Voting down the wrong addictions

With the upcoming election within our grasps, I believe that we as college students have the greatest obligation to get our voices heard.

In the article “Ohio 2006: Who’s it gonna be?” that was featured in the Oct. 18 issue of The BG News, for once people were speaking up.

Issue 3, the amendment more commonly known to allow slot machines to be placed in approved areas around the state of Ohio as a way to grant high school seniors money to attend college, is an issue that I could not support more.

We are college students. We know the type of financial burden that the state of Ohio has put upon many of us due to the decreased funding for higher education.

If you ask me, we should also do whatever we can to help the generations to come to be able to afford a higher education.

However, some people have decided to make it their fight to defeat the issue 3 amendment.

It irritates me when an entire religious cohort begins to make defeating this issue their fight.

In the article, the Cleveland Bishop Richard Lennon was quoted as saying “Slot machines have been called the ‘crack cocaine’ of gambling.” Excuse me Bishop Lennon, do you really want to take it there? Let’s see. If I am correct there are numerous types of “legal” addictions that people all over the country suffer from.

Why are you not out there trying to prevent the means of those addictions from being readily available to their victims?

People have addictions to alcohol. Should we ban that? People love watching pornography late at night on their University sponsored cable. Why isn’t the Bishop fighting that?

Oh, if I am correct the United States has a constantly growing problem with obesity which many would say is caused by an addiction to food. Bishop Lennon…would you like to ban fast food restaurants?

We as Americans fight the government all the time on issues related to them making decisions about how we should live our lives.

We cannot sit back and watch as the government decides to ban things that many people find enjoyable, even if others have a problem.

I remember in high school always being so mad when an entire class got punished for the actions of a few class clowns. If you ask me, that is exactly what people such as Voinovich and Bishop Lennon are trying to do. Just because some people might have a problem, the rest of us are being punished by having such a ban on slot machines.

The only difference is that slot machines are readily available in surrounding states and even Canada. Instead of having to travel to Michigan and Windsor to play some slots, why not make it available in Ohio?

That in turn would allow the revenue to help support high school seniors that want to further their education.

This issue would not only provide millions of dollars every year to deserving Ohio high school graduates for the chance to go to college, but also it would provide nearly 56,000 jobs in an already stagnant job pool.

I know many college students today do not see the positive aspects of this amendment because it does not directly benefit them.

Look at it from a different perspective. No, this will not affect our college educations, and yes we will still have to bear the financial burden of furthering our education. But think about your siblings, nieces, nephews, cousins. Think about your children.

If I can be proactive in the fight to make sure my future children are granted the opportunity to attend college and better their lives, sign me up.

We need to be thinking about the generations to come. I am not going to tell you who to vote for because honestly that is not my right.

I will say that I think we should all take a few steps back and look at how this can benefit the state of Ohio as a whole.

Amy Grunenwald, Junior, Social Work, [email protected].