Sunday, November 05, 2006

Misleading Statewide Issues

Okay, I am going to make some endorsements on the statewide ballot issues since they aren't Republican and Democratic issues.

ON ISSUE 2: Minimum wage: I support the constitutional amendment to increase the minimum wage and then tied it to inflation. If Members of Congress can get an annual raise for their six-figure salaries and having them automatically adjusted for inflation without wrecking our economy, why shouldn't those working in our service industries? Nobody talks about the economic cost to taxpayers which shows how overstated the arguments are made by the opposition. The attack based on personal information is a red herring.

ON ISSUE 3: Ohio Learn & Earn:If there's been a more dishonest issue campaign in Ohio than this one, I can't recall it. First, there's the allegations that petitioners mislead voters into signing the Ohio Learn & Earn petitions that it was solely about creating college scholarships, and not about legalizing slot machines. Then there was the above-average number of signatures that were invalidated because they were fraudulent. Then, it's been the several month long paid media campaign that talked only about the scholarships, and didn't mention the issue about slot machines until the last few weeks. Now, seeing the popularity of Issue 2 & seeing the opposition to Issue 2 on its own, the campaign is now running ads promoting both issues as if they are both about creating jobs. Hogwash.

First, the campaign has been caught flat out lying about how much money it will exactly generate. Then, it lied about the support (they oppose it) of the Ohio Board of Regents. Now here's what the Issue 3 campaign doesn't tell. Whether you support legalized casino gambling or not, this is about our constitution. And this amendment to our constitution that creates an industry gambling monopoly to a select few. Then, it mandates that a certain percentage of the proceeds from the gambling goes to subsize the purse prize money offered by Ohio's horseracing tracks. So, it's corporate welfare. Third, it mandates that the owners of slot machines get a certain percentage of the proceeds generated from the slot machines, and that the money kept by the race track owners and other slot machine operators get to keep that money FREE FROM STATE TAXATION!!! So you have a state-created monopoly with a mandated corporate welfare provision and a sweetheart tax-exemption for the entire monopology. Got that? It's not about the scholarships or creating jobs. It's about saving the horse racing tracks with a constitutional monopoly, corporate subsidies, and tax-emption enshrined by our Constitution.

ISSUE 4: Smoke Less Ohio The fact that Issue 3 is more intellectually dishonest than Issue 4 is a testament that the Issue 3 campaign is more intellectually dishonest than the tobacco-industry supported Issue 4. Despite it's advertisement, Issue 4 does not feature common sense smoking regulations. It actually takes away the ability for local governments to set limits on public smoking that current exist and allow more smoking than currently accepted. If it and Issue 5 passes, Issue 4 overrides it as it is a constitutional amendment and Issue 5 would enact a statute. Issue 4 is less public health protection and, like Issue 3, enshrines these limits in the state constitution, making repeal more difficult.

ISSUE 5: Smoke-Free Ohio This is the initative supported by the American Cancer Association. 'Nuff said. This initiative doesn't radically change the availability of public smoking, but takes it further. For those who think it doesn't allow smoking in restaurants, it doesn't. It just requires the smoking section to be in separate area where smoke doesn't drift into the non-smoking area and limits how much space can be dedicated to the smoking area.

Vote for Issues 2 & 5, and against Issues 3 & 4.


Jill said...

Nice job, ModEsq.

Rich Leonardi said...

Yes, Modest ... er, Modern Esquire. This changes everything for me.

Mark_McNally said...

Did you read Issue 5? You couldn't have been more wrong. You can't even smoke in almost all patios.

the zoom said...

I listened to a speech from a former congressman where he preached how bad the Republicans are in communicating there message to their base and to the public, and how the public does not know anything about what the republicans got done in the 109th congress. And while he was going on about the issues that the Republicans got done, he was also talking about the "earmarks". He explained to the conservative crowd, that "earmarks are les than one tenth of a percent of the federal budget" witch is a stunning fact that makes me wonder why this is the concern of our time in the conservative community.

As he finished his speech, I walked up to him and told him "Mr. Congressman, I might be wrong but I recall reading an article in the Wall St. Journal, about an official in CO criticizing an earmark that Sen. Allard (R-CO) inserted in a spending bill, saying that it takes away the money the State gets from the federal government." So I asked the Hon. Congressman "Is it true that when a congressman or senator inserts an earmark in a spending bill, he does not raise spending? That he just takes away the liberty from one bureaucrat to decide how to spend the money and decides himself where the money should go?"

The answer was yes.

So if earmarks do not raise spending and it's not more then one tenth of one percent of the budget, why is there so much noise about it?

Because we do not communicate, and nobody amongst us is aware of the facts. We have to start communicating, and shouldn't be afraid that someone will slam us, because if you fight back, you have a chance of winning, and if you don’t fight you don’t even have a chance of winning.

Bingo lady said...

well Im all up for legalizing slot machines but I dont beleive they should be free from state taxation. I would like to think any money I lost in slot machines went onto provide something for the community and not just fill the pockets of the casinos