November 2009 Newsletter Article
Below is the article appearing in the Good Shepherd newsletter from me this month.
“What Part of NO Don’t They Understand?”
We are just days away from the 2009 elections. In an off-year such as this, turnout is expected to light. But I hope all of you will get out and vote this year. There are some local officials to elect and there are several issues to vote on – none more important than Issue 3, which proposes an amendment to the state constitution that would allow casino gambling.
I generally refrain from advocating one particular side on an issue, though I am certainly free to do so (unlike the issue of endorsing particular candidates, which U.S. law prohibits clergy and churches from doing if they want to maintain their tax-free status). On issues, members of the clergy as individuals and congregations and denominations as a whole are allowed to advocate for or against whatever they like. Normally, I try to help people think through the possibilities and I ask questions designed to help people zero in on what they believe God may be calling them to do. On Issue 3, however, I am taking a different approach. I will be voting “NO” on this issue and I want you to know why.
Let me say up front that I am sensitive to the fact that thousands upon thousands of Ohioans need steady jobs. I am all for using government to support the development and maintenance of such jobs. This issue, among other failings, will not do that.
Here is why I’m voting “NO” on Issue 3:
1. Even if I were positively disposed toward the development of casinos (which I am not), I am stubborn enough to be fed up with various gambling interests coming back over and over and over again – even though the state has repeatedly voted “no” by large margins – to keep asking. What part of “NO” don’t they understand? Go away and leave us alone.
2. Nearly every full-fledged study I’ve read about that has studied the economic impact of casinos has come to the conclusion that they do not add jobs to the local economy. At best, they are job-neutral. What happens most of the time is that entertainment income that has been used on other things gets diverted to the casino, seriously hurting – or putting out of business entirely – the vendors that had been the recipients of the money before. The economic argument for building casinos is a lie.
3. Another thing most studies agree on: It’s the people who can afford it the least who are the ones who lose the most money at casinos. Why would we ask the poorest among us to subsidize the already giant profits these casino companies enjoy?
4. The notion that gambling profits will help fund our state’s education system is also a lie. This is the same argument put forward back when the lottery was started. What happened? Our state legislature at the time diverted the education money in the budget to other areas and replaced it with the lottery proceeds. Yes, the lottery profits when to education, but they added nothing overall. Do we really think it will be different this time? Much better, I think, would be to hold our state legislators accountable to the Ohio Supreme Court which has ruled our state education funding system unconstitutional several times while the legislature did nothing to fix it.
5. This is a constitutional amendment. Think about it. Constitutional amendments are like tattoos – once you add them they are difficult, if not impossible, to change or remove. It can be done, yes, but it’s difficult and sometimes painful. This amendment enshrines one individual and one company as the sole proprietors of casino gambling, locks in profit sharing terms that are just about the most lenient on the casino owners compared to other states, and allows changes to casino gambling in Ohio based on changes that happen in casinos in surrounding states. In fact, it was written by the folks who would profit the most from the amendment. Why on earth would we carve that into the constitution? Good grief! (I have nothing against tattoos, by the way!)
Gambling is one of the few issues that United Methodists – who are often deeply divided on any number of other issues – can agree on. Our 2008 Book of Discipline states:
“Gambling is a menace to society, deadly to the best interests of moral, social, economic, and spiritual life, destructive of good government and good stewardship …. The Church’s prophetic call is to promote standards of justice and advocacy that would make it unnecessary and undesirable to resort to commercial gambling—including public lotteries, casinos, raffles, Internet gambling, gambling with an emerging wireless technology and other games of chance—as a recreation, as an escape, or as a means of producing public revenue or funds for support of charities or government.” (¶ 163.G)
Don’t let the ads fool you – Issue 3 is a bad deal, a bad policy, a bad change to our state constitution, and will fix nothing in our economy or educational system. I hope to see you at the voting booth on November 3!
Peace always,
Dr. Don Wallick
“What Part of NO Don’t They Understand?”
We are just days away from the 2009 elections. In an off-year such as this, turnout is expected to light. But I hope all of you will get out and vote this year. There are some local officials to elect and there are several issues to vote on – none more important than Issue 3, which proposes an amendment to the state constitution that would allow casino gambling.
I generally refrain from advocating one particular side on an issue, though I am certainly free to do so (unlike the issue of endorsing particular candidates, which U.S. law prohibits clergy and churches from doing if they want to maintain their tax-free status). On issues, members of the clergy as individuals and congregations and denominations as a whole are allowed to advocate for or against whatever they like. Normally, I try to help people think through the possibilities and I ask questions designed to help people zero in on what they believe God may be calling them to do. On Issue 3, however, I am taking a different approach. I will be voting “NO” on this issue and I want you to know why.
Let me say up front that I am sensitive to the fact that thousands upon thousands of Ohioans need steady jobs. I am all for using government to support the development and maintenance of such jobs. This issue, among other failings, will not do that.
Here is why I’m voting “NO” on Issue 3:
1. Even if I were positively disposed toward the development of casinos (which I am not), I am stubborn enough to be fed up with various gambling interests coming back over and over and over again – even though the state has repeatedly voted “no” by large margins – to keep asking. What part of “NO” don’t they understand? Go away and leave us alone.
2. Nearly every full-fledged study I’ve read about that has studied the economic impact of casinos has come to the conclusion that they do not add jobs to the local economy. At best, they are job-neutral. What happens most of the time is that entertainment income that has been used on other things gets diverted to the casino, seriously hurting – or putting out of business entirely – the vendors that had been the recipients of the money before. The economic argument for building casinos is a lie.
3. Another thing most studies agree on: It’s the people who can afford it the least who are the ones who lose the most money at casinos. Why would we ask the poorest among us to subsidize the already giant profits these casino companies enjoy?
4. The notion that gambling profits will help fund our state’s education system is also a lie. This is the same argument put forward back when the lottery was started. What happened? Our state legislature at the time diverted the education money in the budget to other areas and replaced it with the lottery proceeds. Yes, the lottery profits when to education, but they added nothing overall. Do we really think it will be different this time? Much better, I think, would be to hold our state legislators accountable to the Ohio Supreme Court which has ruled our state education funding system unconstitutional several times while the legislature did nothing to fix it.
5. This is a constitutional amendment. Think about it. Constitutional amendments are like tattoos – once you add them they are difficult, if not impossible, to change or remove. It can be done, yes, but it’s difficult and sometimes painful. This amendment enshrines one individual and one company as the sole proprietors of casino gambling, locks in profit sharing terms that are just about the most lenient on the casino owners compared to other states, and allows changes to casino gambling in Ohio based on changes that happen in casinos in surrounding states. In fact, it was written by the folks who would profit the most from the amendment. Why on earth would we carve that into the constitution? Good grief! (I have nothing against tattoos, by the way!)
Gambling is one of the few issues that United Methodists – who are often deeply divided on any number of other issues – can agree on. Our 2008 Book of Discipline states:
“Gambling is a menace to society, deadly to the best interests of moral, social, economic, and spiritual life, destructive of good government and good stewardship …. The Church’s prophetic call is to promote standards of justice and advocacy that would make it unnecessary and undesirable to resort to commercial gambling—including public lotteries, casinos, raffles, Internet gambling, gambling with an emerging wireless technology and other games of chance—as a recreation, as an escape, or as a means of producing public revenue or funds for support of charities or government.” (¶ 163.G)
Don’t let the ads fool you – Issue 3 is a bad deal, a bad policy, a bad change to our state constitution, and will fix nothing in our economy or educational system. I hope to see you at the voting booth on November 3!
Peace always,
Dr. Don Wallick
Comments
Thanks for sharing.