-
Login
-
Digital Edition
-
Print Edition
- Most Commented
- Most Commented
- Most Emailed
- Most Emailed
- Popular
- Popular
« News Home
Why oppose state Issue 3? Voinovich counts the ways
TweetBy Harold Gwin
Permitting casinos in Ohio would have ill effects on public policy and families, the Republican said.
YOUNGSTOWN — U.S. Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, isn’t sure allowing gambling casinos in Ohio is a good way to raise money.
And, he’s more than a little concerned about the social and family problems that can accompany gambling.
The senator visited Youngstown Friday to express his opposition to Issue 3, an issue on the November ballot that would amend Ohio’s Constitution to permit the development of four casinos with table games and slot machines in Ohio. The casinos would be in Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus and Toledo.
Voinovich said he opposes Issue 3 on both financial and public-policy grounds.
It’s a “sweetheart” deal for the casino owners, he said, noting they’ll only have to pay $50 million for their casino license (which they could immediately sell at a much higher figure) and a 33 percent tax on gross revenue. Both are too low, he said, pointing out that a license in Indiana for just a slot machine operation is $250 million. In Illinois, it was $400 million for a single casino, he said.
Ohio should handle the casino issue the way Pennsylvania did, put it out to the highest bidder and get the best deal possible for the state. Pennsylvania has a gross revenue tax rate of more than 55 percent, he said.
Even then, Voinovich said he would still oppose casino gambling because of the social ills it could bring.
There is “an enormous downside” to gambling, he said, calling it “a threat to the family.”
Opening casinos exposes a whole new group of people to gambling, and gambling addiction can lead to divorce, embezzlement, bankruptcies and suicides, he warned.
Studies show that someone living within 10 miles of a casino has an 80 percent increase in their chance of becoming addicted to gambling, he said, adding that for every $1 a casino brings in, it creates $3 in social welfare cost.
Voinovich said he doesn’t believe the framers of Ohio’s constitution ever planned for it to be used to create a monopoly, as Issue 3 would do.
Backers of Issue 3 are touting the creation of 34,000 jobs, but that promise is exploiting people who are down and out and looking for work, he said. Looking at casino development in other states shows that not all of those promised jobs ever show up, and most of those that do are relatively low-paying positions. The top jobs pay hourly rates of only $13 or $14, he said.
If people are spending money at the gambling table, what other things are they not spending money on, he asked, suggesting that state sales tax could decline, the arts would suffer and the human cost would be too great.
Supporters of the casino issue say it will keep $1 billion of Ohio money in Ohio, but people are creatures of habit and those traveling to nearby out-of-state casinos aren’t likely to stop those visits, he said.
Casinos don’t draw larger numbers of out-of-state gamblers as backers claim, Voinovich said. Studies show that 80 to 90 percent of a casino’s patrons come from surrounding counties, and they take money from the discretionary budgets of Ohio families, he said.
Allowing casino gambling is just a bad idea, Voinovich said, vowing, “I’ll fight this till the day I die.”
gwin@vindy.com
Comments
I have been a fan of Sen. Voinovich ever since he led the fight against the riverboat casinos.
However, he has it WRONG when it comes to advising to "doing it" like PA. We did NOT auction off our licenses. They were given away at a price that the casinos “could live with.”
The citizens and even elected officials have been held hostage by the gambling interests from the beginning of the PennsylVEGAS casino saga.
Our slots law was pushed through over Fourth of July weekend in 2004 by taking a good 33 line bill on background checks for people who work at the tracks. They crossed all of that out except the title and number, added 144 pages of AMENDMENTS and dumped 14 casinos throughout the Commonwealth. There were NO public hearings, NO public scrutiny, and NO PUBLIC INPUT!
There is much, much more to this nightmare-like real story and it is now a very shameful and ongoing part of our history.
PA is the poster child for all the reasons NOT TO EVER LEGALIZE ANY GAMBLING.
The arrogant, monopolistic gambling interests have become even more demanding. Their current whine is for adding table games. They have also convinced some legislators that letting our taxpayer funded and supported institutions of higher education should be casino colleges.
I believe that you can smell our PA stench all over Ohio. If you are wise, you will not let them get a foothold in your state and you will even fight to rollback legalized gambling.
A "threat to the family?!" The only threat to the family is your antiquated beliefs. Over a billion dollars is currently leaving the state and being spent on gambling. We need that money here. And while you look down at us from your McMansion, there are plenty of folks that need jobs badly.
The licensing fee argument is just silly, in my opinion. I'd much rather the casino groups spend their money on building beautiful, state-of-the-art facilities that are woven into the core of our biggest cities, than a licensing fee that will likely be misused by our incompetent government, as it goes straight into the state's general fund.
And one would think a Senator would understand that the tax rate in Pennsylvania only applies to slots, which the state pays for and requires far less to run than full-service casino games. The proposed rate for table games in PA is 12-21% - Do the math. The 33% tax rate proposed here is the fourth highest in the country. I'm voting yes come November.
Hey George is an expert in sweetheart deals! Remember all the money that the "V" group got from the state for various projects? Voinovich is such a hypocrite.
Really? That's your argument for Issue 3?! Keep the money in Ohio? Give me a break. I'm glad one of our politicians, Voinovich, finally stepped up and took a stand against this ridiculous issue. Issue 3 is short sighted and makes NO sense to put into the Ohio State Constitution. I'm not against gambling. I am however against giving a monopoly to two casino owners and allowing them to set their own tax rate. There's a time and place for gambling and this isn't the way Ohio should go about it. Why can't we do what Pennsylvania did and actually let the best bid win?! What a concept! Pennsylvania's tax rate on Casinos is 55%...why should Ohio get the same rate? You argue that Ohio is throwing away revenue by not "keeping the money in Ohio", I argue that they would still be throwing away money if they do not negotiate the best deal possible in regard to gambling. The local municipalities should have a say in where the Casinos go as well. If Ohio is going to allow gambling we should get the best deal possible...this isn't even close to that.