Yet More on Vote No on Issue 3
Oct 30th, 2006 by Brian A. Thomas
A little more on Vote No on Ohio State Issue 3, the supposed learn and earn amendment, more like the rip the people of Ohio off with large acts of deception amendment. Anyhow, Rebecca, who has left comments before about the issue here, points out that if you look at the Endorsements page of the Ohio Learn and Earn website, they repeat many of them, showing how much more they are willing to deceive the people of this state.
While I still don’t oppose the idea of casinos in Ohio, my reasons for voting no on Issue 3 continue to grow. They have made it nearly impossible to get either the scholarships or grants (the grants cover only a limited portion of the tuition, and then only if you are in the top 5% of the high school class and disappear after 12 years anyhow, leaving only the scholarships). To get the scholarships, you need not only take the core classes, but take advanced classes as well, take college readiness programs, most be active in civic duties, all with no guarantee or legal requirement to set how much the scholarship will be. They would be within their rights to give a student $1,000 (or even less) for all 4 years of school and pocket the rest of the money they earned.
My biggest problem is that rather than try to pass a bill before the Ohio Congress to get them to be allowed to put these slot machines in, they by passed them and tried to get signatures to get the measure on the ballot. It was reported by some major papers that the people gathering signatures never mentioned the casino/slot machine portion, only asked people if they wanted to sign a petition to get scholarship/grant money for Ohio kids. How many people would have signed if they knew the facts before they signed? Probably not enough to get the issue on the ballot. We shouldn’t use the Ohio Constitution to give a monopoly to a few select individuals. If they want to get slot machines, bring it before the Ohio Legislator and get them to allow it, don’t use back door tactics to do it.
There are other issues at play here, see the Facts on Ohio Issue 3 page for all the details.
The slot machine proposal has been brought before the Ohio Legislator back in 96 and in 00. Both times the republican controled legislator refused to handle it. Read the bill, after the program is fully funded in 12 years, all %100 of Ohio students are eligiable for the grants. I will vote Yes on Issue 3 because I will for once will benifit from a tax I won’t have to pay since I don’t gamble. My daughter will also have a chance to go to school in Ohio without me filpping the bill. The bottom line is if you don’t gamble, thats more the reason you should vote for Issue 3 because you will benifit from a tax you will never pay. Yippy !!!
As I noted in all my posts, including my original post I don’t object to gambling being legal in Ohio. As a matter of fact, I am all for it, as I think it would actually benefit Ohio. However, a constitutional amendment, is not the way to do it. As I said, if they can’t get it pass the Legislator, then they need to drop it.
My kid will not benefit as he will be home schooled. I would never trust the government with my child’s education. Education is too important to trust to them.
I further see nothing in the actual amendment language that says that they will cover 100% of the bill. I see nothing in the language of the actual amendment that they will drop the need to take advanced classes or do “voluntary civic activity.”
For that matter, I see nothing that says they will fund 100% of Ohio students after the first 12 years. I don’t see anything about what happens after 12 years. It says:
Nothing there suggests that they expand it to everyone after the first 12 years. Heck, by my reading of that, they can stop funding grants after 12 years if they want.
By all means bring casinos to Ohio, but not via a Constitutional Amendment.
They need to take it before the Ohio Legislator again and again until it passes. Full casino gambling, none of this bull crap designed to save the horse tracks and the Flats. No crap about keeping home schooled kids out, or kids who don’t do civic activities (I have to doubt they consider volunteering at the church a qualified activity), and no crap about needed to take advanced classes at crappy schools.
Home schooling from an accredited organization is covered by this amendment.
Where does it say it covers home schooling? I see it covering public and non-public high schools (so that may correct an earlier post where I said some private schools won’t qualify), but I see no mention of home school. I don’t think they intent to apply the “non-public high school” to anything but private schools.
However, to be fair, I have asked the Issue 3 people themselves. We’ll see if they respond and what they say. I’ll make a new post with their answers when and if I get them.
There are several home schooling programs that ran from accredited organization public or private. These are covered under the bill. Maybe not word for word but it is understood.
That’s the problem, Ed. They aren’t covered in the amendment. Are we just going to trust the gambling bosses to come through? That’s a bad bet any way you look at it.
Additionally, *all* that is guaranteed is that in 12 years, the grants dissapear. There is absolutely no time frame in which the scholarships will begin, and no amount stipulated for how much they will be. According to the commercials, your child will get a scholarship. According to the *amendment*, he/she may not get a dime. Read the amendment for yourself - try to find one place where it mentions a dollar amount for the scholarships, or a date at which they must begin.
You can ask the Issue 3 people yourself. They promise up and down that they’ll deliver. But are we going to take the risk, knowing that it is not stipulated in the amendment? That didn’t work out for us very well with the Lottery, now did it?
Additionally, you say that anyone who gambles won’t pay for this. I assure you, we will. We will pay for this in additional taxes that are needed to up our police forces for the added crime. We will pay for it because we will need to support the 109,000 promised addicted gamblers that this legislation will create. And we’ll pay for it when Donald Trump wants to come to town and open up a billion dollar resort… but can’t, because we were stupid enough to create a monopoly in our state constitution.
Please, take a moment and read the amendment. Realize that it is creating a governmentally-protected monopoly for a priveleged few. Realize that while their commercials sound nice, their amendment promises nothing.
There is no denying the money ( 850 million) Can’t be used for anything else but education. Thank God ! Is is up to The Board of Regents to distrubute the money in a fair way. Of corse everyone will not be happy but that is inevitable. Your Columbus politcians raided the Lottary fund and they can not touch the education money. No wonder they are opposed to Issue 3. The grants do not disappear in 12 years. IN 12 years the program is fully funded and all 100 % of Ohio student are eligible. And yes it states in the amendment accreditd public or private high school. There are home schooling programs that are accredited by the state. These students are covered.
I have not heard from the Issue 3 people themselves yet, so my guess is they either have no publicly acceptable answer, or they feel questions such as those risen have no need to be answered. Either way it is a bad attitude to take.
I still don’t see where the amendment itself says the program is fully funded after 12 years and they will give 100% of the money to 100% of Ohio’s kids. I see no mention anywhere in the amendment that says what happens after 12 years. I hear their hype that it will still be covered, but I don’t see it protected by the amendment. I see nothing that stops them from saying, “forget it, we are keeping all the money”, after the 12 years are over. I quoted the section of the amendment relating to the 12 years already so there is no need to repeat it here. All the amendment language itself covers is “For the first twelve such high school graduating classes…” I’ll get onto the dangers of “understood” language in a bit. Needless to say, there is a big problem when something isn’t spelled out and is left to be just “understood.”
Also, until the cover 100% of all home schooled kids, it is a rip off. If you have been approved by the state to home school then that is all the more that should be required. The fact they don’t specifically mention home school in a amendment, not just a bill, but an amendment, leaves too much room for them to deny home schooled children. Heck, look at Ohio’s CCW law. It is “understood” that the rules are to apply to every city/town in the state, but Toledo restricted things beyond what the law says is allowed anyhow. This is a case that is now on appeal before the Oho Supreme Court. There is a clear danger in letting things be “understood” when they are not spelled out. The fact it is an amendment means they can stick to the language even more closely then they could if it was a law. They could easily argue that when is says “accredited public and non-public high school” that literally means school, a building outside of the home. The language is too loose and that is an invitation for trouble.
The only way to remove such “understood” language is to make yet another amendment to make it spelled out. Much like our Bill of Rights were not included in the Constitution of the United States as the Founding Fathers felt it was “understood” that those rights existed. It took Jefferson and his friends to convince the rest of them that they couldn’t just leave those to be just “understood” but to be spelled out specifically… what little good it does given our government present day abuse of those Rights…
They also need to drop the requirement to take advanced placement classes and to do civic volunteer work. Very few people I know who went to college, myself included, ever took advanced placement classes. The civic volunteer work requirement sounds too socialistic for my personal tastes. (Aside: We need to move away from the “It Takes a Village Syndrome” and start recognizing the value of an individual. An individual who needs to be part of society and moving to better everyone, but not at the cost of self that those on the left so desperately want. It is in the individual’s best interest to see society as a whole rise, so in pursuit of their best interest they will generally work to better the world around them and for their children. It is when you deny the individual and pursue only the conformity of those around them that people and society fails to rise and eventually falls… but I digress)
My vote remains No. My advice to friends and family remains to Vote No on Issue 3.
Again, Ed, that $850mil figure appears absolutely *nowhere* in the amendment. Their own campaign admitted that they are exaggerating the figures in their commercials. What more do you need?
Also, there is absolutely no guarantee as to when the funds will be paid out. It would be absolutely within their rights, according to this amendment, to keep the money accrued through the program in their own bank account, earning interest for as long as they please. Again, no start date is even mentioned in the amendment. The grants *DO* dissapear in 12 years - read the amendment. After 12 years, all that is guaranteed is that the grants are gone. Absolutely nothing else is spelled out. Don’t believe me? Read the amendment. Again, point to the section where they guarantee an amount for the scholarships and a start date at which they will be paid.
You say that 100% of all students are eligible. Of course they are eligible. That’s like saying any citizen over 35 is eligible to run for president. But any student who dares go out of state for college is disqualified. Any student who can’t take AP classes because their high school can’t afford to offer them (which is the case for many, many schools in Ohio) is out. Any student who doesn’t meet the wishy-washy requirements of the *appointed* Board of Regents is also automatically out. Any student who is truly homeschooled (not with programs developed by the state) is automatically disqualified. Are you starting to see the problems here? They are not mistakes. They were not overlooked by the Learn and Earn crew. They are 100% on purpose, designed as loopholes for the gambling bosses to pay as little as possible into this program. Yes, yes, the percentages are there. But again, there is *no guarantee* of how much they actually need to pay out or when. Go ahead, I challenge you. Find the start date when the scholarships begin. Find the amount that the gambling bosses actually need to *pay out* (not just set aside) in scholarships.
I teach my kids that hard work pays off. Work hard in school, get good grades and do well in extra activities. Those merits will earn you scholarships (private and public) to go to college. Work hard there, earn your way through, and get a good job to help support your future family. Telling my kids, “don’t worry about, somebody’s gambling money that should have gone to their own family will pay for your college bills” goes against everything we should be teaching our children. Sending my kids to college on the backs of someone else’s family, someone who should have been saving their money to send their own kids through college, is fundamentally wrong, and sends our kids a very skewed message. Would you depend on gambling to buy your family food? Of course not. So why are we going to depend on gambling to send our kids to college?