In Columbus, Ohio, Several Mcdonald's employees recieved a little something extra along with their most recent paychecks; handbills that directly suggested that they vote for three republican candidates in the upcoming November election. It reads, "If the right people are elected we will be able to continue with raises and benefits at or above our present levels. If others are elected we will not." The distribution of these handouts has fallen solely on the shoulders of Canton franchisee Paul Siegfried, with the Mcdonalds headquarters in Oak Brook, Ill quick to point a finger at Siegfried and claim innocence in the matter.
Mcdonald's general manager for the Ohio branch immediately responds to the incident with a public address, "We wholeheartedly respect diverse views and opinions, and our employees' right to vote. Our position is that every employee should make his or her own choice." As Allen Schulman, an attorney to one of the employees states, this goes against both state and federal laws for corporate advocacy in elections. The secretary of state in Ohio, Jennifer Brunner, launched an investigation into the matter, feeling that the incident may violate Ohio election laws. She later states,"Voter intimidation is a form of voter fraud. It is a serious offense requiring a strong response."
After reading this story, I was suprised by the strong reaction that the Government had for Mcdonalds. I wasn't expectingany action to take place for at least a few weeks, as with everything else that the government deals with. I feel that their response was appropriate; the secretary of state in Ohio issued a serious general warning to the state about voter fraud, which is a federal offense, which is precisely why the man whose idea this was, immediatly responded to the incedent with a public apology to mirror that of his superior, that Mcdonalds general manager in Ohio.
No comments:
Post a Comment