Carroll Commencement
Fairborn commencement
Badin graduation
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2009 > October > 18 > Entry
Ellen Belcher: Casino backers way worse than your kids
2009 Elections
This is every mother’s confession:
Once you have kids, there’s a lot in life that you can’t help but see through the prism of that experience.
The temper-prone idiot at work looks a lot like your 2-year-old.
The rude clerk sounds just like your pre-teen.
The bullying boss could pass for the kid who keeps tripping your son at recess.
Your melodramatic best friend sounds a lot like your overwrought 16-year-old daughter.
It’s true; there’s a lot about children and their life cycle that prepares you for dealing with the adult world. (I digress, but I’m totally convinced that women are much more likely to notice this than men. Fellows, now you know our secret.)
All of this brings me — no kidding — to Issue 3, the proposed constitutional amendment that would allow a casino in Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati and Toledo.
For the fifth time in two decades, you’re being asked to allow casino gambling. Four times you have said no. But “the kid” — the gambling industry — will just not give it up.
“He” keeps asking, begging, bribing, whining until you swear you’re going to slap him to sleep.
“Everybody’s doing it,” goes the argument, “Please, please, please.”
Gag me. Been there, heard that stuff for longer than I want to remember.
So enough with the metaphors. Here are the reasons to hold your ground, to not give in, to not be worn down, to not say “yes” because you’re tired of fighting the fight.
Issue 3 was written by the very two outfits that would own the casinos. They decided their own tax rates. They decided who would benefit from the low taxes they’ll pay and in what amount.
They decided what their license fees would be. They decided there would be no competition in the state, even though they are poised to rake in money in perpetuity. For-ever.
Remember, we’re talking about changing the Constitution here. And also keep in mind that the typical slot machine takes in about $100,000 a year. The casinos could have thousands at each site.
I’ll admit it: No matter who wrote the rules, you probably could never get my vote to allow casinos. I’ve been in one exactly twice, two decades apart. Once was in Reno, in 1995. This year I went to one of Pennsylvania’s new “racinos” in Erie.
The picture was the same: Hundreds and hundreds of people, many of them obviously not well-off, sitting around drinking, smoking and losing money hand over fist.
Obviously, people are free to spend their money and time how they want, but there’s something wrong with government wanting people to entertain themselves with discounted drinks and machines that are quite literally “one-armed bandits.”
There’s also something wrong with businesses getting filthy rich off an enterprise because they’re so rich they can stack a public-policy debate in their favor. Issue 3 would require Ohio’s casinos to pay 33 percent of gross revenue in taxes. But Pennsylvania’s rate is 55 percent; Illinois’ is 50 percent; Indiana’s is 35 percent; Michigan’s is 34 percent.
Why should Ohio be demanding such a small cut? Because Ohio isn’t demanding anything. To repeat: the casino developers wrote the proposed amendment for themselves.
The last time you were asked to approve casinos, the pitch was that practically all of Ohio would get scholarships from the proceeds. This time, the argument is that Ohio will be swimming in jobs.
Are we really that gullible? More than half of the projected jobs are construction jobs that will disappear after the casinos are built, and a lot of the others are for blackjack dealers and cocktail waitresses. Now there’s a future for your children.
Casinos also are built to be self-contained. That is, they don’t want gamblers going out to nearby restaurants or visiting other tourist sites or seeing the town. That means casinos will put some other businesses out of business. But that loss of jobs isn’t talked about.
Next month, be the grown-up — again. Say no to Issue 3.
Permalink | Comments (18) | Post your comment | Categories: 2009 endorsements, Columns, Elections, Ellen Belcher, Ohio government, Ohio politics
Comments
By joe
October 18, 2009 9:01 AM | Link to this
Vote no and continue to watch Ohio money flow out of the state. When the Argosy Became the Hollywood I assume the change did not create any jobs. The casinos will not take any jobs out of the area but add to it.Maybe not as many as the opponets think it should but how is their projection any better the the people for this bill. Maybe the DDN is like that adult that thinks everyone else is wrong and only they know what is best for everyone else. They beat down their opponets until they give in. Think about it and vote yes for issue 3
By bobby
October 18, 2009 10:59 AM | Link to this
What metaphor would Ms. Belcher chose for the repetitive levy requests from public agencies that are defeated. Many times, the will of the majority is meaningful only until the next election cycle,when voters are subjected to the levy until passage. Five attempts in twenty years doen’t seem too often, relative to public sector requests.
By Rufus
October 18, 2009 11:03 AM | Link to this
Ellen, I was there with you until you parenthetically slammed dads for being unobservant and kinda clueless with their kids. Why did you do that? And anyone who uses “totally” reminds me of GenY blogger wannabe writer rather than a responsible, respected journalist. The rest of the stuff is good, but I am still voting for Issue 3.
By scoobydo
October 18, 2009 11:07 AM | Link to this
If all this about jobs, why did everyone hate the idea of a casino in Wilmington last time? That could have been jobs in a place that could really have use them. Jobs did not matter then, now that is one of the 2 selling points. In addition, they played the evil gambling card, which is not in play this time either. Why jobs and gambling are a good thing mantra now? Guess the money behind this NEWER version is a lot better and more powerful. Many of the no votes last time now think it is such a great deal. Gambling is still the same; jobs were needed then as much as now, but it is all different somehow this time.
By Tom R
October 18, 2009 12:42 PM | Link to this
You bemoan these jobs as ones that will disappear and others that are nothing to be proud of. Here’s some facts…I have family members in construction that would LOVE one of these disappearing jobs since they have had no work in over 2 years and as far as jobs to be “ashamed” of, I for one would much rather have one of these jobs than collect unemployment.
By Shame on you!
October 18, 2009 4:34 PM | Link to this
Wow - Fellow Ohioans, please do not buy into the outright lies in this editorial. This debacle that they label journalism doesn’t even have the facts right. Hey editors, do me a favor and go Google “American Gaming Association’s State of the States” report. Check the tax rates. You’ll find the proposed tax rate here in Ohio is the fourth highest in the country at 33%. Pennsylvania’s 55% only applies to slots, which cost far less to operate than table games - that’s why the tax rate is so high. Illinois’ tax rate is a GRADUATED rate of 15-50%. Indiana’s is also a GRADUATED rate of 15-55%. And Michigan’s is a fixed 19%. If you can get your tiny brain around the word “graduated” and then do the math, you’ll see that a 33% fixed rate is the FOURTH HIGHEST tax rate in the country and a great deal comparatively for Ohio.
By Shame on you!
October 18, 2009 4:37 PM | Link to this
Who are you to begrudge people of jobs? That’s food on someone’s table! It’s completely elitist to say that because the jobs may be temporary or lower paying than maybe you make that they’re not worthwhile. Shame on you! We’re experiencing double-digit unemployment and you’re going stick your nose up at a venture that could create tens of thousands of jobs?!
By PP
October 18, 2009 4:40 PM | Link to this
This editorial is so full of lies and utter B.S. that it makes me sick to even read it. Have an opinion, sure, but people depend you, as a so-called journalist, to give them the facts. Ironically, a kid could have done better research and fact checking!
By Bob
October 18, 2009 4:44 PM | Link to this
Ellen, why are you and the DDN outright lying? Why do you distort indisputable facts and literally fabricate other statements?
By null
October 18, 2009 5:39 PM | Link to this
Ellen right on.There is nothing good about Issue 3 for Ohio.Should not be a Const. Amendment and the other issues should not be either.Once they become amendments we are stuck with them. Don’t be taken in.
By David Anderson
October 19, 2009 12:40 PM | Link to this
How utterly hypocritical for Cincinnati state lawmakers to argue that since residents are taking taxpayer revenue to neighboring state gambling venues and returning with attendant social costs, they might as well keep both the profits and the problems in-house (AP story, Casinos in Ohio, Oct.18). In support of bringing gambling to Ohio, these so-called representatives of their people are with this argument recommending an increase in domestic violence, embezzlement, insurance fraud, bankruptcy, suicide, foreclosures, evictions, depression, theft, prositution, teen addiction, and decreased school performance - to name a few of the social costs attributable to gambling.
By dlm
October 19, 2009 4:13 PM | Link to this
The big problem with Issue 3 is it will add an amendment to the State Constitution that defines how one business and business owner will be allowed to operate in the state. This is like adding language to a property deed that would only allow one pizza delivery company to make delivers there and would define the tip and delivery fee. If gambling is the solution to Ohio’s economic problems, then work for legislation through the State House that would create an open competitive system. Also let the cities decide if they want a casino, which has the social and infrastructure costs that will need to be met.
By nully
October 19, 2009 6:24 PM | Link to this
Good, clean casinos are not as bad as people make them out to be. My entertainment budget is for them and not for the movies, Schuster or Victoria theaters or the local college sport games which are all expensive or even for some of the better restaurants. Even the lottery is a ripoff. There are ALL classes of people at the casinos. Many jobs besides construction and waitress will be created—managers, chefs, cooks, janitors, parking attendants, tech personnel that repair machines, security, cashiers and numerous others so that people can earn a living. Children are not allowed in casinos except for restaurants. If Issue 3 does not pass, there will be Indiana for me to continue to spend my entertainment money and have a pleasant day while doing it.
By Rob
October 20, 2009 12:10 PM | Link to this
Are you voters fully prepared to cede the land that the casino will sit on to the owner? Because the amendment clearly states that the casino will not be subject to any limiting rule or regulation imposed by the State or the locality. Zoning regs will not apply. And, any game permitted in any surrounding state MUST be allowed in Ohio. Please vote NO and retain state sovereignty.
By todd
October 20, 2009 5:48 PM | Link to this
I love when the opponets say they’re not going to give professional casino jobs to Ohioans…are there any professional casino workers in Ohio? Why would they be here? Wouldn’t they be working in a state that has casinos. The idea is that Ohioans get jobs in the casinos and work they’re way up to the “professional” stature. I think the opponets of 3 are taking a stand based on their so-called “christian morality.” If they were really “christian” they’d know that putting people to work and supporting their family is very “christ like.” Those people who would go to Ohio’s casinos are already going- accross the state line.
By Bill in Centerville
October 20, 2009 8:19 PM | Link to this
Use your brain. Vote no to issue 3.
By Mark
October 21, 2009 4:18 PM | Link to this
Very well said Ellen. What bothers me the most about this issue is that it messes with the Ohio constitution, and the last thing I want is some gamblers messing with the state constitution.
By fortressdayton
October 23, 2009 1:55 PM | Link to this
Ummm… Ellen… are you willing to get rid of the lottery? Oh, sorry..that’s a state MONOPOLY!!! Oh, and while preaching morality, see what religious organizations rake in on Bingo. Last time I checked, the bingo halls were full of people ‘obviously not well-off, drinking, smoking and losing money hand over fist.’ Just wanted to refresh your memory…