Reason #34 to VOTE NO on ISSUE 3
CLICK THIS TEXT TO VISIT THIS BLOG'S CURRENT SITE
Because Cleveland, NEO and Ohio already have more than enough bankruptcies.
According to a 2005 report from Policy Matters Ohio,
By 2003, there were a record 5.5 personal bankruptcy filings for every 1,000 people
living in the U.S., and 7.7 personal bankruptcy filings for every 1,000 people living in Ohio, according to Going Broke in Ohio, released today [February 22, 2005] by Policy Matters Ohio. Ohio s rate was eight highest in the country and higher than all Midwestern states except Indiana's. Only Tennessee, Alabama, Utah, Georgia, Nevada, Indiana and Arkansas had higher bankruptcy rates than Ohio in 2003.
One reason for the high bankruptcy rates is unprecedented levels of borrowing, said Weller, Senior Economist with the Center for American Progress. For the first time since the Federal Reserve started collecting these data in 1952, the average U.S. household had debt totaling more than 115 percent of disposable income. Mortgage debt rose relative to income, while credit card debt held constant at 10 percent of average household disposable income.
Families also had to dedicate more of their income to servicing debts. Since the recession started in 2001, families nationally have spent 13 percent or more of their disposable income on debt service, the highest rate since the Federal Reserve started collecting this information in 1980.
The national study found that bankruptcy was correlated with lack of health insurance, high unemployment and low income. These variables can t fully explain what s gone on in Ohio, said Amy Hanauer, Executive Director of Policy Matters Ohio. While only seven states had worse bankruptcy rates than Ohio, 34 had lower health insurance coverage, 16 had higher unemployment rates and 26 had lower levels of personal disposable income.
..."Bankruptcy filings are an indication of severe financial distress," said Hanauer. "It is imperative that we determine the cause of the sharp spike in Ohio bankruptcy filings, and adopt reforms to reduce these rates."
The addition of 31,500 slot machines to Ohio's landscape is not a reform that will reduce the bankruptcy rates. The addition of 31,500 slot machines won't help reduce credit card debt. The addition of 31,500 slot machines won't increase disposable income. The addition of 31,500 slot machines won't reduce mortgage debt.
Combine the Policy Matters information with the experience-driven sentiments voiced by Howard Hughey, the spokesman for Detroit Mayor Kwame M. Kilpatrick, who was elected in 2001, and opposed the casinos as a state lawmaker, "From the social side, we've had our highest rates of personal bankruptcy ever, we've had our highest rate of alcoholism in quite some time."
From the same article, "I think it was a bad deal for the city of Detroit," says Alonzo W. Bates, a councilman and retired city recreation director. "What makes places like Detroit and Baltimore lose out is they see how much money is going to be made, and they don't look at all the fallout: people are losing their savings, losing everything they got to get one big hit."
Finally, there's this from the Baltimore Sun article:
In Detroit, Gamblers Anonymous meetings have proliferated, and the number of gamblers referred to a state counseling program has grown 8 percent to 10 percent each year since the casinos opened, officials say. The number of people on the state's Disassociated Persons List - addicts who ask to be banned from casinos for life - reached 561 last year, up from 56 in 2001, the program's first year.
A survey of Detroit-area residents by the University of Michigan-Dearborn in late 2000 found that minorities were less likely to gamble than whites, but were more likely to become problem gamblers. The survey's author, Paul Wong, a sociologist who has since become a dean at San Diego State University, said that the proximity of casinos to poor, largely black neighborhoods in central Detroit adds to the problem. "It's within walking distance," he said. "You don't even need a car."
Sherry White, 39, a telecommunications saleswoman, says she put herself on the Disassociated Persons List a year and a half ago after losing $80,000 to $90,000 in less than eight months. She was so "caught up in the rapture" of trying to win back her blackjack losses, she said, that she put her 15-year-old son in her mother's care and took out a loan against her house. White says she disappeared into the 24-hour casinos after work Fridays. She returned to work Mondays in the same clothes.
She says she sought help after her arrest for disorderly conduct after a night of devastating losses. "It can destroy people," she said Saturday night, while picking up her brother in a bleak neighborhood just beyond the MotorCity Casino.
Cleveland - meet fallout. Fallout- meeting Cleveland.
You can all stop pointing to Detroit as some beholden model for the gratitude society owes to casinos.
Previous reasons to vote no on Issue 3:
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.
According to a 2005 report from Policy Matters Ohio,
By 2003, there were a record 5.5 personal bankruptcy filings for every 1,000 people
living in the U.S., and 7.7 personal bankruptcy filings for every 1,000 people living in Ohio, according to Going Broke in Ohio, released today [February 22, 2005] by Policy Matters Ohio. Ohio s rate was eight highest in the country and higher than all Midwestern states except Indiana's. Only Tennessee, Alabama, Utah, Georgia, Nevada, Indiana and Arkansas had higher bankruptcy rates than Ohio in 2003.
One reason for the high bankruptcy rates is unprecedented levels of borrowing, said Weller, Senior Economist with the Center for American Progress. For the first time since the Federal Reserve started collecting these data in 1952, the average U.S. household had debt totaling more than 115 percent of disposable income. Mortgage debt rose relative to income, while credit card debt held constant at 10 percent of average household disposable income.
Families also had to dedicate more of their income to servicing debts. Since the recession started in 2001, families nationally have spent 13 percent or more of their disposable income on debt service, the highest rate since the Federal Reserve started collecting this information in 1980.
The national study found that bankruptcy was correlated with lack of health insurance, high unemployment and low income. These variables can t fully explain what s gone on in Ohio, said Amy Hanauer, Executive Director of Policy Matters Ohio. While only seven states had worse bankruptcy rates than Ohio, 34 had lower health insurance coverage, 16 had higher unemployment rates and 26 had lower levels of personal disposable income.
..."Bankruptcy filings are an indication of severe financial distress," said Hanauer. "It is imperative that we determine the cause of the sharp spike in Ohio bankruptcy filings, and adopt reforms to reduce these rates."
The addition of 31,500 slot machines to Ohio's landscape is not a reform that will reduce the bankruptcy rates. The addition of 31,500 slot machines won't help reduce credit card debt. The addition of 31,500 slot machines won't increase disposable income. The addition of 31,500 slot machines won't reduce mortgage debt.
Combine the Policy Matters information with the experience-driven sentiments voiced by Howard Hughey, the spokesman for Detroit Mayor Kwame M. Kilpatrick, who was elected in 2001, and opposed the casinos as a state lawmaker, "From the social side, we've had our highest rates of personal bankruptcy ever, we've had our highest rate of alcoholism in quite some time."
From the same article, "I think it was a bad deal for the city of Detroit," says Alonzo W. Bates, a councilman and retired city recreation director. "What makes places like Detroit and Baltimore lose out is they see how much money is going to be made, and they don't look at all the fallout: people are losing their savings, losing everything they got to get one big hit."
Finally, there's this from the Baltimore Sun article:
In Detroit, Gamblers Anonymous meetings have proliferated, and the number of gamblers referred to a state counseling program has grown 8 percent to 10 percent each year since the casinos opened, officials say. The number of people on the state's Disassociated Persons List - addicts who ask to be banned from casinos for life - reached 561 last year, up from 56 in 2001, the program's first year.
A survey of Detroit-area residents by the University of Michigan-Dearborn in late 2000 found that minorities were less likely to gamble than whites, but were more likely to become problem gamblers. The survey's author, Paul Wong, a sociologist who has since become a dean at San Diego State University, said that the proximity of casinos to poor, largely black neighborhoods in central Detroit adds to the problem. "It's within walking distance," he said. "You don't even need a car."
Sherry White, 39, a telecommunications saleswoman, says she put herself on the Disassociated Persons List a year and a half ago after losing $80,000 to $90,000 in less than eight months. She was so "caught up in the rapture" of trying to win back her blackjack losses, she said, that she put her 15-year-old son in her mother's care and took out a loan against her house. White says she disappeared into the 24-hour casinos after work Fridays. She returned to work Mondays in the same clothes.
She says she sought help after her arrest for disorderly conduct after a night of devastating losses. "It can destroy people," she said Saturday night, while picking up her brother in a bleak neighborhood just beyond the MotorCity Casino.
Cleveland - meet fallout. Fallout- meeting Cleveland.
You can all stop pointing to Detroit as some beholden model for the gratitude society owes to casinos.
Previous reasons to vote no on Issue 3:
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.
JBlog Me
16 Comments:
"Ohio s rate was eight highest in the country and higher than all Midwestern states except Indiana's. Only Tennessee, Alabama, Utah, Georgia, Nevada, Indiana and Arkansas had higher bankruptcy rates than Ohio in 2003."
So, while 35 of the 50 states have some form of casino gaming, only 3 of the top 8 states for bankruptcy filings have some form of casino gaming.
"The number of people on the state's Disassociated Persons List - addicts who ask to be banned from casinos for life - reached 561 last year, up from 56 in 2001, the program's first year."
Do illegal bookmakers have a Disassociated Persons List? For that matter, do legal lottery retailers?
"...the proximity of casinos to poor, largely black neighborhoods in central Detroit adds to the problem. 'It's within walking distance,' he said. 'You don't even need a car.'"
How many lottery retailers are there within walking distance of central Detroit? State lotteries are much less favorable than even the least favorable slot machines.
"She was so 'caught up in the rapture' of trying to win back her blackjack losses, she said, that she put her 15-year-old son in her mother's care and took out a loan against her house. White says she disappeared into the 24-hour casinos after work Fridays. She returned to work Mondays in the same clothes."
A sad story to be sure, but to blame the legalization of casino gaming for Ms. White's actions would be akin to blaming the repeal of Sunday blue laws for alcohol related fatalities.
Why are you talking about casino gambling when we can start with slots?
What's your point about the Disassociated Persons List question?
The distance issue has nothing to do with who has better payouts. You're just being cheeky. :)
As for Ms. White, causality, Jason, causality. The "but for" issue related to bringing such opportunities to our region.
"Why are you talking about casino gambling when we can start with slots?"
Slots are a subset of casino gambling.
"What's your point about the Disassociated Persons List question?"
First, if something is legal, it can be regulated. Black markets are unregulated. The state can require a legal casino to bar players who place themselves on the Disassociated Persons List. Illegal gaming operators won't follow such regulations.
Second, casinos are easier for problem gamblers to avoid than other forms of gambling. To play slot machines, if Issue 3 passes, you would have to go to one of only 9 sites in the entire state. Right now in Ohio, it's nearly impossible to buy gasoline or groceries without encountering a lottery machine.
"The distance issue has nothing to do with who has better payouts."
I didn't say that it did. Even before the legalization of casino gaming, Michigan already had a much worse form of gambling within walking distance of all Detroiters.
"You're just being cheeky. :)"
Uh, thanks...I guess. (:
"As for Ms. White, causality, Jason, causality. The "but for" issue related to bringing such opportunities to our region."
OK, Jill. It's possible that, but for the legalization of casino gaming in Detroit, Ms. White might never have developed a gambling problem. However, the legalization of gambling wasn't a proximate cause. Ms. White chose to enter the casino. She chose to stay there too long. She chose to chase her losses. She chose to take out that loan. Ms. White is the proximate cause of her problems.
If you blame the legalization of gambling for Ms. White's actions and the actions of other problem gamblers, you fall into the same trap that these researchers when they blame the repeal of New Mexico's blue law for an additional 42 deaths.
Jason, ever thought of doing our own countdown? :) Just kidding. Then readers would have no where to go for a point-counterpoint, which I really think is the best way to help people make their own decisions.
Ok - let's see:
Slots might be a subset of casino gambling but if that Ohio Crash & Burn passes, and casinos don't get approved, we'll be stuck with 31,500 slot machines. Let's work that down first.
What illegal gaming operators? Wouldn't they be an enforcement issue? See - you know too much about things that shouldn't even exist in the first place. And no - just because black market crap isn't regulated doesn't mean we should make it legal so we can regulate it - that's absurd and twisted with no connection to the behaviors involved in the first place.
You think lotteries are worse than slots therefore slots are okay? Again, Jason, that's just flawed as in, if the behavior is detrimental, it's detrimental. You can't be a little pregnant.
Jason, you know that I am not arguing that casino operators should be held liable in a court of law for Ms. White's troubles, although I have to say that as a contributor to society's ills beyond what they would otherwise be without the casinos, I would like to reserve judgement as to whether I think they could be found guilty in a court.
You know my point is that the consequences are foreseeable and, being able to foresee the consequence, in my right mind, I cannot endorse legalizing such an activity.
"Jason, ever thought of doing our own countdown? :)"
You expect a dissolute libertine like me to blog daily? (:
"What illegal gaming operators?"
Bookmakers, numbers runners, offshore internet gaming sites, operators of illegal card games, etc.
"Wouldn't they be an enforcement issue?"
All the enforcement in the world won't keep people from gambling. The drug war has punched holes in our Fourth Amendment rights, scared doctors away from prescribing pain medication, and given us the largest per-capita prison population in the world. People still use recreational drugs. Even if the government pursued gamblers as vigorously as it pursues drug users, people would still gamble.
"See - you know too much about things that shouldn't even exist in the first place."
But they do exist, and they'll always exist, whether or not you, or the government, or I, or anyone else approves of them.
"And no - just because black market crap isn't regulated doesn't mean we should make it legal so we can regulate it - that's absurd and twisted with no connection to the behaviors involved in the first place."
How many people die from drinking bathtub gin these days?
"You think lotteries are worse than slots therefore slots are okay? Again, Jason, that's just flawed as in, if the behavior is detrimental, it's detrimental. You can't be a little pregnant."
Ohio's current law with regard to gaming is just silly. A lottery, with a house edge of 50% is OK, but slot machines, with house edges of between 5 and 20% aren't. That's like allowing moonshine and absinthe but criminalizing wine.
"You know my point is that the consequences are foreseeable and, being able to foresee the consequence, in my right mind, I cannot endorse legalizing such an activity."
And when you make criminals out of all gamblers because of harm caused by a few gamblers, you're engaging in collective punishment, which is immoral. Punish each individual for the harm that he or she commits (or attempts or conspires to commit).
I don't believe in making something legal so it can be regulated, because those wanting it legal say that you then have to live it with unregulated if it's not legal. That's a specious argument. I will stick with the laws that exist re: law enforcement of what is illegal. Again, admitting that the law does a crappy job of dealing with social issues, I still prefer keeping something illegal that should be illegal, because it should be illegal, than making it legal because everyone is doing it anyway. Likewise, helping enforce the laws already on the books. Think of immigration, Jason - Simpson-Mazzoli has plenty to do, but it's been wonderfully ignored since being passed in 1986. Illegal immigration isn't any more or less legal because of poor enforcement and my opinion about illegal immigration won't change because of poor enforcement (i.e., oh let's just make it all legal etc. because of crappy enforcement - that's absurd logic).
Now - I simply don't know as much about gaming law in Ohio as you seem to. So I'm not going to say whether it's all silly or not. To the extent that there's no solid reasoning behind why the law says one thing about one type of gaming and another about another, I'm happy to speculate, and to the extent that the law is inconsistent, I would be less than happy about that. But I do not know specifics. Frankly, I trust you enough to say that it may very well be silly - I just have never studied what's already in existence.
Look, Jason - I have no idea if you have kids or not. But let's be specific here: parents are always counselled to teach their children, and remember for themselves, that a child isn't a bad child - the child does a bad thing. Likewise I would not necessarily say that gambler is a criminal but he may be engaging in criminal activities. To the extent that his or her activities are defined as crimes, that's the way the law goes. And I have no problem with people who would try to put up slots, when the state doesn't allow them, to be considered as folks who've engaged in criminal activities.
"Likewise I would not necessarily say that gambler is a criminal but he may be engaging in criminal activities."
I really don't see the difference. Someone who engages in criminal activities is a criminal. Your use of parenting as an analogy for government is disturbing. do you really want the government to be your parent? I certainly don't.
Jason, the difference is that people make crappy choices - crappy for themselves and crappy for others. Doesn't mean that that person is a crappy person. He or she might be a crappy person - but making crappy choices doesn't automatically nail him or her as such.
As for parenting and the government, that's an easy way to paint what I've said, but it's not accurate and you know it. I'm drawing on my experience as a parent to inform the way I see things. Even so, as part of a democracy, which, my son tells me, is going to hit 300 million people this week (!), we have agreed to allow our government to make laws. Parents make rules too. It's an analogy, but it's not always the right one - I agree with you there. There are limits.
So my answer would be no - ultimately, I do not want our government to be my parents. No therapist could manage such a caseload.
Jill, if you really want to stop gambling from affecting Ohio bankruptcies, then you need to work on shutting down the casinos in West Virginia and Indiana. Ohio residents are already supporting them. In return we get NO (ZERO) money in taxes, education funding, economic stimulation or support for problem gamblers. On top of that, we are paying salaries and wages of those states' residents. If this were truly an argument of doing the right thing by preventing gambling, then you make some good points. Unfortunately, those days are over in this state. Every other argument comes from the fight for money and power. The strongest of which is our own Governor's. Between the lottery proceeds he uses to cover his budget problems to the anti-gaming fundraising he does, this issue would be a big blow to his and the republican party's future. If you don't believe me, ask him about the money he's raised from the gaming companies in Indiana and West Virginia. During the 1996 campaign, one man, the owner of a company that supplies the casino equipment in those states wrote a $500,000 check, and there were several other large contributions. All with the hopes of defeating Ohio casinos. This issue is all business! Unfortunatley at this point we are billions behind in terms of money our residents send to Indiana, West Virginia, Michigan and coming soon - Pennsylvania. It's time to stop this nonsense and approve Issue 3.
Jill, if you really want to stop gambling from affecting Ohio bankruptcies, then you need to work on shutting down the casinos in West Virginia and Indiana. Ohio residents are already supporting them. In return we get NO (ZERO) money in taxes, education funding, economic stimulation or support for problem gamblers. On top of that, we are paying salaries and wages of those states' residents. If this were truly an argument of doing the right thing by preventing gambling, then you make some good points. Unfortunately, those days are over in this state. Every other argument comes from the fight for money and power. The strongest of which is our own Governor's. Between the lottery proceeds he uses to cover his budget problems to the anti-gaming fundraising he does, this issue would be a big blow to his and the republican party's future. If you don't believe me, ask him about the money he's raised from the gaming companies in Indiana and West Virginia. During the 1996 campaign, one man, the owner of a company that supplies the casino equipment in those states wrote a $500,000 check, and there were several other large contributions. All with the hopes of defeating Ohio casinos. This issue is all business! Unfortunatley at this point we are billions behind in terms of money our residents send to Indiana, West Virginia, Michigan and coming soon - Pennsylvania. It's time to stop this nonsense and approve Issue 3.
Jill, if you really want to stop gambling from affecting Ohio bankruptcies, then you need to work on shutting down the casinos in West Virginia and Indiana. Ohio residents are already supporting them. In return we get NO (ZERO) money in taxes, education funding, economic stimulation or support for problem gamblers. On top of that, we are paying salaries and wages of those states' residents. If this were truly an argument of doing the right thing by preventing gambling, then you make some good points. Unfortunately, those days are over in this state. Every other argument comes from the fight for money and power. The strongest of which is our own Governor's. Between the lottery proceeds he uses to cover his budget problems to the anti-gaming fundraising he does, this issue would be a big blow to his and the republican party's future. If you don't believe me, ask him about the money he's raised from the gaming companies in Indiana and West Virginia. During the 1996 campaign, one man, the owner of a company that supplies the casino equipment in those states wrote a $500,000 check, and there were several other large contributions. All with the hopes of defeating Ohio casinos. This issue is all business! Unfortunatley at this point we are billions behind in terms of money our residents send to Indiana, West Virginia, Michigan and coming soon - Pennsylvania. It's time to stop this nonsense and approve Issue 3.
Well, look. I'm not the kind of person who argues without conceding anything. And I'm not stupid. My thrust against Issue 3 isn't because I don't understand these arguments used to say that we should pass it. I understand what you are saying, and Jason Sonnenshein and others who are pro-Issue 3.
My point is then that that amendment needs to be something separate and something legislative, that can be altered as time goes on - to the extent that Ohioans want it, via their proxies who are the state legislature.
The "because everyone else is doing it" is too weak. That the money goes over there and then the folks come back here with nothing - well - then - we must offer something, but why must it be gambling?
And the whole education thing? Wrong. Just plain wrong. At least the way it's set out in Issue 3.
As a lawyer, I would expect to be sued for malpractice if I had anything to do with crafting that thing. It is absolutely wretched.
But I do appreciate your thoughtful comment. Whoever you are. :)
Jill, I’m sure you are writing or reading about the blunders with the intent of our state lottery money going towards education. Why do you think that isn’t happening? To hope for a legislative action that doesn’t leave a big pile of money in the hands of politicians just isn’t a reality. I actually like the fact that as a constitutional amendment they can’t mess with it. If we have to count on our politicians to create legislation that will most likely compete with the lottery, hence take away their slush fund, and put something in place that sets Ohio apart from the rest of the country, it’s never going to happen. The one thing I partially agree with you on is the argument against gambling. The world was a different place when you had to go to Las Vegas or Atlantic City. It didn't affect the lives of most Ohio residents. If there was another way to combat this problem, I would support it. Unfortunately, that's just not the reality anymore. Ohioans will gamble. I'm just sick about the fact that our residents take their money to these states and leave it there to hire their residents and pay for their public benefits. As for education, I don't care whose numbers you believe, the proponents $850 million or Taft's $350 million. That's a lot more than we have today! Plus the jobs, plus the economic development money and plus the problem gambling money. Who pays for treating our problem gamblers today? Indiana and West Virginia are creating them, and my state taxes are paying to treat them. Again, if we could build a wall and keep our residents out of their casinos, then this would truly be a gambling argument. This would be an entirely different conversation. Unfortunately, I feel like as a state we are sliding down a steep slope, and we continue to go faster and faster. Maybe this isn't the ideal way to move forward, maybe it is. All I know is that it stops downhill descent. Consider the possibility that it actually might work. Wouldn't it be nice for Ohio to have a progressive college tuition program? For once we would actually be ahead of the curve compared to most other states. I don't know the proposal and exactly how it would be administered to make a truly valid assessment of it. All I'm sure of is that it's better than what we have now.
Thanks for the response. Let me see what I can do with it:
Okay - let's start with the assertion that the GA can't mess with it. Oh yes they can - have you read the amendment language? If the Gaming Integrity Commission isn't formed in six months, guess who gets to do what the commission is supposed to do? Likewise, and I quote (so you're getting a preview of one of my future reasons):
The General Assembly shall pass laws within six months of the effective date of this amendment to facilitate the operation of this amendment.
And - guess what? If the GA doesn't do that, and the Gaming Integrity Commission isn't formed within six months either, do you know who gets to supervise EVERYTHING under this amendment?
THE LOTTERY COMMISSION.
Pretty f'd up to me. And it's in the constitution? I don't THINK so.
Okay - what else?
No - actually - I expect the thing to be blundered all on its own because of how poorly written and conceived it is. I'm not intimately familiar with the Lottery Commission junk except for how school funding has been treated as a zero-sum thing.
If there was another way to combat "this problem" - this problem being...making higher education affordable? Of course there have to be other solutions, Johnny. To posit that this is the last resort is basically to say that Armeggedon is here. I mean, Issue 3 isn't in fact going to make a DENT in getting more kids and more of the kids who need the help into college. Not a statistically significant dent. So then, under what you're saying - this is it. This is the end of line. No more hope for any others every getting to college.
I can't accept that and I don't accept it. (I'm kinda stubborn.)
I do not see how on Earth Issue 3 stops Ohio from sliding down a steep slope. I only see it accelerating the slide for those already sliding and the ones not sliding? They get to make hay - make more hay I guess I should say.
How do you know that it stops downhill descent? Seriously - can you cite some examples?
I would LOVE to be proven wrong - love love love it. Chances are however, that if Issue 3 passes and those facilities get built, I'll be finding more than enough reasons to move elsewhere and will find a way to do just that. (yeah yeah everyone can hold their good riddances for now)
I'm not sure why you are sure that, without having read the amendment, it's better than what we have now. It's now, Johnny. It unequivocably is not. And I look forward to reviewing the amendment in detail in the coming days.
Thanks again for engaging. I do appreciate it.
Jill, No good riddances from me. This is all in the nature of trying to do the right thing as far as I'm concerned, but generates no hard feelings. The steep slope I'm talking about is in reference to the amount of Ohio dollars currently going into Indiana, West Virginia, Michigan and soon to be Pennsylvania. Let's assume you're right, and the unworthy politicians don't put the proper legislation together. So the lottery commission administers the money (is that temporary or permanent?). Wouldn't it be better for Ohio to keep the hundreds of millions of dollars, whether it be for scholarships, or general fund, or whatever, rather than continue to send it into these other states where they are creating jobs and beefing up their budgets. In the past, I have always understood the argument against gambling in Ohio, but at this point that battle is lost. Now we're simply watching others receive benefits at our expense. What pisses me of the most is that the casinos and related companies in the surrounding states have given millions to Taft and the Republican party. Let's add it up. Taft gets their money, he fights to keep gambling out of Ohio, and the casinos in the surrounding states avoid competition. Sounds like a political strategy where everyone is happy. Oh yeah, I forgot about the citizens of Ohio. I guess everyone except the rest of us is happy. Meanwhile we pay for their educations, capital improvements, economic stimulation and support their jobs. I'm tired of it. If we have to wait for the politicians that we clearly can't trust to come up with a solution to this problem, then we all might as well move to a better place. I've had enough. I'm voting yes on Issue 3
Looks to me from the proposed language that the lottery commission could govern the $$ indefinitely. Look for my review of that language in a few days, but Reason #18 has a link to the proposed amendment's full text (and it's not even in a pdf so you can view it right away - the language we're talking about is in the fourth to last paragraph).
Keeping the money in Ohio is a myth, Johnny. SOME of the money will come back to Ohio. But people will continue to go outside. It's absolutely ABSURD to think that all these folks will automatically stop going over the borders once Issue 3 passes. 1) - the casinos and slot parlors will only be in Cleveland. 2) the racetracks w/ slots are only in certain locations. Under no circumstances is a large proportion of the Ohio population covered by the geographic demarkations made by Issue 3.
I disagree with you about the battle being lost. How do you see it as lost? People were taking their money elsewhere in 90 and 96, when the prior ballot issues failed. Why is it any less wrong and any more desirable now? Because we're talking about more money? That's ridiculout - to put a price on when it's okay to accept this kind of otherwise undesirable industry. You can't be a little bit pregnant.
What money has Taft really gotten since 2002 and from whom? What do you mean by the surrounding states have given Taft millions? There's nothing in it for Taft now.
I think you're going all dramatic on me in the last couple of sentences. To say we're paying for all that stuff in other states simply isn't accurate - it's a vast overstatement. I for one would be THRILLED for people who love gambling so much that they want it here to move to other places.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home