News: Slots issue on ballot, opponents ready to attack

http://www.pointbuzz.com/news.htm?id=1021

Cedar Fair deftly walks both sides of the issue.

I say legalize it and then tax the heck out of it. People in Ohio are gambling anyway and the State doesn't get a dime (lotto not included). They are eitehr travelling somewhere that betting is legal or they are doing it online.

It can be done well. The Seminoles have two Hard Rock Casinos/Resorts here in Florida and the complexes are very nice with restaurants, entertainment and, of course, the casino. Very Disney-esque...but for adults.

Wise up Ohio. People are gambling...and you aren't benefitting at all.

Can't say I disagree with you Chief. I'm not a big gambler, but people are leaving the state to gamble. Why not have it here and let other local businesses leech off of it?

Although I have to laugh, taxing the hell out of it? Isn't that what they do here in Ohio anyways? ;)

~Rob Willi

Near as I can tell, this is slots only, so it's difficult to say whether this will pass or not. What about table games? Unless this is a way to get a foot in the door for full fledged casinos, Ohio will still lose gamblers who prefer table games. At least the smart gamblers who know the odds are better at table games than at slots.

Here's a secret: They don't want the smart gamblers. They want the dumb one's who just pump quarter after quarter into the machine.

But, I do think this would likely be a "first step" toward more significant games.

I don't see what the big issue is if it is "slots only". In Delaware, we have 3 casinos (slots) which all have harness racing, simulcast, and restaurants. Dover Downs has a 5 star hotel, NASCAR track (with 2 races per year) several restaurants and there is not the "crime and evil" that those who are against it state.

,
*** Edited 9/20/2006 1:28:40 PM UTC by Skip Johnson***

I think a slots-only casino would have a harder time keeping residents from traveling to Detroit or Windsor, as opposed to a full-fledged casino. A decent number of "skill" or "educated" gamblers won't play slots at all.

Slots-only is boring, but even in Vegas slots account for some massive percentage of revenue. If it included video machines, it might be a little more interesting.

But the reason that Cedar Fair is against it is pretty obvious... they don't get to have any of the slot machines on their property. I can guarantee they'd be on the other side of the coin if they were able to build something.

Unequivocally.

Their argument of, "we don't want gambling in Ohio but, if gambling is legalized, we want to be a player" rings a bit hollow to me.

But, Disney has used the same tactic on multiple topics. "We don't want a bullet train, but if there is a bullet train we want a stop on our property and NOT on International Drive."

I'm not sure I agree with the argument that we should bring gambling to Ohio because people are doing it anyway and the state isn't making any money, or we should bring it here because people are leaving the state to do it.

Nevada makes money off legal prostitution and people are going to spend money an prostitution anyway, but I don't think we should legalize it so Ohio can make a buck and local businesses can leech off of it.

I know its not the same thing, but I don't think we should legalize something just because people are doing it and someone else is making a buck off it.

There is a heck of a lot more money to be made off gambling than prostitution though (but I do see your point).

Its a touchy line to toe. There is always going to be a group steadfastly opposed to it. However there is an easy solution to that: if you don't like gambling, then don't go in the casino.

However, as gambling has become more prominent and widespread, that "bad element" that has been traditionally associated with gambling and casinos (no doubt because of organized crime's hand in Vegas) never seems to materialize. There is rarely that spike in crime or violence that the naysayers say will destroy the city that builds a casino.

It is an interesting tactic that the "Say No" group is using though. For all they know, a drop in in-state tuition costs (more accurately, more money available to those who need it) could actually spur more than 60% of students to stay in state for school. It will be interesting to see how things like this play out.

As I said in the other thread, the idea that the state will get a windfall from casinos, or that towns will flourish, is a myth. The phrase, "the house always wins" is never more true than it is here.

If your reasoning for supporting this is because you like to gamble and now it'll be closer to home, that's one thing. And I think that is a part of it of why people want it. But don't try to convince me that this is a win-win or that region's economy will improve. It didn't help Detroit, it didn't help Chester, and it won't help Ohio.

I know some opponents want to make it a moral issue, but the strongest argument is common sense (though the gambling industry admits this will create 100,000 new addicts). I listed to Cuyahoga County Commissioner Tim Hagan on WMJI yesterday morning talking about this issue. John Lanigan, the host, asked him why people are against it since it's a such a no-brainer. He responded, "God told them to." They went to rip on religious people for a few minutes before I finally turned it off. And this is a person who helps guide one of the largest counties in Ohio? Really? Not that Tim Hagan has a reputation for being a smart thinker, though he is a great politician. No one can convince me that taking $2 billion out of the economy and getting $700 million back for scholarships is good thing. People who dump that $2 billion into a slot machine won't be spending it elsewhere.

And I can see why Cedar Fair is against it. Not only will they have to compete against that venue, but they can't get into the game themselves. The way the law is written, it's already determined who gets the slots. No bids, no competition. Not hard to guess whose idea that was. And that's fair?

Walt,
Your last reason to me is a better reason to vote no than any other. It should not be written into a law as to who gets to install slot machines.

The moral opposition may have made sense 50 years ago, but not today.

I don't really have a moral opposition. Casino math just doesn't make sense.

Casino math does. The math for this system doesn't.

Sure a lot of money is taken in by a business from citizens, but there are also a lot of taxes generated off that, not to mention the several thousand jobs that are created by a casino (even more with hotel/casino).

However, installing some slots at existing racetracks doesn't create more than a few jobs. So the amount of money put back into the economy by this is minimal compared to what it will (or is expected to) take out.

I don't find gambling to be inherently evil. That in itself will never be a reason to oppose gambling.

I don't like the idea that anyone is predestined to be a casino operator though. That reeks of someone stroking someone else in government.

I kind of like the arrangement in Ontario, where the province owns the casinos, and they contract out the operation of them. Presumably they can bid out operation to someone else at the end of their term.

Even the situation in Detroit isn't terribly bad (despite what Don Barden would have you believe).

The state opened the way for non-Indian casinos, the city decided they would have 3 and then accepted bids. There wasn't anything written into a law as to who could or could not have casinos, its up to the individual cities.

The Ontario situation is probably one of the smartest for a government though. Why let someone else own the casino and just pay taxes when you can have the whole pie? There's more money to be made through ownership than through tax collecting anyway.

This is Ohio, someone is always stroking it Jeff.

I can't agree with Walt more, I always knew he was a sharp one. Anyone who thinks that casinos will directly create "spin-off development" hasn't done any real studing of economic development.

I hate this admendment! And it's not because of some moral issue with gambling. I would say that soft drugs and prostitution should be legalized (for other reasons than my wanting to partake in these activities, which i don't). But back on track. Read the document before you vote. Number one i really dispise this learn and earn idea. If they want to earmark the money for state universities, just distribute it among them all to reduce tuition fees. Better yet use that money to reduce the state income tax. That sounds good for EVERYONE. But i just don't like it for many reasons. None of which are because i don't gamble or think that noone else should.

This thing just won't post my cuts and pasties.

Check out this site: http://www.ohiolearnandearn.com/
learnandearn_amendment.pdf

There you will see that the language allows for the two specified cites in cleveland by description, if not by address (Nautica and Tower City, ie Jacobs and Forrest City). You will also see that the city of cleveland will get eight tens of one percent for economic development, six tenths of one percent just being the host city and 1.5 percent for being the county seat. There are some other funny things in the taxation section worth reading.

Also it states that after the fourth general election a vote could be held to allow full table games at all casinos in the state. Yes it's a foot in the door and they aren't trying very hard to hide it.

*** Edited 9/20/2006 6:03:02 PM UTC by gener***
*** Edited 9/20/2006 6:06:32 PM UTC by gener***
*** Edited 9/20/2006 6:07:10 PM UTC by gener***
*** Edited 9/20/2006 6:08:25 PM UTC by gener***
*** Edited 9/20/2006 6:13:00 PM UTC by gener***

Exactly, Slots will only be local draws at best. Since it sounds like most of them will be going into race tracks, there is already evidence that the current race tracks to nothing to help economic growth around the area. There are no hotels, food, shopping, etc around Northfield Park, and Thistledown sits next to a now half vacant mall. Slots are just going to provide more of the same, people going into dump money (or in my case win money off the pick 3 ;)) at the track and go home.

Actually, slots only could be a draw(as boring as it may be). Just look at Dover Downs on any given weekend..the place is packed and the hotel is crowded. Even during the week, the place is busy. Recently the casino has expanded (again) and is now open 24hours. And the best part..NO SMOKING permitted!! And yet the place is packed. Atlantic City is 1.5 hours away, still there are alot of Jersey plates in the parking lot, along with busses. The Delaware beaches are 1/2 hour from Dover. My point.. with many tourist attractions in the area, all attractions benefit. I must admit, I go to the Casino a couple times a year and I live 1 mile from it. Mostly when I go, I dine and go to the comedy club and the NASCAR races. Cedar Fair should not be worried.

The State Lottery Commission runs the Casinos in Delaware. In the Casinos you can play slots, video games, Horse racing and lottery tickets.

With many states jumping on the bandwagon with allowing Slots only, Ohio should get in before all the surrounding states are allowing it.