According to The Columbus Dispatch, on Monday the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that Gov. Ted Strickland’s plan to add video slot machines at Ohio’s horse-racing tracks is subject to a referendum, potentially creating a nearly $1 billion hole in the state budget.
The court also put implementation of the slots plan on hold for 90 days in order to give a group that seeks to put the issue on the statewide ballot enough time to gather the needed signatures.
The Dispatch stated that if the petition drive succeeds, voters would then decide the issue in the November 2010 elections. If the referendum passes, this would effectively prevent the state from counting on slots revenue for the two-year budget that began July 1.
Many are convinced that Ohioans will reject Strickland’s slot machines if they are permitted to vote on the issue. This would send a sharp message to the governor and Ohio legislators who earlier bypassed the electorate in their passage of the gambling scheme.
Former Republican governor and U.S. Sen. George V. Voinovich said that he thinks that Strickland and the legislature have no choice now but to consider a tax increase.
“We’re in a situation where we need to be responsible, and I think you have to do it (raise taxes),” said Voinovich, who raised taxes when he was governor.
The Dispatch story included the following:
In a 6-1 decision, the state’s highest court said it could not take Ohio’s precarious budget situation into account when deciding that according to the state’s constitution, the slots plan is subject to a vote for possible repeal.
“We are not unmindful of the effect our decision may have on the state budget, nor of the commendable efforts of the members of the executive and legislative branches of state government to fulfill their constitutional duties to balance the budget in Ohio,” Justice Terrence O’Donnell wrote in the court’s majority.
“(H)owever, our own constitutional duty is to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Ohio Constitution irrespective of their effect on the state’s current financial conditions.”
The constitution allows referendums to repeal bills passed by the state legislature but also says appropriations of state money for “the current expenses of the state government and state institutions” are not subject to referendum.
Strickland and the state had argued that because the slots plan was included as part of the state budget, which appropriates state funds, the slots could not be challenged.
The court’s majority ruled otherwise, saying the slots provisions in the budget bill do not appropriate any state money and thus do not meet any exemptions from a referendum.
LetOhioVote.org spokesman Carlo LoParo said the group would file a initial petition with 3,000 signatures and a summary of the proposed referendum for Brunner and Attorney General Richard Cordray to certify.
“Millions of Ohioans deserve the right to weigh in on expanded gambling in Ohio, and the decision by the court today will give them the opportunity to cast their vote,” LoParo said.
