jump to navigation

Why I am voting NO on Ohio’s Issue 3 and why it matters (to me) October 19, 2009

Posted by makingyourdashcount in ohio, Ohio Legislation, Ohio Politics, politics.
Tags: , , ,
add a comment

This weekend I had the privilege of being in a small audience listening to John Harwood’s (CNBC &NYT) slant on politics in the age of cable news polarization and grass roots movements. In all honesty, it was a bit disheartening as he talked about what it takes to get a legislator to vote for any bill introduced by the other party. As I heard it, even if one party introduced a bill where all of the points stood on the side of the other party, the other party would never vote for it, because it was not theirs. Party Loyalty.

So much for the American public’s desire for collaboration.

It takes acts like 9/11 to bring both sides to agreement across the table. So sad because it tells me that I’ve wasted a lot of time on the letters sent to legislators (although there are a very few, who have some backbone while not running for reelection, seem to break that mold.)

In polling, as I learned in a political science class the day before, people cross party lines when asked about issues although they barely cross when asked about candidates. On issues, people of different political persuasions find common ground. Sounds like a much more promising area to make a difference… state and local issues, because people do not pigeonhole their political identification as readily.

This is particularly visible on the current battle over Issue 3, Gambling in Ohio. Pushed heavily by labor unions in the state on the hope that it will generate jobs, key Ohio politicians (both Democrat and Republican) have stayed out of the discussion. God knows Republicans would never publicly agree with Unions.. and Democrats would never go against.

So here is MY .02 on why I hope that all of you vote no on Issue 3
To me this issue isn’t about jobs or preying on those least affording to gamble false hopes, taxes or the evils of gambling, although if those reasons propel you to vote no, I’m good with it.

I am against Issue 3 because this is our state’s constitution and I have a problem with specifically entitling locations and particular people with ANYTHING, let alone a monopoly business!

To me a constitution is about affording rights and codifying policy. If one wants to codify gambling in the Ohio Constitution, then don’t limit it to particular locations and numbers. The free market system should determine that. Say: Ohio allows the following types of gambling.. yada yada and then let investors dook it out.
Read this issue for yourself to see the following language: (The casino in Cleveland, Ohio will be located on one or more of the following properties: (a) the property situated south of Public Square, east of Superior Avenue, west of
Ontario Street and north of W. Prospect Avenue; (b) the property situated south ofW. Prospect Avenue, east of West 6th Street, north of W. Huron Road and west of Ontario Str«1; (e) approximately 7.91 acres of property located south of W. Huron Road, west of Ontario Street, nonh of Canal Road and lying east of the prolongation of the centerline of the Bridge of West 6th Street; (d) approximately 11.22 acres of property and water lying east of the prolongation of the centerline of the Bridge of West 3rd Street, south of Canal Road, northwest of W. Eagle Road and bounded by, and including a portion of, the Cuyahoga River to the soulh and the southwest; (e) all air rights above the approximately 0.87 acre parcel… etc etc etc… Is THIS what SHOULD be in a Constitution. Think about it.

If you decide you are FOR this Issue, let me know. I have a few business ideas that I, too, would like to have codified. I have two more years of tuition to cover and need that guaranteed income.