The Columbus Dispatch is running an interesting article on its blog (http://blog.dispatch.com/dailybriefing/2009/07/harris_proposes_opening_up_slo.shtml#more) regarding the proposal that the Senate is bringing forward regarding video lottery terminals.  Nevermind the fact that their proposal would apparently allow gambling anywhere and the fact that the money won't come nearly in time.  What I'm wondering is how they think this is an alternative to the current budget situation.  Whether they want to admit it or not, they have two choices: either accept the Governor's framework (with some minor changes, perhaps) or introduce their own substantive alternative.  Coming out with a variation of one part of the plan that is contingent on voter approval and therefore unreliable doesn't cut it.

As I have said before and I will say again, I completely understand if the Senate or others do not agree with the Governor's framework.  I don't agree with every single aspect of it.  However, it is the basic responsibility of the Senate to build consensus for an alternative, not to tear down the plans of another. 

People throughout the district are asking "why isn't this getting done?"  It's simple: Budget negotiations are just that: negotiations.  No one negotiates by having one person sitting at the table offering suggestions and having the person on the opposite side saying "No" with no alternatives.  Yet that is exactly what we have in Columbus.

Jon Husted and his friends might not like it but it's true: The so-called "Upper House" is dragging our state lower and lower every day.