Tom Brinkman - 2004 Reelection

2004 Reelection

In 2004, he faced a challenger in the primary, attorney Greg Delev of Anderson Township. Brinkman told the Enquirer, "I ran for office when the party wanted to dictate who my state representative was going to be. I couldn't stand for that, so I ran, and I'm proud I did. It's been a frustrating three years as I've watched Governor Taft drive the state off a cliff. But I've been fighting back." Delev said he agreed with Brinkman on most of the issues, but that Brinkman's actions in Columbus had made the district "the laughingstock of the state." The Cincinnati Enquirer said both candidates were "rock-ribbed conservatives who agree on most fiscal and social issues," but endorsed Delev. "The issue here is Brinkman's lack of effectiveness," said the newspaper, echoing the Columbus Monthly article:

Few lawmakers are as honest, principled and consistent as Brinkman. But he exhibits those qualities to a fault, coming off as stubborn, ideologically rigid and unwilling to compromise. He's made many enemies in Columbus by refusing to see anyone else's side of things. This has limited his ability to work with others and get things done.

Brinkman won the March 2 primary: 7,113 (63.00%) to 4,178 (37.00%).

In the general election on November 2 he faced Democrat Glen Miller of Anderson Township, a former history teacher who worked in job training. "I think the biggest issue of this race is Tom Brinkman—how he votes and how he's against everything," Miller said. The Enquirer, again citing his stubbornness, endorsed Miller . Despite the criticism, Brinkman once again won the Republican district by a comfortable margin: 35,229 (60.04%) for Brinkman to 23,451 (39.96%) for Miller.

Brinkman strongly supported concealed carry legislation. "We have a constitutional right to bear arms. Larry Flynt has a right to put out smut and some people may not like that, but it's a right whether we like it or not," he said . Brinkman sponsored legislation to allow ex-cons the right to cut hair. He called "stupid" the policy of the state regulators to deny prisoners who had taken prison-administered barber classes a license upon their release. "I'm for personal responsibility, but people do make mistakes and we should give them a second chance," Brinkman said .

Brinkman also worked to limit state spending just as he had opposed local projects. In 2003, he opposed Taft's "Third Frontier" project and the bond issue on the November ballot as Issue One which would have permitted the state to borrow money to subsidize business's research and development. "Who would have thought a Republican governor would run on this?" Brinkman said (Issue One was soundly defeated by voters). When Taft proposed in 2004 the question once more be submitted to the voters, Brinkman renewed his criticism. "Corporate welfare is corporate welfare. Just because you buy off the manufacturers with more money for them, and you buy off the farmers, doesn't change what it is." He said he would join Democrats in voting against its placement on the November 2005 ballot.

Brinkman in 2004 criticized state spending for Cincinnati's bid to win the 2012 Olympic Games and against legislation in 2004 to give hospitals more money for breast cancer examinations . Later that year, he spearheaded a campaign to repeal the City of Cincinnati property tax. While it did make it to the November ballot, it was rejected by the voters . He was also a supporter of Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell's proposed amendment to the Ohio Constitution to limit state spending . In 2005, he was one of only eight Republicans in the Ohio House to vote against the state budget, which raised taxes and increased spending. Previously, he had opposed Governor Taft's proposed personal income tax cut because it would mean higher local property taxes. He also called for funding for public libraries to be maintained.

On April 28, 2005, he introduced a bill, House Bill 228, that would ban all abortions. Brinkman acknowledged that the bill was unconstitutional under Roe v. Wade, but wanted to use it as a test case to overturn the Roe decision. "We’re just positioning the state for the future," he told the Cleveland Plain Dealer. He re-introduced the ban on July 2007, despite the additional burden of Gov. Strickland's veto threat. Six months before, he successfully passed legislation for Ohio to conduct a study of how the death penalty has been administered in the state. "I'd like to abolish it or have a moratorium, but you've got to start somewhere."