THE BURNED OVER DISTRICT

Because, not only does he stink but he is a health hazard to the Lucas County GOP. From the Toledo Blade we learn about the continuing troubles of the party organization in which Tom was a major player.

Months after the party decided to convert $63,000 in outstanding loans from Mr. Noe into contributions, prosecutors say they believe the party cannot waive the debt. Election officials and a special prosecutor are examining whether the party violated Ohio campaign finance laws.

Julia Bates, the county prosecutor, said yesterday she has referred the matter to Lynn Grimshaw, a special prosecutor working in southern Ohio. Ms. Bates said the party asked Mr. Noe to drop the loan but said documents show he was “not in a position to forgive the loan.”....

....The elections commission is set to consider a related issue April 27, when it will review other financial filings by the county GOP. At issue: incomplete records of contributions to the party.....

.....If the party is forced to come up with the money, it would worsen an already dismal financial situation. As of mid-December, the party had just $1,226 available.....

.....Dennis Lange, the interim chairman of the party, said fund-raising has plummeted since the Noe scandal began to unfold a year ago, and the party doesn’t have the money to repay him.

“People are just shying away completely,” Mr. Lange said. “This has been very damaging to our party.”

And to add insult to injury.

What irks the party further is how the loans originated. The party’s bylaws say the executive committee must approve all obligations exceeding $5,000. Neither in 2002 nor in 2004 did the committee vote on the loans. Instead, they were reportedly accepted by Mr. Noe’s wife, Bernadette, when she was chairman of the party.

“We never accepted it as a loan. We were not aware of it as a loan of any kind,”

Well whaddaya know, another Republican husband and wife team involved in fund raising shenanigans. I guess the GOP was counting heavily on the old "spouse can not be forced to testify" rule, ignoring the old "spouse can be indicted too" rule.