it really, I've done the math on this and it appears to me that Democrats have to win either all three of the seats that are open or the two Associate Justice seats that are open, because if the Democrats win the Chief Justice seat well then, the governor gets to appoint, actually it's Mike DeWine who gets to appoint the replacement because of the way that the terms overlap, even if he doesn't win the election.

So yeah, if Democrats want to affect the balance of the court, they have to win all three seats.

Otherwise, yeah, if this goes to the Ohio Supreme Court it seems very likely that this ban would be upheld.

- And if Republicans wanna affect the balance of the court, they could win those seats too.

- And that would be the two Republican justices who are currently on the court, reelecting those two justices and then elevating Sharon Kennedy, who's running against Jennifer Brunner, the Democrat.

And then once again, Mike DeWine gets to appoint someone to that position that would be open when either one of those candidates win.

- [Mike] Got it, Ken?

- I spoke to gubernatorial candidate, Nan Whaley, last week and she said that never has she seen so much conversation about these court elections, that this is the most important election in Ohio's history and you're seeing a level of discourse about who are we voting for for these judge positions that she's never seen before, and you hear that a lot.

- And Nick, you're our politics expert, and I don't know if we've ever really had a lot of discussion in general from people about Supreme Court Justices and really any judge races, it always seems to be whatever name I recognize, and you know in Cuyahoga County there's a lot of Gallaghers and Russos.

Do you think it's different that people are starting to say, "Who do these people stand for?"

And by the way, I think this is the first year we're gonna see party affiliation on the Supreme Court Justice votes.

- Right, I mean, that changes the game for these judicial races because you typically do not see party affiliation, and I think you'll continue not to see party affiliation for the local judges, but that changes the game for these Supreme Court races.

Democrats, although they have been quite unsuccessful in winning statewide races in Ohio over the past several cycles, they have done pretty well winning Supreme Court seats and that's definitely what helped them in the redistricting fight, having a bench of Democrats there.

So this will change the game now that you will see party affiliation and that could probably give the edge to Republicans because this is a right-leaning state.

- Hmm, Karen?

Agree?

- Yeah, in fact I've heard about some internal polls that are showing that the interest in Supreme Court races is really high.

Normally it's in like the teens.

Now it's in the forties in terms of percentages and that the generic ballot, which is how people are expected to vote, is starting to look the same for those Supreme Court races as it is for the wider ballot and all the offices.

So that suggests that Republicans are going to win those three races, but of course it is September 23rd.

We don't know and all of it depends on what happens when people turn out.

(orchestral music) - The Ohio Debate Commission has canceled scheduled debates for governor and United States Senate after the Republican candidates declined to take part.

Karen, we mentioned previously a USA Today Network, Suffolk University poll that was recent that showed 84% of voters wanted the debates, but that didn't move the campaigns.

- Yeah, and I think that there were reasons that the candidates were not interested in debating.

I mean, when you look at polls that are showing Mike DeWine is up as much as 20 points, he's got widespread name recognition, lots of money.

Why might he consider debating Nan Whaley who is very far behind in name recognition and money?

I mean, I would hope that he would, but I could see the political calculus of him not doing that.

When it comes to JD Vance and Tim Ryan, they're both kind of targeting a lot of the same voters, they're both kind of targeting a lot of the same issues, and so while that race is very close there's a lot of money coming into it and so maybe the calculus there is we'll let the ads speak for themselves rather than for JD Vance in particular to come forward.

I thought it was interesting to see the way that the Republican campaign spun this, that last weekend there was a story that basically suggested that it was my fact checking of the Republican candidates in the U.S. Senate debate in March that was a reason why they didn't wanna debate.

And then of course the stories that came out this week about the Ohio Debate Commission's executive director.

But there have been six major debates that the Ohio Debate Commission has sponsored and we haven't heard these criticisms before.

I've moderated three of them.

I haven't heard these criticisms before and so this is very interesting, the timing of this.

- You mentioned the executive director, Jill Miller Zimon, she has run for office as a Democrat in the past, she wrote a blog and criticized Rush Limbaugh, which I think people from all walks of life might do, right or left, but regardless, clearly she has her political beliefs.

She is not the one moderating these debates and as I understand it, what happens is there's negotiation with both of the parties, both of the campaigns, to decide what the format of the debate is, who will be the moderator, they have to agree on that.

So it's not as though this person, regardless whether she's a Republican or Democrat, is influencing the actual debate itself.

- There is no influence by anybody on the Ohio Debate Commission Board or the executive director on the questions that are asked.

I know because I've done this and the questions that are put together are put together by journalists, or in the case of the debate in March, these were questions that were submitted to an online portal.

I took the questions, worked them up with the help of other journalists and those were the questions that were presented to the candidates.

And when we talked about issues in March, people wanted to know about the candidate's views on the 2020 election because out of the seven candidates, six of them were talking about, they were talking about the baseless claims that Donald Trump won the 2020 election.

So people wanted to know the candidate's views on that.

They wanted to know about immigration.

They wanted to know about Ukraine.

These are real issues.

And I just, the criticism of somehow the commission is biased and the debates were biased, this has not been heard before and so I'm just wondering about the timing of this.

- Nick, the head of the Debate Commission, or the chair of the Debate Commission Board, Dan Moulthrop at the City Club, gave a pretty powerful defense of debates when asked about this.

He's saying they're listening to their campaign advisors, but really this is a broader democracy issue, that the public deserves to be able to see both of these candidates in a pressure situation face each other and have to answer questions.

Is that really starting to become a relic of the past, politically?

- It sure looks like it.

I think the political reality right now is that candidates feel they don't need to step onto some neutral ground where they can debate each other before a broad general audience.

They have their own ways of reaching their voters.

They can target their voters with ads online and other social platforms.

They have sympathetic media organizations that will carry their message and amplify what they want amplified.

And so what's the point?

What's the point of going to a debate where you might get called out for saying that the election was stolen from Donald Trump, because that's not true.

When you can talk to a sympathetic media organization that shares all of your views and is not going to have that difficult conversation with you.

So I think that's a reality and like you said, with DeWine being seen as really the favorite to win this gubernatorial race, he's only got things to lose by going onto a stage and having a debate that would elevate his opponent.

- What about Vance and Ryan?

They're pretty close.

Will we see a debate, even if it's not the Ohio Debate Commission?

- It seems like it's a maybe.

The Columbus Dispatch had a story about this whole fallout from the Debate Commission saying that the candidates have said that they've agreed to debates, but what they've said they've agreed to, the times and places don't line up.

So, they're kind of playing this, there's this dance where they're saying, "Yeah, sure we'll debate," but it's not clear if they are really going to do that or not.

(orchestral music) - MetroHealth has tapped Dr. Airica Steed to take over as CEO, succeeding Dr. Akram Boutros who will leave at the end of the year.

Dr. Steed is the executive vice president and chief operating officer of Sinai Chicago Health System and president of Mount Sinai and Sinai Children's Hospital.

Ken, in making the choice MetroHealth said Dr. Steed was the right person for the job because her background with a safety net healthcare system that has a similar focus to Metro, and she talked a lot about really wanting to close the racial gap for healthcare.

She seems to fit perfectly with what we've been hearing from MetroHealth for the last decade.

- Yeah very much so.

So MetroHealth highlighted that Mount Sinai, from which Dr. Steed is coming, really focuses on health equity and eradicating healthcare disparities, especially in an urban academic community, which is what Cleveland is all about.

And so they described her as an innovator and a community collaborator.

And so, interesting to her background, in previous interviews, Dr. Steed has referenced that she was the first minority executive to hold that position at Mount Sinai and I really encourage listeners to go on Twitter, which is not something I usually encourage people to do, but to go on Twitter and see the retweets of this announcement by black women in Cleveland and you only have to see those tweets to know how important this appointment is and how much it affects individual's perceptions of the healthcare that they will receive here in Cleveland.

This is not symbolism.

This is actual leadership put into practice.

- And it's obviously a huge job, but a little bit bigger too, given the St. Vincent Charity news.

- Yeah absolutely, and especially when we're talking about the intersections between minority communities and mental health issues, of which, as Nick said earlier, we're not sure how the closing of St. Vincents, some of their services, are going to affect the mental health services that are offered here in Cleveland.

(orchestral music) - A first term city councilman in Akron has announced his plan to run for mayor.

Shammas Malik is viewed as a rising star in Akron politics.

Malik says his focus as mayor would be on public safety, including improving relations between the city's residents and its police department.

Incumbent Mayor Dan Horrigan has not yet publicly announced whether he'll seek a third term.

Nick, we're still a long way from the filing deadline, there's a long way to go here, but getting into the race early certainly worked out in Cleveland for Justin Bibb.

So is there some advantage here for Shammas Malik to get in early?

- Absolutely.

To be the first candidate to announce, well actually I believe some others have announced, but to be sort of the candidate who makes a splash with an announcement like this is important, it gets your name out there, especially as a first term city councilman.

You're gonna need to introduce yourself to a lot of voters.

It gives you the advantage that you've got more time to raise money, which you need to have a campaign staff to go knock on doors, so there's really an advantage to starting early, I mean, the Bibb campaign also started quite early, the beginning of the year of 2021 and I think that head start really help them.

- What role will the Jayland Walker shooting and then the whole push for a community advisory police commission, an advisory board, what role do you think they'll play in this campaign?

- I mean, I think this will, in some ways, set the terms of the debate.

If you do have a charter amendment that is also on the ballot that would create a police review board with some investigative powers, which it's essentially a more powerful police review board in the charter amendment versus what's being proposed by Mayor Horrigan in legislation, candidates are going to be asked, "Do you support or do you oppose this charter amendment?"

As we saw in Cleveland with Issue 24, that became a really defining debate, especially toward the end, between Kevin Kelley and Justin Bibb, with Bibb supporting it, Kelley opposing it and Bibb and Issue 24 ran pretty similarly, in that they won by big margins in November.

(orchestral music) - And let me take a moment now, since the news was released yesterday, that Nick Castele will be leaving Idea Stream Public Media.

His last day is next Friday so I'm assuming this is your last round table.

- Unless you want me next week.

We'll see if I get the call.

- I don't know if I'll put you in on your very last day.

But my friend, it has been a pleasure to work with you in the newsroom and on this show, you're a class act.

- Thank you very much.

I'm gonna miss you.

- Absolutely.

I feel the same way, Nick.

It's not the same place without you.

- I will be hosting a new podcast called After Castele.

(everyone laughing) - Love it.

Monday on the "Sound of Ideas" on WKSU, we'll bring you part (upbeat music) of the City Club of Cleveland Debate between Chris Ronayne and Lee Weingart, both seeking to be the next Cuyahoga County executive.

I'm Mike McIntyre.

Thanks for watching and stay safe.

(upbeat music continues)