The Sandusky Register has the story of an investigation being conducted by the Erie County Board of Elections into fraudulent signatures that appeared on Issue 3’s petitions.
Lorain city council ripping a page from the Strickland playbook?
August 27, 2009 — buckeyerinoElyria’s Chronicle-Telegram is reporting that Lorain city council is mulling a way to enable poker tournaments at a Lorain bar/billiard lounge.
“State law only allows government facilities, veterans halls, sporting facilities and fraternal organizations to host gaming festivals for charity. Kennedy’s Billiards could only host such an event if the city leased it for a short period of time. The city would be reimbursed.”
I don’t think charity is the chief motive for the billiard lounge proprietor. As with any business, the chief motive would be to profit from this “charitable” activity. I don’t mind businesses making profits, as long as everything is above-board, but snaking through dubious legal loopholes doesn’t pass the smell test with me.
Ted Strickland, as governor of Ohio, though, has opened the Pandora’s Box, however, with his reversal on gambling expansion and his making a mockery of the Ohio Constitution with his VLT slots/lottery/racetrack scheme. We can expect more of this erosion of Ohio’s statutes as Strickland continues down his current path. As Ohio’s chief executive officer, he should be foremost in upholding the law, but, instead, he’s leading the charge to subvert the law.
Gambling: Plundering of other people’s wealth causes economic contraction
August 13, 2009 — buckeyerinoNOTE: This entry has been cross-posted at Kyle Sisk’s blog, www.kylesisk.typepad.com. You’ll also find his blog listed in my blogroll sidebar under the State of Ohio Blogger Alliance heading. This is not my first post about how gambling hurts the economy, as I’ve written about the lost opportunity cost and diminished multiplier effect during last year’s Issue 6 campaign. I’ve previously posted 4 other blog entries about this year’s casino ballot issue, which you can read by clicking here, here, here, and here.
The casino backers who seek an amendment to the Ohio Constitution to let out-of-state entities operate 4 casinos on Ohio soil have chosen to call themselves “Ohio Jobs and Growth Plan.” From the name of it, you’d think it was an advocacy group that would lobby state government with a comprehensive plan for bringing jobs to Ohio and lowering our unemployment rate. But if you think that, you’d be wrong. “Ohio Jobs and Growth Plan” exists solely for the purpose of introducing casino gambling, nothing else. The only connection between “Ohio Jobs and Growth Plan” and real Ohio jobs is that the casinos plan to hire a few individuals if the constitution is amended. They don’t plan to hire 34,000 employees, however, no matter how much they repeat that ridiculously bloated figure. I don’t think they even plan to hire one-tenth of that amount for 4 casinos.
Do casinos grow an economy and grow jobs? Think about it. Then think about these questions:
Does piracy grow the economy and jobs in Somalia?
Thinking? Ready for the next question?
Do internet scams grow the economy and jobs in Nigeria?
Ready for the next question?
Do intellectual property thieves (who infringe on copyrights, trademarks, and patents) grow the economy and jobs in China?
What do casinos, Somali pirates, Nigerian internet scammers, and Chinese intellectual property thieves have in common?
Let’s answer the last question first. What these entities have in common is that they create nothing. They produce nothing. Any wealth these entities have was plundered from someone else. The Somali pirates seize aquatic vessels by force. Nigerian internet scammers acquire funds through trickery and deceit. Chinese intellectual property thieves copy work done by others, and sell the knock-offs. Casinos have their own bag of dirty tricks for plundering gamblers, but they are not unlike Nigerian internet scammers.
So, does piracy create jobs and economic growth for Somalia? Yes. Somalia is a failed state that has no education system, thus Somalis are not equipped to produce anything of value to trade in the global marketplace. Therefore, they confiscate the property of those who did produce something of value, ransom it, and the proceeds can provide an influx of wealth to Somalia that wouldn’t be realized otherwise.
But what does Somali piracy do to the global economy? It introduces inefficiencies into the global marketplace. Costs rise as ransoms are paid, as security is beefed up, as time is lost, as vessels, cargo, and crew are forfeited. If the higher costs make the producer’s enterprise unprofitable, they shut down. If the producer doesn’t wish to increase investment to cover the higher costs, they drop out of the marketplace. Inefficiencies cause the economy to contract. Commerce shrinks. Jobs are lost.
About one-fifth of Nigeria’s economy comes from scamming. Yes, there is a boost to Nigeria’s economy, but what does it do to the global economy? Like Somali piracy, it causes it to shrink.
Chinese intellectual property pirates? Companies that actually do the creating of products have to compete against the knockoffs. Some can’t. Companies that continue to compete against the knockoffs have higher costs as they sue in court for infringement, or they tighten security against industrial espionage, or they add features to the product to make it easy to detect the counterfeits. Some people in China make money off these knockoffs, but globally, knockoffs kill jobs, which is why the U.S.A. and its investors have lobbied China hard to go after these intellectual property pirates.
Somali pirates are not enriched from plundering Somali sources of wealth.
Nigerian scammers are not enriched by plundering Nigerian sources of wealth.
Chinese intellectual property pirates are not enriched by plundering Chinese sources of wealth.
That’s why the economy shrinkage they cause is compartmentalized so that it isn’t experienced domestically.
Casinos, however, plunder victims in close proximity. Nevada, with the most casinos in the USA, has a higher unemployment rate than Ohio. It has a higher home foreclosure rate, too. In fact, Nevada leads the nation in foreclosures.
Of course, sub-prime mortgage scams played a huge role in the rising foreclosure rate and the rising unemployment rate. The difference between sub-prime mortgage scammers and casino operators is that the sub-prime mortgage scammers produce a paper trail that shows us exactly how the wealth they plundered has evaporated. The casinos don’t produce such a paper trail. They are much less transparent. Casinos are every bit as much of a scam, plundering wealth that they didn’t create, and making our economy less efficient, thereby causing economic shrinkage.
So the jobs that casinos create come at the expense of jobs lost elsewhere in the economy. Thus, the moniker of “Ohio Jobs and Growth Plan” is an attempt to deceive. The 34,000 jobs? That’s an attempt to deceive, too. Nigerian internet scammers like to lure victims with numbers so big, like, “We have identified you as the next of kin to inherit $20,000,000,” in order to coax people into divulging bank account information. The rule of thumb? Invent a number so big that it causes you to take a risk. All of the numbers provided by “Ohio Jobs and Growth Plan” follow this rule of thumb, and they parade those numbers every chance they get. Even Donald Trump, gambling tycoon, admits to using this trick in his personal life, as he’s admitted to exaggerating his net wealth to obtain a myriad of objectives.
Overall, the economy of Nevada suffers because of gambling. Overall, the economy of Detroit suffers because of gambling. Overall, the economy of West Virginia suffers because of gambling. I could go on and on. The opulence of the casinos are meant to deceive you into thinking that wealth is being created, when it’s really just being plundered.
Casino rebuttal and counter-rebuttal
August 5, 2009 — buckeyerinoToday I received an e-mail from Justin Higgins, a former blog author of Right on the Right, which can be found in my blogroll sidebar under the heading of State of Ohio Blogger Alliance. Mr.Higgins is also a contributor to Shots on the House. Mr. Higgins is involved in internet outreach for the casino proponents, who call themselves “Ohio Jobs and Growth Plan” (a misnomer if I ever heard one, over-the-top propagandistic, but that’s a topic for a blog entry for some other day).
The State of Ohio Blogger Alliance is comprised of blogs that consider themselves politically right-of-center. Buckeye RINO, this very blog, is also part of the State of Ohio Blogger Alliance. As you can tell already, from the intro to this blog entry, there are differing opinions within the Alliance, and gambling is one of the issues that the SOB Alliance is divided on. Most of those within the Alliance who favor casinos describe themselves as somewhat Libertarian in their social views. The others on the right who favor casinos are more moderate. I think there are valid reasons why, even from a Libertarian viewpoint, Ohio’s casino issues don’t pass muster (here’s an example from last year’s Issue 6). As one can read in my right-hand sidebar, I’m neither Libertarian nor moderate. I consider myself to be a conservative Republican, even though a few people label me as a RINO (don’t be fooled by this graph). At any rate, I’ve been catching flak from some on my own side of the aisle for my opposition to gambling. They don’t usually leave comments here on the blog, for all to see. They usually just let me know of their disapproval through e-mail. Mr. Higgins, though, intended this email to be part of the public discourse, so here it is:
_______________________________________
From: Justin Higgins <jhiggins@ohiojobsandgrowth.org>
To: williamsonworks@yahoo.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2009 10:35:23 AM
Subject: Touching Base from the Ohio Jobs & Growth Plan
Daniel,
I contacted you back in the spring and since then you’ve spoken to a couple folks from the Jobs & Growth Plan, including our spokesman. I just wanted to let you know that I’m going to be talking to bloggers and providing information from now until November and I’m available as a resource for information. We’re glad you’re writing about the issue and I wanted to contact you to provide some facts and thoughts that might answer some questions and stand contrary to a few of your arguments.
1) First, in response to the notion that this is another deal that only benefits out-of-state gambling operators: Dan Gilbert employs Ohioans, contributes immensely to the Cleveland area, and has contributed immensely to Ohio’s economy. He employs over 2,000 Ohioans through a Quicken Loans web center in downtown Cleveland, a Fathead distribution center in Columbus, and his other Ohio ventures. He is a significant investor in the state.
2) Also, in a similar manner, you wrote about the Monte Carlo scenario being different because outside money was flowing into Monaco. I think the missing piece of the puzzle that makes our proposal beneficial is that Indiana, Michigan, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, New York, and even Canada are Ohio’s “Monte Carlo’s”. They are the ones siphoning wealth and prospering while Ohio refuses to fight for the market share that is already being spent out of state and will be spent whether Ohio has casinos or not. It is estimated through the Ohio Jobs & Growth Plan that $1 billion in Ohio gambling dollars that are currently leaving the state will be repatriated.
3) Also on the issue of “money leaving Ohio”, it’s not just about the management and companies owning the casino, but it is about the jobs and peripheral benefit the casinos will have on area businesses such as hotels and restaurants. The amendment requires the facilities to be $250 million investments at the minimum, so they will be first-class establishments.
4) In response to your final argument about a free market for gambling in Ohio, it is a frustrating case of reality setting in. As Bob said, it is “impractical” to have 50 casinos operating in Ohio right now, not only from the business perspective but from the political perspective.
I am sure you will cover this issue more going forward, and I am available to answer your questions or provide you information by phone or e-mail.
Justin Higgins
The Ohio Jobs & Growth Plan
Jhiggins@ohiojobsandgrowth.org
614-563-5730
___________________________________________
I do have to concede one point to Mr. Higgins. I thought I’d included all prior correspondence with Ohio Jobs and Growth in this post. I took a look through my email inbox and found I’d overlooked a prior message from Mr. Higgins. Here it is:
From: Justin Higgins <Jhiggins@ohiojobsandgrowth.org>
To: Daniel Williamson <williamsonworks@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 6:56:08 AM
Subject: Introduction to Ohio Jobs & Growth PlanDaniel,
First off, I want to introduce myself. My name is Justin Higgins and like you, I’m a blogger in Ohio. Recently however I’ve taken on a new role and I’m doing some internet outreach for the Ohio Jobs & Growth plan. I am not a spokesman, I’m just here to get you guys (good bloggers) in touch with folks and give you info on our proposal. Feel free to ask me any questions but treat anything I send as off-the-record unless noted otherwise (or unless a link to a story or official statement). Basically, I wanted to share some info about the plan. This plan will bring in 4 casinos and create roughly 20,000 jobs. It will generate the state over $650 million in tax revenues every year. I recall you writing that Ohioans oppose gambling, and while that’s true in the past, new polling data shows a shift. I’d direct you to the Vindicator for this- http://www.vindy.com/news/2009/may/09/ohio-poll-60-favor-casino-gambling/?newswatch
/A total of 60 percent of respondents said they favored making casino-style gambling legal in Ohio. /
/That result is comparable to past Ohio Polls but does not mean voters will back specific casino issues on the ballot, said Eric Rademacher, co-director of the institute./
/According to a release, “While the Ohio Poll has found in the past that a majority of Ohio adults approve of casino gambling in major cities near their home, the poll has also found election day voters unwilling to approve ballot issues that would lead to the legalization of gambling in the state. This has been reflected in election day outcomes over the past decade.”/
We believe a considerable amount of opposition to past proposals has more to do with the strength of those proposals. We believe this plan is the right plan at the right time for Ohio. Feel free to contact me with any questions or requests.
— Justin Higgins
Online Communications Specialist
Ohio Jobs & Growth Plan
Jhiggins@ohiojobsandgrowth.org
330-501-4466
___________________________________________________
OK. I’m finished with concessions. Now, onto my counterpoints to Mr. Higgins rebuttal.
To Mr. Higgins point number one: There are many, many people who invest in Ohio, who employ people in Ohio, and who, themselves are Ohioans. Mr. Gilbert is not an Ohioan, but he would get special rights under this proposed constitutional amendment that resident Ohio investors/employers would not be granted.
To Mr. Higgins point number two: As for the casinos that exist in neighboring states, they cannibalize the assets of the populations of their own states more than they do Ohio’s. This differs from Monte Carlo, because that casino was off-limits to Monaco’s citizenry. Monaco was only gaining money from the casino. They weren’t simultaneously losing money to the casino. So there was an economic net gain from Monte Carlo. The surrounding states don’t receive a net gain, and this post during last year’s issue 6 campaign explains some of the reasons why, from a microeconomics point of view (and I’ll be building on that theme in the near future). I can’t help that those other states have casinos, as I’ve not been registered to vote in those states. I CAN, however, strive to make a difference in Ohio, so that we don’t make the same mistakes that surrounding states have made (and casinos are mistakes, in my book).
To Mr. Higgins point number three: Ohio gets the table scraps, while the out-of-state casino owners/operators pump their profits out of Ohio. Ohioans might as well continue gambling at the out-of-state casinos. Opening the casinos here only increases the cannibalization of Ohio’s population while sending the profits out to some of the exact same entities that own the out-of-state casinos. If Ohio were to approve casinos, I’d rather that the casino owners making the profits were Ohioans, and if Dan Gilbert wants to get in on the action, he can work as a peon blackjack dealer and earn a fraction of those table scraps. How’s that for turning your idea on it’s head?
To Mr. Higgins point number 4: Thanks for pointing out that libertarians, who champion free enterprise, should not support the casino industry, where much marketplace intervention is required to keep the industry artificially sustained. Also, thanks for pointing out that there are business realities and political realities, for casinos aren’t the utopias they are made out to be. Among the political realities are the fact that we rely on government officials to be the gatekeepers of casino gambling, and that, since Ohio has had a recent history of corruption in government, politicians can’t be trusted as gatekeepers. The pro-gambling lobby provides great temptations for ethically-challenged government officials. Libertarians clamour for transparency and accountability. Conversely, the gambling industry corrodes both transparency and accountability. I’ll have much more to say about all of these points in the near future.
Compare with Monte Carlo . . .
July 31, 2009 — buckeyerinoIn November, Ohioans will be asked if they wish to amend the Ohio Constitution to allow 4 casinos, owned and operated by out-of-state entities, to do business on Ohio soil.
As one can determine upon reading my correspondence with spokespersons for the casino proponents, the major thrust of their marketing efforts is to portray casinos as an economic booster. I will have much to say about this portrayal beyond what is contained in this blog entry, so stay tuned . . .
Last year, in the days preceding the vote on another casino issue, Issue 6, I made a fuss over who gets the privilege of owning and operating a casino in at least a couple of posts (like this one, and this one). With this latest casino proposal, I’ve already made this same fuss over special Constitutional rights to own and operate a casino granted to out-of-state tycoons that won’t be extended to the 11 million residents of Ohio.
Why is it that I concern myself so much with the right to own a casino and not so much with the right to gamble at a casino? One obvious reason would be that adults already have the mobility to get to a casino, and if they can get there, they have the right to gamble there. Therefore, the rights to gamble are not, in reality, curtailed. However, the rights to own and operate a casino are very much curtailed. If a casino happens to be publicly traded (and not all of them are) the average person might be able to own a few shares of stock, but a controlling interest in the corporation would clearly be out of reach. Meanwhile, the average person, if they felt entrepreneurial enough, might manage to open a restaurant, a fitness center, a retail shop, a trucking service, a dry cleaners, a laundromat, an automotive repair shop, a mortgage brokerage, a realty, a manufacturing facility, a marina, a hotel, a software company, and so on and so forth . . . except a casino.
The clear economic advantage of having a casino in your city would accrue to the casino’s owners, not the casino’s gamblers . . . and since the casino’s owners aren’t even from your city, or even your state . . .
So, can you name an example of a casino that actually boosted an economy? How about the famous Monte Carlo casino in the Mediterranean principality of Monaco?
OK, let’s look into the history of the Monte Carlo casino. We can then compare it with what’s being proposed now.
The land area of Monaco amounts to less than a square mile. It has a population of between 30 and 35 thousand people. It lies on the shores of the Mediterranean, and beyond its land boundaries lies the nation of France.
The terrain of Monaco is sharply sloping, and it’s soil is relatively rocky. Nevertheless, through much of Monaco’s early history, much of it’s economic lifeblood came from agriculture. Lemons, oranges, olives, and grapes were cultivated in Monaco, once upon a time.
There was a sudden drastic change that left Monaco bereft of its agriculture. Suddenly, Monaco was the poorest state in Europe. What happened?
Monaco’s territory used to be bigger. The Grimaldi dynasty that ruled Monaco imposed high taxes. Grumblings over taxes led to a separatist movement. The royal family didn’t have the power to hold Monaco together intact, especially with the behemoth of France breathing down its neck. So, in order to remain a family of privilege with at least a tiny parcel of territory to rule, the Prince of Monaco arranged a treaty with France that recognized the Grimaldi family’s self-rule over the tiny parcel of land that constitutes present-day Monaco, but the Grimaldi family was forced to relinquish claims on the agricultural lands inhabited by the separatists. In the year 1861, Monaco lost 90% of its territory, including all of its arable land.
What’s a Prince to do? If the Prince allows Monaco to wallow in poverty, all its remaining residents will also revolt, and there will be no territory or people left to rule over.
In 1863, the first phase of the Monte Carlo casino was built. Prince Charles III had been to a luxurious combo spa and gambling resort in Germany, and decided to give it a try in Monaco. His resort would cater to the very wealthy, and he’d use the balmy Mediterranean seaside climate as an additional marketing tool to attract the upper crust.
The Prince knew that the casino would fail to enrich Monaco if its residents gambled there. Therefore, from its inception, the Monte Carlo casino was off-limits to Monaco’s citizens, including the royal family, itself. Monaco’s citizens were not even to enter the casino. To make sure that the casino was catering to an upscale clientele, guests had to dress up in order to gain entry. No shorts or blue jeans or t-shirts. Tuxedos and evening gowns, however, were quite acceptable attire.
In less than a decade, Monaco’s income tax was scrapped. The royal family had managed to solidify its rule within its principality.
But that’s not the end of the story . . .
During the Great Depression, revenues at the casino dropped substantially. The royal family realized they had to diversify Monaco’s economy. From that time to this, Monaco has been working toward minimizing its dependence on casino revenue. Nowadays, there’s competition from casinos in France, so there’s even more reason to diversify the economy. When casino revenues fell, instead of pouring larger investments into casino expansion, the Grimaldi family invested in other diverse ventures. The tourism industry is the largest economic sector of Monaco, even today, constituting roughly 50% of GDP. The casino’s share of today’s economy? Less than 5%. The famous casino, while it endures, is not an economic necessity for Monaco. The economy of Monaco today could survive quite well without it. Many of the biggest investments the Grimaldi family made weren’t even in the tourism sector of the economy. A chunk of land was filled in and reclaimed from the sea, and light, non-polluting, industry was attracted to the new stretch of land by the siren call of low taxes.
At one point, Monaco had to modify its stance on taxes. The neighboring behemoth of France noticed too much of its tax revenue was being drained by wealthy people taking up residence and setting up business in tiny little Monaco. Therefore, French citizens must reside in Monaco for at least 5 years before they become exempt from French taxes. With its scarce land, Monaco is a pricey location when it comes to renting an apartment, but, depending on a person’s tax bracket elsewhere, moving to Monaco could make your net income grow by 50%. Wouldn’t that be worth something to you? As a result, only 16% of Monaco’s population is comprised of native citizens. The rest have been lured there from elsewhere, and they have a very high standard of living. The Grimaldi family doesn’t have to worry about separatist movements any more. Wouldn’t it be nice if Ohio aspired to be a tax haven?
OK, so let’s compare the Ohio casino proposals with the Monte Carlo model. The royal family of Monaco has a controlling interest in the casino, and they, in fact, reside in Monaco. Ohio’s casino moguls would not be based in Ohio. Monaco’s citizens have not been permitted to gamble at Monte Carlo. Ohio’s citizens would be be incessantly entreated to gamble at the casinos. Monte Carlo’s marketing targeted only wealthy clientele. Casinos in the USA, including the current casino proponents, have no such qualms over who they entice to gamble. Monte Carlo pumps money into Monaco from elsewhere. Ohio casinos would pump money in the outward direction. During an economic downturn, Monaco did not ramp up its investment in casino expansion to shore up lagging revenues, while the casino tycoons seeking entry into Ohio are doing exactly the opposite. Instead, Monaco sought to diversify it’s economy, while Ohio is seeking to put all its eggs in one basket: gambling. Monaco realized that a casino is not an economic cure-all, but Ohio hasn’t caught on to that yet. Monaco learned that high taxation will only cause power to slip through your fingers, and that low taxes can spur economic growth and diversification. Ohio’s government? They don’t seem to know squat about that.
To sum it all up, Monte Carlo was an economic boost for Monaco in the short run when they were in dire straits, but the proposal in front of Ohio voters is not at all like the Monte Carlo model. The Ohio proposal, as structured, cannot possibly duplicate the results that Monte Carlo achieved. In the end, the real lesson that Monaco learned was that tax policy is among the fundamental building blocks to obtaining and maintaining economic and political power.
Town Hall meetings with State Rep Terry Boose
July 29, 2009 — buckeyerinoMark your calendars! Willard–August 18. Amherst–August 19. New London–August 25. LaGrange–August 26. Grafton–September 3. State Rep Terry Boose (R-58) will be conducting town hall meetings in these communities on these dates.
Plan to attend! There needs to be dialogue between voters and elected officials, and this is a prime opportunity. Boose’s 58th District includes much of southern and western Lorain County, all of Huron County, and the eastern portion of Seneca County. I hope these town halls are well attended, because Ohio is facing a very rough road ahead. Voters, we can’t afford to stick our heads in the sand and wait till trouble is over. Government is supposed to be of the people, by the people, and for the people, so I’m hoping that you’ll show up and participate. Even if you live in Koziura’s 56th district, or Lundy’s 57th district, if you have concerns about the state of Ohio (and you should), you may want to take advantage of these opportunities to meet a state legislator, Terry Boose, face to face.
Ohio’s biennial budget is not done. Sure, the General Assembly passed a budget, and the Governor signed it into law, but that budget relied heavily on revenue forecasts that cannot be relied upon. There will have to be more budget slashing, you can count on it. Which programs should get the ax? Which programs should be spared the ax? What do you think are the state’s funding priorities? Terry Boose has shared a few thoughts, in writing, about what should have been done with the state budget. I recommend reading through it, and showing up at these town halls prepared to grapple with these issues.
WILLARD–August 18, 2009
The Town Hall meeting will be at the Willard City Hall in the Council Chambers from 7:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. The City Hall is located at 651 S. Myrtle Ave. Willard, OH 44890.
AMHERST–August 19, 2009
The Town Hall meeting will be at the Trinity Evangelical Free Church from 7:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. The Church is located at 46485 Middle Ridge Road Amherst, OH 44001.
NEW LONDON–August 25, 2009
The Town Hall meeting will be at the New London Public Library from 6:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. The library is located at 67 S. Main St., New London, OH 44851.
LA GRANGE–August 26, 2009
The Town Hall meeting will be at the Village of LaGrange Administration Building from 6:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. The building is located at 355 South Center Street, LaGrange, Ohio 44050.
GRAFTON–September 3, 2009
The Town Hall meeting will be at the Grafton Midview Public Library from 6:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. The building is located at 983 Main St. Grafton, OH 44044.
Casino operators: Special rights for special people
July 29, 2009 — buckeyerinoThere are so many illuminating tidbits of information to cull from my correspondence with the backers of the casino issue. Thus, this will not be the only blog entry written about what’s revealed in that correspondence, so stay tuned . . .
If voters were to approve this casino issue in the November election, casinos would be legal in Ohio by an amendment of the Ohio Constitution.
So, are you, Ohio residents, ready to open up your casinos? Oops! Wait a minute. Who do you think you are? Dan Gilbert? If you aren’t Dan Gilbert, and you open a casino, you will be raided by the police, your gambling equipment and revenues will be confiscated, you will be thrown in jail, and you will be charged with a crime and prosecuted. PERIOD! But if you ARE Dan Gilbert . . . CHA-CHING!
Think that’s unfair? Think it’s so unfair that it should be unconstitutional? Guess again . . . it’ll be TOTALLY constitutional, because we will have amended Ohio’s constitution to make casino operation permissable for Dan Gilbert, and out-of-state casino operators (like Penn National Gaming Inc.), but IMPERMISSABLE for other Ohio residents. Isn’t it interesting that an out of state casino corporation will be granted more constitutional rights by Ohio than Ohioans, themselves, will be granted?
And just who is Dan Gilbert, anyway? He’s the loan-shark-in-chief of Quicken Loans. He’s the special Ohioan who gets to own and operate a casino in Cleveland. OOOPS! Did I say Ohioan? Duh! I meant to say Wolverine (or, at least Spartan, as he’s a Michigan State alum)! His hometown is Livonia, Michigan! My oh my! Do ANY Ohioans, any at all, get a crack at opening an Ohio casino if we approve this amendment to our state’s constitution?
So, all this agitating over neighboring states having casinos, but not Ohio, would result in allowing the entities from the neighboring states to be the ones to operate Ohio’s casinos. So, after the taxes are paid by the casinos, where will the casino profits go that the casino owners get to keep? Outside of Ohio? WAIT A MINUTE! I thought that the whole idea behind voting for this constitutional amendment was to KEEP THE GAMBLING MONEY INSIDE OHIO!!!!! BUT IT WON”T BE THAT WAY AT ALL!! MONEY THAT COMES FROM INSIDE OHIO WILL STILL BE PUMPED OUTSIDE OHIO!!!! The people who will be enriched by casinos will be non-Ohioans, and the people who will be impoverished by casinos will be Ohioans. Sound like a wonderful state constitutional amendment to you?
And why won’t Ohioans be allowed to open casinos? That’s the question I asked to the spokespersons of the casino proponents. It’s because it’s “impractical.” Our economy can’t sustain a free marketplace filled with casinos (and THAT’S A WHOLE OTHER ISSUE TO EXPLORE IN FUTURE BLOG ENTRIES!). Expect any expansion beyond the original four casinos to be jealously fought over if they would allow new casino ownership groups to compete with the original mix of casino owners.
E-mail correspondence with casino issue spokesmen
July 28, 2009 — buckeyerinoFrom: David Kormanik <dkormanik@ohiojobsandgrowth.org>
To: williamsonworks@yahoo.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 1:36:54 PM
Subject: Hello from the Ohio Jobs & Growth PlanDaniel,
Hello, my name is David Kormanik and I represent the Ohio Jobs & Growth Plan.
Over the coming weeks and months, I will keep you informed on our activities and make sure you have the latest information on our plan to bring four first-class casinos to Ohio —one in Cleveland , Columbus , Cincinnati , and Toledo .
In the meantime, feel free to follow us on Facebook and Twitter for the latest news, endorsements and campaign updates.
Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions you have!
Thanks,
David Kormanik
Ohio Jobs & Growth Plan
614-370-2363
__________________________________________________________
From: Daniel Williamson [mailto:williamsonworks@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 5:14 PM
To: David Kormanik
Subject: Re: Hello from the Ohio Jobs & Growth PlanQuestion: If the casino proposal represents a plan for Ohio ‘s jobs and growth, why just cherry pick 4 locations?
Question: If America is, by its nature, is intended to be a land of opportunity and free enterprise, and if Ohio voters favor legalization of casinos, why limit competition by creating a casino cartel, as your proposal intends, instead of allowing anyone to open up, own, and operate casinos wherever the zoning of Ohio’s communities permit them?
–Daniel Williamson
__________________________________________________
From: David Kormanik <dkormanik@ohiojobsandgrowth.org>
To: Daniel Williamson <williamsonworks@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 11:36:32 AM
Subject: RE: Hello from the Ohio Jobs & Growth PlanDaniel,
Please contact our spokesperson, Bob Tenenbaum (news@ohiojobsandgrowth.org). He will be able to answer the questions below, as well as address any other concerns you may have.
I have also attached a document containing information on our proposal.
Thanks,
David Kormanik
Ohio Jobs & Growth Plan
614-370-2363
_________________________________________________________
From: Daniel Williamson <williamsonworks@yahoo.com>
To: news@ohiojobsandgrowth.org
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 1:25:31 PM
Subject: Fw: Hello from the Ohio Jobs & Growth PlanQuestion: If the casino proposal represents a plan for Ohio ‘s jobs and growth, why just cherry pick 4 locations?
Question: If America is, by its nature, intended to be a land of opportunity and free enterprise, and if Ohio voters favor legalization of casinos, why limit competition by creating a casino cartel, as your proposal intends, instead of allowing anyone to open up, own, and operate casinos wherever the zoning of Ohio’s communities permit them?
–Daniel Williamson
______________________________________________________
From: Daniel Williamson [williamsonworks@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 3:49 PM
To: news@ohiojobsandgrowth.org
Subject: Re: Hello from the Ohio Jobs & Growth PlanQuestion: Didn’t you pledge to answer questions?
–Daniel Jack Williamson
______________________________________________________
From: ” Tenenbaum, Bob ” <BTenenbaum@themilenthalgroup.com>
To: Daniel Williamson <williamsonworks@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 12:50:24 PM
Subject: RE: Hello from the Ohio Jobs & Growth PlanIs this for a publication, or are these just personal questions? (We will answer either way, I’m just curious.)
______________________________________________________
From: Daniel Williamson [williamsonworks@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 4:09 PM
To: Tenenbaum, Bob
Subject: Re: Hello from the Ohio Jobs & Growth PlanI definitely intend to blog about the casino issue multiple times this year. I’m surprised that you have a two-track answering system, one for on the record, and one for off the record.
Consider this “on the record.”
–Daniel Jack Williamson
From: ” Tenenbaum, Bob ” <BTenenbaum@themilenthalgroup.com>
To: Daniel Williamson <williamsonworks@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 1:13:02 PM
Subject: RE: Hello from the Ohio Jobs & Growth PlanWe don’t ever answer “off the record,” and there is no two-track system. As I said, I was just personally interested.
_______________________________________________
From: Daniel Williamson [williamsonworks@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 4:31 PM
To: Tenenbaum, Bob
Subject: Re: Hello from the Ohio Jobs & Growth PlanI recant. I’m so sorry, I apologize. I shouldn’t be flippant like that, especially when the information is offered to me so graciously.
But, yes, I’ll be blogging about the casino issue.
–Daniel Jack Williamson
____________________________________________
From: David Kormanik <dkormanik@ohiojobsandgrowth.org>
To: williamsonworks@yahoo.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2009 4:18 PM
Subject: YouTube Petition Filing VideoDear Daniel,
The Ohio Jobs & Growth Committee released a video today on Facebook and YouTube highlighting last Thursday’s petition filing.
It includes footage of the 200+ petition boxes containing over 850,000 signatures (double what is necessary to qualify) being submitted to the Secretary of State’s office.
I invite you to watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DINbOCW6JxA.
Please let me know if you need any additional information about the campaign! Thanks for your time.
Sincerely,
David Kormanik
Ohio Jobs and Growth Plan
___________________________________________________
From: Daniel Williamson [mailto:williamsonworks@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 11:53 PM
To: Tenenbaum, Bob
Subject: Re: Hello from the Ohio Jobs & Growth PlanI’ve been waiting for your answer to the two questions I asked. Plenty of time has elapsed. I do intend to blog about the casino gambling issue. I will include your answers in my blog if I can receive those answers in the next 48 hours. If I do not receive answers, I will compose a blog entry, anyway, even without answers.
Daniel Jack Williamson
Buckeye RINO_____________________________________________________
From: ” Tenenbaum, Bob ” <BTenenbaum@themilenthalgroup.com>
To: Daniel Williamson <williamsonworks@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 6:34:02 AM
Subject: RE: Hello from the Ohio Jobs & Growth PlanHere you go:
Question: If the casino proposal represents a plan for Ohio ‘s jobs and growth, why just cherry pick 4 locations?
Casino gaming is a business, and as such needs to be looked at in terms of what is practical. It is clear Ohio can support four casinos in the state’s four largest cities, where they will create jobs, contribute to the revitalization of our largest urban areas, and generate tax revenues to help support local governments and schools throughout the state. Every state that allows casino gaming limits the number of licenses available. The supporters of this issue believe that the most practical solution for Ohio is to place casinos in the state’s four largest cities, while making sure that every county and every school district in Ohio benefits from the tax revenue the casinos will generate.
Question: If America is, by its nature, intended to be a land of opportunity and free enterprise, and if Ohio voters favor legalization of casinos, why limit competition by creating a casino cartel, as your proposal intends, instead of allowing anyone to open up, own, and operate casinos wherever the zoning of Ohio’s communities permit them?
The notion that “anyone” can “open up, own and operate casinos wherever the zoning of Ohio’s communities permit them” implies that Ohio could support 10, or 20, or maybe 50 casinos spread throughout the state. It’s simply a totally impractical idea. Every state that has permitted casino gaming has limited the number of licenses available. In addition, opening up the state to casino gaming requires an amendment to the Ohio Constitution, and that requires a campaign that someone has to fund. The developers of the casinos proposed in this ballot issue have been very open about the fact that they are supporting the campaign because they want to develop these casinos. They have also committed to investing a minimum of $250 million of private money in each casino . . . a significant contribution to the economy of the state and its four largest cities.
Bob Tenenbaum
Spokesman for the Ohio Jobs & Growth Plan
250 Civic Center Dr., Suite 440
Columbus OH 43215
(614) 573-1377
_____________________________________________________
From: Daniel Williamson [mailto:williamsonworks@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2009 9:45 AM
To: Tenenbaum, Bob
Subject: Re: Hello from the Ohio Jobs & Growth PlanThank you very much. This will be posted soon.
Daniel Jack Williamson
Buckeye RINO_______________________________________________
From: Daniel Williamson [mailto:williamsonworks@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 10:18 AM
To: Tenenbaum, Bob
Subject: Re: Hello from the Ohio Jobs & Growth PlanMy initial reaction: What you refer to as practical and impractical serves to highlight one of the big differences between the casino industry and most other industries in a free market system: Sustainability. Casinos require a very structured marketplace because they cannot be sustained in a free marketplace.
–Daniel Williamson
________________________________________________________
From: “Tenenbaum, Bob” <BTenenbaum@themilenthalgroup.com>
To: Daniel Williamson <williamsonworks@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 10:20:21 AM
Subject: RE: Hello from the Ohio Jobs & Growth PlanIf you’re opposed to allowing the casino industry in Ohio , I respect your viewpoint. But this is for the voters to decide. Independent polls have consistently shown that Ohioans favor allowing casino gaming in concept. It is our belief that they have defeated four previous issues because they did not provide the kind of economic development and tax revenues the voters were looking for. We think this issue does . . . and therefore believe it has a very good chance of gaining passage in November.
_____________________________________________________
From: Daniel Williamson [mailto:williamsonworks@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 10:29 AM
To: Tenenbaum, Bob
Subject: Re: Hello from the Ohio Jobs & Growth PlanOf course. I want the voters to decide, also. I think this dialogue will be instructive.
–Daniel Williamson
_________________________________________________________
Dear readers: This is raw source material. I plan to expand on this information in the near future. Stay tuned . . .
Petition time looming for school board, township trustee, non-partisan municipal races
July 27, 2009 — buckeyerinoFed up with government? Do you feel you need to step in with common sense solutions? Well, there’s still time to do that, and get in at the ground level.
This year, there are township races, school board races, and municipal races.
Municipalities that have partisan races already have their ballots set for fall elections. If you missed that boat, you should have read my post last January about filing for those races.
But some municipalities have non-partisan races. Please keep in mind that if your municipality has a city charter, it’s likely that you have non-partisan races, but the city charter may list a petition-filing deadline for candidates that differs from deadlines that pertain to other types of candidates. Please check your city charter. Unless otherwise specified by city charter, local non-partisan candidate petition filing deadlines are before 4 pm on Thursday, August 20, 2009, at your county’s Board of Elections office.
School board and township races are non-partisan local races. Again, the deadline for filing petitions to be a candidate for these races is before 4 pm, Thursday, August 20, 2009, at your county’s Board of Elections office.
Perhaps my January post on the subject of launching candidacies might be helpful to you if you are contemplating a run for local office. Questions? You can try emailing me, if you like (see my “About” page), but you’re likely to get better answers from the Board of Elections office in your county, and you can always avail yourself of the Ohio Secretary of State webpage, and pose your questions to the SoS office.
At any rate, the deadline for declaring your candidacy for one of these non-partisan local races is right around the corner, so if you’ve been thinking about it, but haven’t taken action, NOW is the time to spring into action.
State Rep. Terry Boose op-ed on the state budget
July 21, 2009 — buckeyerinoIn the past, I haven’t posted press releases at Buckeye RINO. However, in the heat of summer with no airconditioning, I haven’t felt like spending much time typing away at my keyboard. So, for once, I think I’ll go ahead and post a press release at Buckeye RINO, as it’s so much quicker to add blog content by copying and pasting.
Plus, I hope my readers will weigh in on the Ohio budget with their state legislators. The politicians really need to be hearing from all of you.
Terry Boose (R) represents the 58th Ohio House District, which includes all of Huron County and portions of Seneca County and Lorain County.
Cost-Saving Proposals Ignored in State Budget
“Recently, a new two-year state operating passed the General Assembly and was signed by Governor Strickland. The budget is the most comprehensive piece of legislation to pass the Legislature, and this year’s process of drafting, debating and altering the provisions of the budget bill proved to be especially difficult with the state’s $3.2 billion budget deficit. With unemployment in our district being one of the highest rates in the state, it is crucial that the budget accurately reflect the needs of Ohioans, which in this economy means spending tax dollars sensibly.
“My colleagues and I in the House Republican Caucus proposed many bills and amendments to the budget that would have made government operations more efficient and cost-effective. These proposals would have developed long-term solutions to Ohio’s budget crisis by better managing the use of the taxpayers’ money. For example, I co-sponsored a proposal that would streamline state government operations, saving nearly $1 billion annually. House Bill 25 would consolidate government processes to minimize waste and eliminate duplicitous expenditures while maintaining important state services.
“I also co-sponsored House Bill 240, which would implement cost containment measures to fix inefficient spending within Ohio’s Medicaid system. This proposal has been estimated to save the state $122 million a year. These two initiatives had the potential to save taxpayers nearly $3 billion over the next two years, reducing the need to cut vital services to close the large budget gap. However, House Democrats refused to even allow hearings on these bills and rejected them as amendments to the budget.
“Instead, the governor and his colleagues supported funding cuts for important services such as an $84 million cut for Ohio’s libraries, which have already suffered a decrease in funding due to the recession. Our libraries are an important tool for those seeking employment and this reduction will limit this resource. Additionally, the final version of the budget included Governor Strickland’s proposed cuts to services for our senior citizens, and eliminated state aid to career colleges. Like many of my colleagues, I could not support these proposals when there are so many ways that wasted dollars could be saved.
“Creating a balanced, responsible budget should be a sincere effort to reflect the interests of Ohioans. I believe that when families have to tighten their belts, government should as well. As your representative of the 58th Ohio House District I will continue to advocate for financially responsible policies that spur job growth and get more Ohioans back to work.”
Gambling: Something to NOT do when one loses a job
July 17, 2009 — buckeyerinoIn the heat of summer, I don’ t have much patience for sitting at a keyboard to blog, so there hasn’t been much new content here at Buckeye RINO in a while.
But I don’t have to spend a whole lot of time at my keyboard if I can just point you in the direction of others who have been at their keyboards lately. The sidebar is full of links to other blogs.
A post I’d recommend on the subject of gambling (which I oppose, in case you didn’t know) appears at Freedom’s Right (one of the many fine blogs of the State of Ohio Blogger Alliance). Giving a green light to gambling makes no economic sense when one is down and out on their luck.
Strickland, Redfern, Dimora, Kasich, and Coughlin
June 23, 2009 — buckeyerinoPolitics serves us flip-flops and broken campaign promises on a frequent basis. In the midst of petty political bickering, we have a fully stocked arsenal of such flip-flops and broken promises to go tit-for-tat with our opponents, no matter which candidate one champions. Such is the human condition.
But some political reversals are so shattering that using the word “flip-flop” in those instances would be trying to trivialize the seriousness of the offense. An example of what I’m talking about would be George Bush the elder, who served one term as president on the heels of Reagan. Bush said, “Read my lips! No new taxes!” That was an outright lie. He didn’t get re-elected.
Ted Strickland’s abandonment of his stance against slots shows that he is a liar. Whatever he said in opposition to gambling to get co-endorsed (with Ken Blackwell) by the Ohio Roundtable in the 2006 gubernatorial race was an outright lie. Read the rest of this entry »
For Ohio’s sake, move county commissioner races
June 20, 2009 — buckeyerino“Along the rust belt that hugs Lake Erie’s shores, Democrats have long enjoyed a near monopoly on municipal and county governments.”
I began another Buckeye RINO post with those words, titled “Democrats control everything.”
If you are a Cuyahoga County voter, you probably think that’s a pretty cool thing that Democrats control everything. Nirvana has been achieved, right?
Oh. Except for the corruption. Funny thing, about that Cuyahoga County corruption . . . as I said before the last election, when I endorsed Annette Butler for Bill Mason’s County Prosecutor seat . . . “It has everything to do with the Democrat Party.”
Oh. Except for the economic woes of Ohio’s Rust Belt. But that has much to do with the corruption. Let Plain Dealer columnist Phillip Morris connect the dots for you, as he did in a column last Monday:
“When will we begin to aspire and agitate for honest and efficient government?
“When will we stop accepting the oversight of party hacks, interested more in preserving power and patronage than in advancing prosperity?
“When will we start to understand that our futures are being compromised by too many uninspired and uninspiring public officials who routinely exploit their offices for self-enrichment?
“When will we realize that we can never become a business incubator as long as we tolerate inefficient city and county government?
“When will we demand better for our children — and our industry — which continue to flee the area in droves?”
I know that everybody in Cleveland likes to blame George W. Bush for the tanking Rust Belt economy, but the former U.S. President has not been implicated in any of the corruption probes of Cuyahoga County officials. Let me just note that the “party hacks” referenced in the 2nd paragraph of that Phillip Morris column excerpt happen to be Democrat party hacks, since the Democrats are the ones who control all the legislative and executive branch offices of Cuyahoga County government.
Talk of a Cuyahoga County government reform package by way of home rule charter has died down.
Phillip Morris asks for voters to start pressuring Dennis Kucinich, Marcia Fudge, and Frank Jackson to present a new plan to reform the county. I think that’s looking to the wrong direction for reform.
The right direction for reforming county government is for voters looking in the mirror and putting pressure on themselves to learn more about election candidates than whether they are Democrat or not. They have to start voting for the person, and stop voting for the party. Jimmy Dimora does not fear any wrath from Cuyahoga County voters. He knows that they will always vote Democrat. Even if Dimora has to step down, he knows that he can always get a crony to replace him, since Democrats will surely always win. Unless Cuyahoga County voters demonstrate that they are capable of voting for a Republican instead of rubberstamping even the most corrupt of Democrats, reform will continue to be elusive.
How is it that even the most corrupt Democrats win county elections time after time after time? I think it’s mostly that they hide in the coattails of the top of the ticket. In presidential and gubernatorial years, the ODP looks to maximize voter turnout in Cuyahoga County to help the top of the ticket carry the state. A lot of the voters that come out of the woodwork for those elections only know about the presidential or gubernatorial candidates at the top of the ticket, but they vote in all the races, using the Democrat party affiliation as their guide in the races they know nothing about. It happens in more than just Cuyahoga County (an example from Lorain County here), and that’s how voters enable entrenched cronyism and corruption. The counties with the least government corruption are those with swing voters, where politicians fear that if they screw up, they’ll be voted out in very short order.
I do have a proposal, though, for cleaning up county governments, not just in the rust belt, but throughout Ohio, and it doesn’t require any home rule charters be implemented for restructuring governments:
Just move the election dates. Elect county commissioners in odd-numbered years.
If we are going to look to a Cleveland-area Democrat elected official to put pressure on to reform county government, let’s not start with Kucinich, Fudge, and Jackson, as Phillip Morris suggests. Let’s start with Ohio House Speaker Armond “I’m for sale!” Budish. Let’s see if Budish is willing to distance himself from the Dimoras, and Russos, et al, of Cuyahoga County. Let’s get action from the Ohio General Assembly to begin the process to amend our state constitution, to change the law, whatever it takes, to move the elections for county commissioners throughout Ohio to odd-numbered years.
Odd-numbered years, like this one, are low turnout years, because we vote for obscure offices like city government, village government, school boards, and township trustees. We ought to encourage more turnout for these local offices. We can do so by bringing a higher profile race to odd-numbered election years. So let’s hold elections for county commissioners in odd-numbered years.
County Commissioners wouldn’t be able to hide in the coattails of the top of the ticket. Instead, they’d be the top of the ticket. They wouldn’t be able to hide. They’d have to withstand more scrutiny. If Cuyahoga County commissioner candidates want to turn out Democrats who will vote straight tickets, they, themselves, will have to be the draw, not the presidential or the gubernatorial candidates.
We’ll make it easier for county commissioners all over Ohio to fear the wrath of voters.
How would we make the transition? In 2010, we elect commissioners to a three-year term. They’d be up for re-election to a four-year term starting in 2013. Likewise, in 2012, we elect commissioners to a three-year term, and they’d be up for re-election to a four-year term in 2015. That would complete the transition.
More than just Cuyahoga County would benefit from this change. 86 other counties (Summit County has home rule charter) would benefit as well. This is a county government reform measure that can be put into place that Jimmy Dimora can’t block from being enacted, as the State of Ohio will be the entity that undertakes the reform, not Cuyahoga County.
Supplemental learning opportunities: School Enterprise Zones
June 2, 2009 — buckeyerinoIn my recent post expressing my opposition to charter schools, I had this to say about my own education in the public schools:
My parents are aware that sometimes values are taught in public school that run counter to their own values. My parents are aware that some values are totally missing from the public schools. Knowing such things, but also knowing that they bore the ultimate responsibility for our education, they supplemented my public school learning with other opportunities for learning.
Parents can (and ought) to supplement their children’s education in order to customize and tailor the learning experience to fit their children’s unique personalities, and align that education with a parent’s values and priorities. This follows from the assertion that parents (not the schools, not the government) are the ones who are ultimately responsible for a child’s education. The government provides schools, but parents should view them as merely a tool to help them fulfill their own responsibility for seeing that their children are educated. Parents should not feel tempted (yet they often are) to abdicate their responsibilities to educate their children and lay that burden, instead, upon the school.
Furthermore, for families who like charter schools because they have champagne taste and want a private school experience for their children, but they are only willing or able to set aside a beer budget to obtain it (with unvoted, confiscated tax dollars used as subsidies), supplemental learning opportunities make it possible to make the public school experience more like a private school experience without breaking the bank.
My own parents had limited time and limited funds, and they had 10 children. That’s the main reason they opted for public schools. However, public schools were only one item on the learning menu that they selected for us. How much nutrition can you get if your meal only consists of one dish? How much easier is it to optimize your nutrition if the main entree is a smaller portion of the meal and side dishes are added? So, think of public school as an entree that delivers on a few of the educational nutrition needs, but think about the learning activities that should be offered as side dishes to add nutrients that the entree is missing. If, after doing all this, your parental priorities and values aren’t reflected in what appears on your children’s educational dinner plate, don’t blame the schools. Go look in the mirror. Blame the person you see reflected in the mirror.
When I was in high school, I was involved in some extra-curricular activities, such as the cross-country team, the track team, the school play, the school choir, and a number of student clubs. I also had a lot of responsibility at home, as the oldest of the 10 kids that my parents had, and those household responsibilities were learning opportunities. Our family attended church together on Sundays. I had occasional access to the YMCA. I had ready access to the local library. My parents had an excellent selection of reference books at home. Our family had a very large yard for outdoor activities. I met each school-day morning, before school started, for Bible study with other students who attended both my school and my church. I also participated in 4-H and Boy Scouts. When I was younger, I had piano lessons (I discontinued the lessons by my own choice–I was never any good at piano, but it did teach me how to read music, so it wasn’t a total waste) and swimming lessons. As you can see, school was just an entree. There were many side dishes.
I am mindful that supplementing a child’s learning might be inconvenient. It’s hard to think of oneself as a parent when one is relegated to the role of taxi driver, shuttling this kid here for this activity by this time, and that kid there for that activity by that time, and then picking them up afterward. Wouldn’t it be so much better if a wide array of supplemental learning opportunities were available in one location? Wouldn’t it be better yet if that location were adjacent to the school? A parent wouldn’t have to feel like a lowly taxi driver for their children, if such were the case.
I propose that we add another facet to regional and urban planning. I call it the “School Enterprise Zone.” This is a concept I’ve been publicly touting since the days of my first state rep campaign back in 2002. When I was a contributor to Word of Mouth blog, before the launch of Buckeye RINO, I wrote a three-part piece about the concept, which you can find here, here, and here. It’s a land-use designation that Ohio communities could add to their options when they contemplate zoning ordinances. What it’s designed to do is make it easier for properties adjacent to schools to transition from residential/commercial/industrial property to property where supplemental learning opportunities are available for children. The key mechanisms to make it work are removing impediments to entrepreneurial providers of supplemental learning opportunities.
Let’s say I’m a martial arts instructor, or a piano teacher, or a youth minister of a church, or a fencing instructor, or an arts and crafts workshop leader, or a ballet teacher, or a Brownie Scout leader, or . . . somebody that has some programs designed to involve kids, and I buy a house within a School Enterprise Zone that surrounds the school. Let’s face it, I’m not going to become fabulously rich by offering after-school lessons to kids. I just want to at least scrape by, or at least supplement some other household income with teaching or coaching or mentoring kids on the side, or maybe I’m just a volunteer, like the Brownie Scout leader, and I don’t want a lot of government-imposed red tape, regulations, and fees to get in the way of providing programs for kids. A School Enterprise Zone could make the task less daunting.
Here are some examples of what a School Enterprise Zone designation could facilitate:
Example 1: Schools are often located in residential zones. Often, residentially zoned properties are prohibited from being sites of commercial activity. The School Enterprise Zone would relax those restrictions to allow commercial activities that provide programming for kids.
Example 2: Ohio laws don’t allow certain adult-oriented businesses, such as bars, within a certain distance of a school. Also, registered sex offenders are required to reside beyond a certain distance of a school. By creating a School Enterprise Zone, the boundaries of the “safety envelope” would be expanded.
Example 3: In converting a house within a School Enterprise Zone from strictly residential to a house where some of the space is reserved for private living space and some of the space is used for commercial activity related to programming for children, only a portion of the public space would be required to be handicap-accessible, not the entire facility, thus negating the need for expensive remodeling projects.
Example 4: Tax exemptions could be offered to qualifying entities within the School Enterprise Zone to help keep overhead expenses low so that these enterprises can keep afloat.
Example 5: Instead of parents being an after school taxi service, they may send a note to school signaling that their child is to be released to an agent of the after-school program when school is dismissed for the day. The parents then don’t have to pick up, drop off, and pick up again. They just have to pick up.
Example 6: If the School Board allows it, some of the school facilities may be rented out to after-school program providers. A ballet instructor may require more performance space than a residential setting may allow, and converting enough space for performance space on private property may be too costly. Instead, the instructor’s property within the school enterprise zone may contain just the business office for the ballet instructor while she rents performance space at the school.
Example 7: If school district budget cuts cause them to no longer offer some extracurricular activities, it may create an opportunity for a new program offering within the School Enterprise Zone. For example, if the junior high no longer has a football team, perhaps an enterprising would-be football coach would set up office in the coach’s home within the School Enterprise Zone and rent the school’s athletic field so that kids can continue to play football.
Example 8: Parents and kids could buy the supplies and equipment they need directly from the after-school program within the School Enterprise Zone instead of having to make a trip to the mall. I propose that such purchases within the School Enterprise Zone be made exempt from sales tax to make the after school activities less expensive for parents. But even without a tax exemption, there is added convenience when one can buy what supplies are needed on-site rather than having to taxi kids to far-flung shopping centers to procure the supplies.
Parents, of course, would foot the bill for whatever after-school programs they enroll their children in, and since funds may not be able to stretch far and since chidren are a precious commodity, the motivation behind creating School Enterprise Zones would be to conveniently locate an array of low-cost, low-risk supplemental learning opportunities.
My opposition to charter schools
May 27, 2009 — buckeyerinoI oppose charter schools.
I’ve been called a RINO because of it. Conservatives might say I’m a moderate, or might even say I’m from the liberal wing of the Republican Party because of it. I think they’re wrong. I think I’m more conservative than the supporters of charter schools (despite what this graph says). I think backers of charter schools are the ones who are in the middle of the road, trying to have their cake and eat it too.
I guess I’m not a compassionate conservative, you know, the kind that grows government spending on corporate welfare while hiding the corporate welfare part by thumping the Bible and using compassionate conservative code words such as “faith-based initiatives,” and “school choice.”
So I guess if I wish to describe myself as a conservative, I’ll have to delineate that I’m not a compassionate conservative. I guess that makes me an insensitive, uncaring, arrogant, and heartless conservative.
But I’m not liberal. I’ll explain.
I firmly believe that parents are the ones ultimately responsible for educating their children. I believe that schools should be used as tools in the hands of the parents to help the parents fulfill their responsibility of educating their kids, and that, ultimately, if kids aren’t prepared for adulthood by the time they finish school, it’s not the schools that failed the kids, it’s the parents and the kids that failed the kids. Doesn’t that sound conservative to you?
Along that vein, parents have three choices: Home schooling, public schools, and private (including parochial) schools. I leave it to the parents to decide which of these tools to use. I’m OK with whatever they choose from that menu.
If I were a liberal, I would scrub home schooling from the list, because liberals don’t believe that parents are competent teachers unless they are actually licensed as such by the state, and even then, they’d only be competent to teach the grade levels and subject matter indicated on the license. Liberals would also be concerned that home schooling isn’t sufficiently multicultural. I leave it to the parents for them to decide whether they have the competence. In areas where they feel less competent to teach, they can always supplement instruction with tools from other sources. Parents can make home schooling as multicultural as they like. There aren’t limits on how multicultural they can make the home schooling experience. Again, I would empower parents with that kind of discretion.
Looking back over the centuries, home schooling took the form of apprenticing your children in your own trade. Before the industrial revolution, nearly everyone worked their business out of their own homes. Stay-at-home housewives? Yeah, and stay-at-home househusbands, too. What do you do to take care of the kids at the house while you do the work that sustains the family? Have them learn the work with you, of course. Some families might send some kids to be apprenticed elsewhere. Some families might send some kids to the military, or to a convent, or to a monastery, or to a university. In these cases, the parents worked out some form of monetary agreement to make those other opportunities possible. The parents, in some form or another, footed the bill.
Public education is a fairly newfangled contraption. Especially after the industrial revolution drastically altered family life, compulsory education in one form or another was deemed desirable by society, so we, the people, agreed to means by which the government became a provider of schooling. It’s a shared cost arrangement. Parents still foot the bill by way of taxes, but so do non-parents. Anyone may send their child to a public school without having to pay extra tuition for it. Children who go to public schools vastly outnumber the children who are home schooled and the children who go to private schools.
My parents sent me to public schools. After all, they were already paying the taxes that are used to support the public schools. They could have sent me to a private school, but that would have cost them a lot more. They realized that they didn’t want to be saddled with the burden of private school tuition costs, especially since I was the oldest of 10 children. If they had chosen private school for all of us, the cost would have been prohibitive. They didn’t home school us. My dad was a die maker at Ford Motor Company who often worked overtime to support our very large family. Mom was often either pregnant or nursing. Thus, home schooling would have been too time-intensive for my parents. Still, my parents understood their responsibility to educate us. They tell me I knew my alphabet when I was one year old. I knew how to read before I was age three. When I got to kindergarten, I was one of a small handful of kindergarteners who could already read who spent a segment of each school day in the first grade reading room with a first grade teacher (we readers had to miss milk and cookies, which is what the other kindergartners did in our absence). I was adequately prepared for school as a preschooler by my parents.
My parents are aware that sometimes values are taught in public school that run counter to their own values. My parents are aware that some values are totally missing from the public schools. Knowing such things, but also knowing that they bore the ultimate responsibility for our education, they supplemented my public school learning with other opportunities for learning. Much of the learning took place in the home. Some of the learning took place at church. Some of the learning happened through friends and relatives of the family. Some of the learning occurred through extra-curricular activities at school. Some of the learning occurred in clubs and organizations that had nothing to do with school. My parents truly sought to adequately prepare us for adulthood. They made mistakes, of course, but one isn’t spared from mistakes no matter what form the schooling takes. One other thing my parents did when the public schools were found lacking in one respect or another, was that they were advocates when they felt they needed to be. They would make their voice heard at a parent-teacher conference. They would have a discussion with a principal or a superintendent. They would state their case at a meeting of the school board. It is critical that public schools remain under local control and it is imperative that they are responsive and accountable to local parents and local taxpayers.
I guess compassionate conservatives, however, who don’t feel up to the rigors of providing home schooling would rather place the blame for failing kids upon the schools, as if the schools are ultimately responsible for the education of their kids. What? Pass the buck to big government? That doesn’t sound conservative. And if the public school isn’t satisfactory, do they take it upon themselves to supplement the child’s learning, as my parents did? Apparently they’re too lazy for that. OK, so send the kids to a private school. Nope. They don’t want to pay for that. OK, so they’re too cheap to send their kids to private school and too lazy to supplement the public school instruction, so what do they do? They come up with charter schools.
I believe that in being ultimately responsible for children’s education, the parents should foot the bill, unless others agree, by way of a vote of the people, to chip in, as well, and help foot the parents’ educational bills.
For home schooling, the onus is on the parents to make it all happen. For private schooling, the parents have to foot the bill. For public schools, the parents and the rest of the community pay taxes to foot the bill. The taxpayers of Ohio have had many direct votes on the funding of public schools.
Charter schools, however, want to charge tuition AND squeeze the taxpayer, and maybe even make a profit. The taxpayers of Ohio have never had a direct vote on whether they want to also fund charter schools. Oops, there I go, sounding like a conservative again–a heartless conservative. Conservatives more compassionate than I orchestrated the charter school movement in the state legislature. To me, it’s just more government spending on corporate welfare. Essentially, the charter school organizers didn’t want to try to compete with private schools in the open marketplace. They were too averse to taking such a financial risk. Therefore, they found a way to open a school with a private agenda, like a private school does, but they found a way to pay for it from government coffers, like a public school does, and no one ever gets to vote on a tax levy of any sort to determine whether the public really supports the private agenda of the charter school.
Charter schools represent some kind of utopia for compassionate conservative parents who will only set aside a beer budget for their family’s education, but wish to quench their champagne taste, all with a minimum of effort.
They call it compassionate conservatism. To me, it’s just corporate welfare. To me, it just sounds like socialism. To me, it sounds like taxation without representation. To me, I hear the grunting and squealing sound of pigs at the government trough. To me, I see charter schools too incompetent to survive as private schools, so they become parasites to survive, feeding off the host government.
Education is something worth working for. It’s something worth earning. It’s something worth a lot of effort. It’s not an entitlement. It’s a responsibility. It’s a prudent preparation for the future.
If I were Ohio governor or member of the General Assembly, I’d give all charter schools an expiration date, with enough time for parents to sort through the educational alternatives. By the time the expiration date arrives, the charter schools would have to do one of the following:
- Become a self-sustaining private school. Not a bad choice, considering that other private schools didn’t have the state government’s help with their startup costs like the charter schools had.
- Get the taxpayers of the community to vote for a tax to support the school independently from the public school. I’d be so surprised if such an effort succeeded, but we do live in a democracy, and if the people voted to sustain the school and its mission with their tax dollars, so be it.
- Become an adjunct, alternative school within a school district. Someone would have to come up with a brilliant sales pitch to persuade the community and the school board to allow the school to operate by different rules than the rest of the schools in the district in order for it to continue its mission.
- Have the school dissolved and all its resources absorbed into the public school district. Investors in the charter school could get some reimbursement for the materials they provided that the school district absorbs, though the reimbursement would be tempered by the calculation that tax funds also helped pay for those resources.
- Shut its doors permanently. Assets and resources could be sold however the charter school organization sees fit, but there might be some reimbursements due to the state according to how tax dollars were expended.
I’m such a moderate. I’m so middle-of-the-road. I’m such a RINO. No. I’m conservative. An insensitive, uncaring, arrogant, heartless conservative, without an ounce of compassion.
Creative Commons; Some Rights Reserved
Buckeye RINO by Daniel Jack Williamson is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Buckeye RINO 