Comments on: Issue 3 bans fish frys.

By: Vote no on Issue 3. For a whole lot of reasons

Vote no on Issue 3. For a whole lot of reasons — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 22:38:11 +0000

[...] via Issue 3 bans fish frys.. [...]

By: The oligarchy backs the monopoly: local dems like casinos

The oligarchy backs the monopoly: local dems like casinos — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:57:08 +0000

[...] you read my post about how Issue 3 bans fish frys- and doesn’t guarantee performance or payment to the State, you’d understand how bad [...]

By: Shannon

Shannon — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 18:18:55 +0000

I passed this on to friends in the ASA & USSSA leagues here in Dayton. Do you know how many softball teams rely on fish frys to pay for tournaments and supplies?

By: Robert Vigh

Robert Vigh — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 17:28:25 +0000

Why do you think that the underlying issue of principle never comes up in these articles? It never gets talked about that this is Mercantilism. We are willing to award a format which provides financial gain based on someones ability to modify a legal document as opposed to their performance in the market. The state supports this pursuit because of the premium tax it would get to chagre. This issue is small element to the destruction of freedom, encouraging statism and anti-capitalist pursuits. I love Casino’s and I would like to have some in Ohio. But I will never vote for an issue like this, because I do not believe in rewarding Mercantilism ever. Ohio should make gambling legal or not. Let whomever wants to build a casino buy the land, construct the building and have at it.

It is wrong of the state to even put something of such a Protectionist nature on the docket to be voted on. Capitalism good, Mercanitilism/Protectionism bad.

By: truddick

truddick — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 14:53:40 +0000

Forget the fish fries. This amendment is a sack of manure. There should be no provisions in any constitution that create a monopoly for any corporation.

Once again we see the lack of vision and leadership in our state legislature, which continues to shirk its duties while expecting all of us to do our own governing. They should have seen this coming and created their own constitutional amendment, forming a state gaming commission that could force competition in the industry, set taxes and fees at rates comparable to other states, and yes, even preserve blackjack at that fish fry.

By: Todd Hollst

Todd Hollst — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 14:09:19 +0000

I’m not sure the assertion that Issue 3 bans church fish frys is correct. If you read the last line in that section it states “Provide that nothing in the Amendment shall restrict or in any way limil loneries authorized under Section 6(A) of Article XV of the Ohio Constitution or bingo authorized under Secrion 6(B) of Article XV of the Ohio Constitution.”
Perhaps, though I’m not certain, church fish frys may be exempted by this provision. I agree, however, if this proposed Amendment bans fish frys it should be defeated.

By: pizzabill

pizzabill — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 13:27:25 +0000

It incredible that the proposed ammendment will, by it’s very wording, ban “Las Vegas” or “Monte Carlo” type fundraisers for churches, civic organizations, little league teams, etc. The only things exempt are bingo, hore racing and the lottery. (Yes I noticed the typo, but it seems to fit).

I hope everyone does their homework on Issue 3. Really,…how much of your freedom and your community’s freedom do you want restricted?