Home | Back

OUR VIEW: Slots at racetracks Their advocacy by Strickland shows desperation, merits legislative support

Share_print Print Story    |    Comments    |   

June 23, 2009

Ohio Governor Ted Strickland's push to permit video lottery terminals, or slot machines, at the state's seven racetracks is a desperation ploy to staunch the budget hemorhaging, but it deserves the support of the legislature.

Slots, it is predicted, could bring in more than $700 million to the state. That will not close a budget deficit that some estimate in excess of $3 billion, but it will help and it may prevent the cutting of some measures that would be more harmful to the welfare of the state than the introduction of one more aspect of gambling.

The racetracks should be an inoffensive location for those opposed to gambling. Horse racing and gambling go hand in glove and except for the lottery and keno games, the racetracks have long been the only approved sites for gambling in Ohio.

Slots would be a boon for Ohio's racetracks, nearly all of which profess financial difficulties in today's environment. The mechanism for state control of the activity has long been set up at the tracks so it should be too difficult to impose state control on slots located there.

Tied to the ups and downs of heavy manufacturing, Ohio's economy, experts forecast, will be a laggard when the current recession ends. Like Michigan, Indiana, western Pennyslvania and western New York state, we are heavily dependent on auto related businesses. We all need to diversify and the keys to that are education, a tax structure that encourages the formation of new businesses, an enlightened workforce, policies that nurture the rejuvenation of our aging cities, and policies that are environmentally conscientious and protect our natural assets.

The slots at racetracks can help generate money to support such policies. I

The fact that Governor Strickland is now advocating slots marks a sharp reversal of his thinking, which has been opposed to gambling per se. For him, it amounts to a compromise, the realization that the cuts needed to balance the state's budget are painful and without someo influx of revenue would be more harmful to the people of Ohio than having slots at the racetracks.




Comments
By Posting to this site, you agree to our Terms of Service Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed. Recordpub.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.

Login above or Register to comment.
 8 Total Comments
8.
    Posted by Molly Coddler Exposer June 27, 2009
I am totally baffled!.

7.
    Posted by Mike510 June 23, 2009
I have to disagree with Kent Sheetz on this one.

6.
    Posted by woomum June 23, 2009
Don't miss it!

http://www.recordpub.com/news/article/4592676

5.
    Posted by douglas kirk June 23, 2009
Wow, I have to disagree with tomcollins1 on that one!

4.
    Posted by tomcollins@ June 23, 2009
Ohio missed the tax boat a few years ago, when instead of a large tax on a box of tickets for bars to sell, they gave only churches and clubs the right to sell them. As far as video, why give the same old crowd a new toy, make a real casino and lets get some new money here
AND keep Ohio money from leaving the state

3.
    Posted by lfw40601 June 23, 2009
Wow, I have to agree with Tom on that one!

2.
    Posted by Nanny_Society June 23, 2009
Oh my, what a heap of baloney! "... is a desperation ploy." Yes, desperation. Yes, a ploy (a maneuver in a game or conversation intended to secure an advantage for the speaker). Should we accept the disadvantage?

"Slots, it is predicted, could bring bring in more than $700 million to the state." Notice the two weasel words, "predicted" and "could". Then there is an unsubstantiated number would no period of time stated. Is it a dollar a year for 700 million years?

"The racetracks should be an inoffensive location for those opposed to gambling." This is barely intelligible but I presume it means that the profits should be restricted to those already making the appropriate payoffs.

"Slots would be a boon for Ohio's racetracks, nearly all of which profess financial difficulties..." So the real purpose, to help the racetracks, is revealed along with the fallacy of it being a boon in a tough economy.

"... so it should be TOO DIFFICULT [emphasis added] to impose state control on slots located there." Is this a Freudian slip?

Ohio's economy lags because of its obsolete power structure that tries to hold onto the past or steer the future towards its power base. Ohio can not progress until that changes.

"The slots at racetracks can help generate money..." Oh, two more weasel words, "can help"! Money generators are commonly known as printing presses while wealth generators are commonly know as hard-working citizens, not gamblers. If money generation is what is being considered, why should Ohio not just take up counterfeiting? Less harm would result.

"... marks a sharp reversal of his thinking" No it is a revelation that it was never a matter of principle. Thus, without a strong principle to protect him, he has now become corrupted. It is not a compromise, it is a collapse. He has decided to thwart the intent of the voter who have already said "NO!" four times. After he does this and it doesn't produce, can he say he was wrong? No, he is now harlot for the gambling interests.

Home | Back