Diamondeye wrote:
Every election cycle this issue is like a contest to see which side can lie and distort the issue more blatantly.
I'm more concerned about the fact that someone thinks casinos are Constitutional Amendment material than I am about the pros and cons of the casino. If Ohio ever amends this in it'll be hell to get rid of it.
I'm in definite agreement on all fronts.
I'm indifferent to casinos. I certainly am not a gambler (five bucks a couple times a year with some friends on poker notwithstanding), and can appreciate how the industry as a whole tends to prey upon certain demographics and its own brand of addict, but there are local enough options that I don't believe Ohio's permission or banning of casinos will alleviate the pressure and opportunity for these people to cause themselves problems. I'm also not keen on the government being the solution for lack of personal responsibility.
But when it comes down to the bottom line, I despise government-supported monopolies, and placing gambling in the Constitution even more so, let alone enshrining both simultaneously.