U.S. Bishops Issue Letter to President-Elect Obama.
Cardinal George Voices Hope for Obama Administration, Points to Possible Obstacles to Our Desired Unity [More]
U.S. Bishops Congratulate Barack Obama on Historic Election; Urge Him to Defend the Weak, Heal Divisions [More]
Ohio Election Results [Ohio Secretary of State]
Ohio Election Summary & 2009 Expectations
MORAL REFLECTION RESOURCES REGARDING VOTING
The Catholic Conference of Ohio grants permission and strongly encourages duplication and distribution of all of the following:
Bulletin Inserts
Ohio Ballot Issues and Ohio Bishops' Recommendations (two-sided)
Color
Black & White
Voting & Reflection Questions (two-sided)
Color
Black & White
Additional Educational Resources for Duplication
Ohio Ballot Issues, Catholic Social Teaching & Reflection Questions
Voting Questions regarding Candidates and 2008
Candidate Questions on Issues of Concern (6 pages)
Parish & School Resource Guide on Faithful Citizenship (includes all of the educational materials and bulletin inserts)
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' Faithful Citizenship MaterialsCATHOLIC ELECTION RESOURCES/ NEWS
On Being Faithful Citizens: A Pastoral Letter to the Diocese of Youngstown,
The Most Reverend George V. Murry, SJ, Ph.D. October 31, 2008
Catholic News Service Election 2008 Special Report
Diocese of Cleveland 2008 Candidate Survey
Diocese of Toledo, Catholic Chronicle articles on Faithful Citizenship
Diocese of Columbus Faithful Citizenship Resources
Archdiocese of Cincinnati Faithful Citizen Resources
Diocese of Youngstown Faithful Citizenship Resources
Diocese of Toledo Faithful Citizen Resources
Diocese of Cleveland Faithful Citizenship Resources
OHIO BALLOT ISSUES NOVEMBER 2008
Issues 1, 2 & 3 were placed on the November ballot by the Ohio Legislature. The remaining issues were citizen initiated. Issue 4 (Sick Leave) was voluntarily removed from ballot consideration.
For your consideration, the Catholic Bishops of Ohio have chosen to take the following public positions:
NEUTRALITY on Issues 1 (Ballot Deadlines), 2 (“Clean Ohio” Bonds), and 3 (Water Rights),
YES on 5 (Payday Lending Reform),
NO on 6 (Private Casino).
Official Pro & Con Arguments on all these issues can be found on the Secretary of State's website.
Catholic Conference of Ohio Ballot Summary and Recommendations
Catholic Conference of Ohio Bulletin Insert on Ballot Issues
Catholic Conference of Ohio Letter to Editor on Isses 5 & 6
Issue 1: Filing Deadline Ohio Ballot Issues: PASSED
The Ballot-Deadline Amendment is a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment asking voters whether Ohio should extend the current 90 day filing deadline for placing an issue on the ballot to 125 days.
Pro Arguments
Ballots need to be printed well in advance of an election. In the past several elections, issues were listed on the ballot that did not officially make the ballot. This caused voter confusion, additional printing expense, unnecessary advertising expenses, and the need for additional explanations by election officials. Requiring an earlier deadline of 125 days prior to an election rather than the current 90 or 60 days deadlines should help avoid such problems.
Con Arguments
A 125 day deadline before a general election is too long. Citizen groups often need the additional one or two months allowed under current law to gather sufficient signatures. If the deadline for placing an issue on the November ballot is in early July, citizens seeking a ballot change may have to wait till the following year’s election. The issue may be more difficult and expensive to pursue if the issue is not fresh in people’s minds.
Church Teaching & Focus Question
In Catholic Social Teaching, shared participation of citizens in shaping the destiny of their community is an important right and duty.
Will Issue 1 help or hinder a citizen’s ability to reasonably pursue statewide ballot initiatives?
Catholic Conference of Ohio Position
The Catholic Bishops of Ohio are neutral on Issue 1.
Issue 2: Clean Ohio Fund : PASSED
The Ohio Bond Amendment is a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment. It is part of the Governor's overall Jobs Stimulus package. Voters will be asked to approve $400 Million in Bonds to continue funding the Clean Ohio Fund established in 2000 for environmental and related conservation, preservation, and revitalization purposes.
Pro Arguments Cleanohio .org
Ohio voters overwhelmingly passed the Clean Ohio Program in 2000. Issue 2 will continue this effective and helpful program.
Issue 2 will not raise taxes. Passage will stimulate the economy, bring new dollars into communities, preserve farmland and green space and create trails. Issue 2 was placed on the ballot through broad bipartisan support from Ohio elected officials.
Con Arguments
Issuing $400 M. in bonds will result in too much debt for Ohio taxpayers. In difficult economic times, it may not be prudent for government to take out more debt. Private entities and/or State General Revenue monies, not borrowed dollars, should fund the Clean Ohio Program.
Church Teaching & Focus Question
In Catholic Social Teaching protecting the land, water, and air we share is a religious duty of stewardship. Economic development that serves the human person is also essential.
Is Issue 2 a reasonable, responsible and effective way to help care for the earth and promote helpful economic development?
Catholic Conference of Ohio Position
The Catholic Bishops of Ohio are neutral on Issue 2.
Issue 3: Great Lakes Water Rights: PASSED
The Ohio Water Compact Constitutional Amendment is a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment that was proposed along side the Great Lakes Water Compact passed by the legislature in June 2008. The goal of the amendment is to protect landowners' right to the "reasonable use" of water on or running under their property.
Pro Arguments
Issue 3 will prioritize the importance of private property rights. Ohio statutes and common law practices related to private property rights are subject to varying court interpretations of “public trust” and “public welfare.” Specifying water rights within the Constitution will aid courts in addressing future public and private water use disputes.
Issue 3 was placed on the ballot through broad bipartisan support from Ohio elected officials.
Con Arguments
Issue 3 is unnecessary and should not be included in Ohio’s Constitution. Current statutes and common law adequately protect and balance private property rights with public welfare needs.
Issue 3 does not give an accurate picture of private property rights. Property owners do not actually own the water beneath their land. They have a right to reasonable use of that water, but the state always has the power to regulate how it is used and take it for just compensation. Issue 3 gives owners a false sense of security that private property cannot be taken away at a later date.
Church Teaching & Focus Question
In Catholic Social Teaching, private property is an essential element of a just economic policy and social order. However, Christian tradition has never recognized this right as absolute and untouchable. It is subordinate to the rights of common use and the common good since the “goods” of God’s creation are meant for everyone to share.
Does Issue 3 reasonably and effectively balance private property water rights with the needs of the common good?
Catholic Conference of Ohio Position
The Catholic Bishops of Ohio are neutral on Issue 3.
Issue 4: Sick Leave has been removed from the Ballot.
Issue 5: Payday Lending PASSED
On June 2, 2008 the Governor signed into law HB 545. H.B. 545 was a result of 12 months of legislative debate regarding how best to reform Ohio’s payday lending law. Among other things, H.B. 545 places a 28% APR (annual percentage rate) cap on small loans; reduces to $500 the amount that can be loaned; restricts borrowers to four loans per year; limits them to one loan at a time; allows them 30 days to repay the loan and prohibits internet lending.
Section 3 of this bill eliminated the existing payday lending provisions in favor of a more regulated and limited small loan program. Payday lenders are seeking to repeal this section of the new bill in order to allow pre-HB545 practices to continue.
In pre-HB 545 practices, a payday loan borrower writes a check (up to $800) typically dated for two weeks later. The money is advanced for a fee ($15 per $100 borrowed). If the borrower is unable to pay back this loan within the two weeks, interest (5% per month on the unpaid principal) and collection fees are assessed. When fees and charges are converted to the federally required annual percentage rate (APR), they amount to 391%.
Voting Clarification
Issue 5 asks whether Section 3 of HB 545 should remain part of Ohio law. Voting NO will repeal Section 3 of HB 545, thus allowing the payday industry to continue as before. Voting YES will keep the reforms enacted by HB 545 that include the elimination of previous payday lending practices.
Pro Arguments http://www.yesonissue5.com
Voters should vote YES on Issue 5. HB 545 passed the Ohio General Assembly with overwhelming bipartisan support. It is considered one of the best legislative responses to “breaking the cycle of debt” caused by over zealous lending practices and under-regulated payday loan businesses. The typical payday borrower is charged 391% APR in interest.
Payday lending is a debt-trap. Borrowers are given easy access to credit that most cannot afford. Studies indicate that only 1% of payday borrowers pay off their original loan in the standard two-week cycle. Typically, borrowers will take out another loan at another payday store in order to pay off the first loan. Studies indicate that the typical payday loan borrower takes out between 10-13 loans per year.
A NO vote on Issue 5, repealing Section 3 of HB 545, will create confusion over interest rates, and lead to expensive and time-consuming legal challenges. It will return Ohio to the less-regulated and abusive status quo. Retain Section 3 of HB 545: vote YES on Issue 5.
Con Arguments http://www.ohioans4financialfreedom.com
Section 3 of HB 545, which eliminates payday lending, should be repealed. Payday loans consumers should be able to decide if they want lending options for their simplicity, convenience and because it's cheaper than many alternatives. Consumers will pay more for less desirable, more costly alternatives like bounced checks and credit card late fees, and at much higher rates than a payday loan.
HB 545‘s replacement loan provisions are too restrictive and unsustainable as a business model. Capping APR charges at 28% will mean that a lender can charge only $1.08 per $100 borrowed. As a result up to 1,600 payday lending stores may close (stores are already closing). This would result in the loss of more than 6,000 good paying jobs with benefits, and a $272.2 million total loss to Ohio's economy.
391% APR, while accurately based upon a year-long loan, is deceptive because the typical payday loan is two weeks. If the borrower pays back the loan on time, the borrower has typically paid 15 % in interest ($15 per $100 borrowed).
Church Teaching & Focus Questions
The teachings of our faith provide many warnings about usury and exploitation of people. Lending practices that, intentionally or unintentionally, take unfair advantage of one’s desperate circumstances are unjust.
On balance, do you consider the pre-HB 545 payday lending practices to be fair, helpful and needed, or do you believe them to be exploitative, harmful and unnecessary?
Is Section 3 of HB 545, which prohibits payday loans from charging a 391% APR, a well conceived and appropriate response to the needs of consumers, especially low income consumers?
Catholic Conference of Ohio Position
On June 27, 2007 the Ohio Catholic Bishops stated their support for initiatives that protect the working poor and all Ohio consumers from the spiraling indebtedness caused by payday lending. The Catholic Conference of Ohio believes that HB 545 responsibly addresses this concern, and encourages a YES vote to maintain the significant and necessary reforms regarding payday lending.
Issue 6: Casino Gambling: FAILED
Issue 6 will amend Ohio’s Constitution to authorize one privately owned casino in the State of Ohio at a site located in southwest Ohio in Clinton County near Dayton, Columbus and Cincinnati. The casino will be required to pay a tax of up to 30% on its gross receipts, a portion of which will be distributed to all Ohio counties based on population to be used at each county’s discretion.
The tax percentage payable by the casino will be reduced in the event another casino is authorized in Ohio. It shall not exceed the lesser of twenty-five percent or the percentage payable by any other casino operations.
Issue 6 requires the casino operator to make a minimum initial investment of $600 million for the development of the casino property. It will also authorize the casino to conduct any game permitted in the State of Nevada, or any state adjacent to Ohio, except bets on races or sporting events. Only persons age 21 and over would be permitted to place wagers.
A Gaming Regulatory Commission would be established.
Pro Arguments http://myohionow.com
All Ohio counties will share the wealth from revenue generated by the resort casino. Approximately $211 million in tax revenue is projected to be divided among Ohio’s 88 counties based on population, and each county will decide how to best spend their money.
The world-class destination resort expects to create up to 5,000 permanent, jobs with average salaries of $34,000.
A minimum of $600 million will be spent on developing the resort casino project. Phase One of the project will include a facility featuring approximately 5,000 slot machines, 150 table games (including blackjack, roulette and craps), and a 20-table poker room. A luxury hotel with approximately 1,500 rooms, and a championship golf course and shooting sports course will also be developed.
Con Arguments http://www.votenocasinos.com
West Ohio Conference of the United Methodist Church
Casinos and slot machines harm families and seduce gamblers, especially those with lower incomes. Gamblers can quickly lose large amounts of money within casinos. Studies have indicated that the problems of gambling addiction double when gambling opportunities are placed within 50 miles of the gambler.
Incidents of crime (substance abuse, prostitution, assault and battery, etc.) often increase around casinos.
Projected revenues from this casino are overstated and offer no guarantees. While individual counties will receive some monies, the state will not receive any revenues. Due to the “competition clause” in Issue 6, tax revenues could greatly decrease if another casino is authorized, especially one controlled by a Native American tribe that would not have to pay taxes to any state or county entity.
Passage of Issue 6 will establish Ohio as a Class III gambling state under the federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act making it easier for Indian casinos to open in Ohio.
The Ohio Constitution should not be used as a tool for private companies to set up exclusive monopolies, take money out of Ohio, and exempt themselves from local zoning ordinances. The gambling owners will reap extensive monetary gain and have a constitutionally protected monopoly in the State.
Church Teachings & Focus Question
Games and schemes of chance are not in themselves contrary to justice. The Church recognizes, however, that a variety of social ills can become associated with any form of gambling. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, forms of gambling “become morally unacceptable when they deprive someone of what is necessary to provide for his needs and those of others. The passion for gambling risks becoming an enslavement.”
In previous Catholic Conference of Ohio statements on gambling, a distinction was made between charitable bingo and casino gambling. While there are a variety of social ills that can also be associated with charitable bingo, the gambling stakes are much lower and 100% of the proceeds are used for charitable purposes. The Catholic Bishops of Ohio would prefer, and in fact have encouraged, our institutions to raise needed funds through alternative forms of fundraising, where feasible.
Is Issue 6 well conceived and in the long-term best interest of the people of Ohio?
Catholic Conference of Ohio Position
The Catholic Bishops of Ohio are opposed to Issue 6. The Catholic Conference of Ohio believes casino gambling is not in the best moral, social and economic interests of the citizens of our state. Furthermore, the Conference believes that the Ohio constitution should not be amended primarily to benefit a single private entity. The Conference encourages a NO vote on Issue 6.
Need More Information
For Resources on Catholic Teachings related to Political Participation link to: Catholic Conference of Ohio Page on Faith and Politics
Contact Jim Tobin , 614-224-7147
Designed and maintained by Advent Media, Inc. www.advent1.com