Events Calendar
In This Section
Most Read Stories
Akron police investigate teen mob attack on family
Woman, 75, charged with beating fawn to death
Akron woman found dead at Brimfield Township store
Man shot outside his Akron home during robbery attempt
Man shot in back near Akron park
Suspect sought in Portage Path bar robbery
Tragic day puts man on path to be Pinnacle owner
Blogs:
Pets:
Dogs' Bark: Not fair! Study shows pups get jealous
The Heldenfiles:
Who Will Get the Michael Media Treatment Next?
Patrick McManamon:
More on Varejao
Akron Zips:
Opponent outlook: Kent State
Browns Bulletin:
Quick thought on Browns rookies
Tribe Matters:
Wedge challenges relievers
Cleveland Browns:
Stallworth test showed marijuana
Kent State Sports:
Men's Basketball Scheduling update
Cleveland Cavaliers:
Andy’s Signed According to ESPN
All Da King's Men:
Does Medicare Have Lower Administrative Costs ?
Blog of Mass Destruction:
CIA Did Mislead Congress
Akron Law Café:
Breaking Story: CIA Lied to Congress about Secret Program
Varsity Letters:
East basketball update
See Jane Style:
Oh Baby!
Car Chase:
Where do We Go from Here?
Let's Talk Real Estate:
Closings….Not the Good Kind!
Ohio Travels with Betty:
Margy inquires-when is a Taste of Hudson?
Sound Check:
LeVert II live performance Saturday night — "Dedication" album due July 13,
HRLite House:
DDI One of Best Places to Work
Akron Gamer:
First 24 'Guitar Hero 5' songs announced
Looking for a reason to oppose state Issue 6?
Published on Monday, Oct 20, 2008
Weighing in last week was the Buckeye Institute for Public Policy Solutions, a conservative think tank based in Columbus. The institute's report was written by Jeffrey Hooke, a Virginia-based corporate finance consultant who has authored many studies on the economics of gambling.
Hooke's conclusion? Issue 6 amounts to a ''giveaway'' by Ohio taxpayers.
Passage of the amendment would grant a monopoly license to a few wealthy individuals from the Cleveland area and their partner, Lakes Entertainment, a Minnesota-based company that manages Indian casinos. The text of the amendment allows the state to set an initial licensing fee of as much as $15 million, but that amount is fully refundable.
Other states auction gambling licenses, in much the same way the federal government auctions permits for oil exploration. Such a license could be auctioned for $1 billion in cash, Hooke calculated, based on market demographics in the Wilmington area and the experiences of other states.
More, there is absolutely nothing in the amendment to prevent the gambling partnership MyOhioNow from immediately selling the license. No wonder MyOhioNow is willing to spend millions of dollars on television ads. The return would make a payday lender blush.
The other telling point in the Buckeye study is that estimates of casino income, jobs and tax revenue must be viewed in light of a limited amount of disposable income. Sure, some Ohioans going out of state to gamble will be lured back. What happens when residents who don't gamble now choose to spend time and money at the casino?
Hooke drives home the essential point that gambling doesn't create wealth. It just shifts wealth around. Many of the entertainment dollars dropped at the casino will be siphoned from the local economy, bowling alleys, movie houses and restaurants suffering. A decline in state lottery revenue will also result, based on the record in other states.
Vote No Casinos, an alliance concerned with the social effects of gambling, upped the ante last week by previewing its TV ad against Issue 6. The group also has prepared yard signs, campaign literature and a video in which Clinton County governmental, religious and business interests express their opposition.
Sen. George Voinovich, a strong opponent of previous gambling issues, stressed the devastating impact gambling has on families whose resources are drained away, forcing them to turn to social service agencies for help. Voinovich rightly described the $240 million that casino backers estimate will be generated by a 30 percent tax on gross receipts from gambling (an amount in no way guaranteed by the amendment) as little more than ''salt in the soup'' when distributed across 88 counties.
Voinovich asked: ''Why in the world would anyone want to amend the constitution and put a monopoly in . . . ?'' Great question.
Get the full article here.
Comments
Click here to post your comments
