I've gotten to spend a lot of time watching TV while recovering from the recent surgery (not really sure whether that's a good thing or not). Regardless, after seeing far too many commercials for and against Ohio issues 5 and 6 I decided to do some online research on each.

Ohio Issue #5[url][url]

If your only exposure to this issue is through the commercials advocating its approval, you probably think it has to do with some type of extreme government regulation over borrowing money. They make it sound like the state wants to make it required that you release all of your personal information in order to get a loan. This nonsense really bothers me as it couldn't be any further from the truth.

Voting "yes" on this issue will stop a House bill that caps payday loans at 28% interest (instead of a fucking insane 391%). I know that these loans are how some people are able to get through financial emergencies, but do you really need to rape them at nearly 400% interest?? I'll loan them the money and take a 28% return if the payday loans people don't want to. You're not going to find that kind of return anywhere else right now.

Does anyone actually see themselves voting "yes" on this one?

Ohio Issue #6

This one is a little more complicated. Essentially, the issue is asking for Ohioans to approve the building of its first casino halfway between Columbus and Cincinnati. The theory is that with Michigan, Indiana, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania all allowing gambling, Ohio is missing out on potential jobs and tax revenue. Ohioans who want to gamble are going to gamble, so why not keep them and their money in the state? This all makes sense to me and I would be happy to support a bill that allows casinos here.

But as the opponents' commercials imply, there is a major "loophole" in the legislation being proposed. The proponents claim there is no loophole and that the wording "allows for up to a 30% tax on revenues." The key words there are "up to" because that wording also allows for 0% tax in the right situation. This is because the State is not prevented from allowing the establishment of additional casinos in the future. The Eastern Shawnee tribe of Oklahoma has been trying (unsuccessfully) to open an operation here for years. The federal government allows Indian casinos to operate at a tax rate of zero. The wording of this proposed amendment states:

"In the event that another casino is permitted in Ohio by state or federal law to conduct gaming activities similar to that conducted by the casino authorized under division (A) of this section, the tax rate on gross casino receipts authorized by this subsection shall not exceed the lesser of twenty-five percent (25%) or the lowest percentage rate payable by any other casino subsequently authorized."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the lesser of 25% and 0% is the latter. If an Indian tribe is allowed to establish a casino that pays zero percent taxes, the law says that this original casino can begin paying zero as well. That defeats that whole purpose of allowing gambling in the first place!

So while I think it's a good idea in theory, the wording of this legislation needs to be changed before you'll see me voting in favor of it. Hopefully enough Ohio voters understand this little detail when they go into the voting booths and cast their ballots. It's hard not to believe differently as the proponents are really working hard to spread a different message with all of their commercials.