Reason #26 to VOTE NO on ISSUE 3, with a BONUS reason! CLICK THIS TEXT TO VISIT THIS BLOG'S CURRENT SITE

Because we should focus on maximizing the use of currently available means for paying for higher education rather than on subsidies that will wind up going to students who will 1) qualify for assistance anyway, 2) have the ability to pay without state assistance and/or 3) head to college regardless of the existence of the gambling proceeds. Throwing money to these groups of students will fail to make college more affordable, fail to get more Ohio students to attend Ohio colleges and stay in Ohio afterwards, and fail to pay for college for those kids for whom college is least affordable.

The idea that higher education isn't affordable comes from the perception that institutions of higher education have ratcheted up tuition through unconscionable increases, in part due to state cutbacks in assistance. Thus, giving gambling proceeds to the top 5% of Ohio's high school graduates doesn't do a single thing to address or attack these roots of the affordability problem.

Hmm, so where is the data on how well Ohioans are utilizing the already existing local, state, federal and other funds available as grants, scholarships and awards? I don't know - I haven't been able to find any. How about a public, publicized Ohio survey of states where higher education is most affordable that would describe what works in those states? Nope, haven't seen anything like that either. Would love to hear if something like either of these items exists - I can't see straight for Googling this stuff so much lately.

But here's an excellent article from the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis from 12/05 called, "Is College Unaffordable? Tuition and student debt have skyrocketed, but higher education still pays off." As long and thorough as it is, however, there's no mention that gambling is a necessary evil to help the situation.

And here is the Board of Regents Higher Education Funding Study Council Report from May 2006..

And here is the Measuring Up report for Ohio. Just how many of the 5% who would get money under Issue 3 do you think live in the groups least able to pay for college? This statement isn't a bias that such kids can't and won't or don't achieve. It's a statement of common knowledge: those in the 5% who would get the gambling proceeds are not, under any circumstances currently in existence in relation to the way Issue 3 is written, going to go, in any statistically significant part, to the kids who need the assistance the most.

This section of Measuring Up provides more detail about affordability.

And here's an alarming report on how colleges are trying to scientifically determine how to spend the least amount of financial aid possible, despite what might be available.

Sigh.

Not only do I digress, but I also didn't find any of those publications suggesting that legalized gambling could, would or should solve the problem.

So then...

What other ways currently exist to fund college, ways which may be underutilized by Ohio families and students?

These ideas came in an email I received from NewsNet5 of all places. Sure, it's basically an infomercial, but it's also a good place to start.

From our state, there is this and this.

From our federal government, there is this free publication plus this information (and I saw several other webpages with information; it's overwhelming and I can see why people might turn away).

From the Foundation Center, there is this. And Ohioans are particularly in luck because one of only four field offices (the HQ is in NYC) is located in Cleveland and the people there are helpful, knowledgeable and selfless in their desire to assist others. The Center's training programs are full of information and offered frequently.

Even if I didn't oppose gambling on any other grounds, I would oppose it as a solution to higher education affordability problems because we could and should be fully utilizing every currently available resource before even thinking about a measure as extreme as a constitionational amendment to legalize gambling and enrich the already wealthy whose very own kids, grandkids or great-grandkids may end up in OLE's top 5%, and receive this higher education money, while also being the least likely to need it.

Previous reasons to vote no on Issue 3:

Reason 27
Reason 28
Reason 29
Reason 30
Reason 31
Reason 32
Reason 33
Reason 34
Reason 35
Reason 36
Reason 37
Reason 38
Reason 39
Reason 40
Reason 41
Reason 42
Reason 43
Reason 44
Reason 45
Reason 46
Reason 47
Reason 48
Reason 49
Reason 50
Reason 51
Reason 52
Reason 53
Reason 54
Reason 55
Reason 56
Reason 57

Vote no on Issue 3 (Ohio Learn and Earn).

And now...

A BONUS REASON TO VOTE NO ON ISSUE 3:

Imagine if this woman's legal arguments succeeded in Ohio and every Ohio who had a "60-hour-a-week gambling regimen" which they called "a business" was able to convince the Ohio judiciary that they should be able to deduct all their gambling losses from their taxes.

In MN, "...Justices concurred that she was involved in a 'trade or business,' even if it wasn't a particularly reasonable one to practice..."

Ooops, honey - there goes Junior's college money. Again.