The Truth

If you check some of the comments around the net, many voters are not happy with a recent ad for Republican Steve Stivers in which his child was featured.  Stivers, a former bank lobbyist, has an ad that notes the burden his child will have because of the national debt.  Some say it is inappropriate, and others feel that the ad actually backfires.  Stivers lives in a perfectly nice home, while others in the district have lost and continue to lose their homes to bank foreclosures.  However, Stivers doesn't think that bank reform legislation was necessary.

 Stivers said that voters aren't that interested in financial reform. 
The Dispatch(8/16/10):

...Steve Stivers, the Republican challenger, says voters are more concerned about their jobs and the national debt than arcane financial regulations. Stivers said he would have voted against the financial-reform bill even though he supports some of its provisions....

How did  Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy respond to what Stivers said?

...."It's hardly an arcane issue when people have lost their jobs, lost their life savings and lost their homes to foreclosure," she said in an interview. "In this race, you have a really clear contrast between someone who is standing up to Wall Street and special interests and someone who spent his career serving the banking industry as a lobbyist."...

Stivers didn't think that this Wall Street reform was necessary?  He believes that banks and bankers are never at fault. At a website called WhoRunsgov.com, Stivers actions in financial services are highlighted:

As a lobbyist for Bank One, Stivers lobbied successfully for a 2002 Ohio bill that blocked Ohio cities from enacting local ordinances intended to stop predatory mortgage lending.
As a state senator, Stivers was one of four lawmakers to opose a 2006 bill that gave consumer protections against mortgage lenders. His spokesman during the 2008 House campaign said the bill "was nowhere near tough enough."Reed, Matt, "Ohio candidates focus on predatory lending" The Associated Press, Oct. 24, 2008⁽²⁴⁾

____________

Oh, no. Here is the title of an article at Huffington Post:

New Proof Wall Street Knew Its Mortgage Securities Were Subpar: Clayton Execs Testify

..."This should have a phenomenal effect legally, both in terms of the ability of investors to force put-backs and to sue for fraud," said Joshua Rosner, managing director at independent research consultancy Graham Fisher & Co.

Original buyers of these securities could sue for fraud; distressed investors, who buy assets on the cheap, could force issuers to take back the mortgages and swallow the losses....


Does that mean that John Kasich knew what he was selling to the Ohio retirement funds that lost over $400 million at Lehman Brothers????  I'm just asking.