Tuesday, 30 June 2009

My Problem With Legalizing Gambling

I could personally care less about gambling. If people want to waste their money on gambling, that doesn't really bother me. In fact if we legalized gambling in this state, it would affect me very little. I would go to the casino about as often as I do know. About once every five years. I just don't have money laying around that I can take and throw away at a casino.

But at the end of the day, it should be up to the people to decide. Our state constitution is very clear on gaming. Anything other than a lottery and that includes slots are unconstitutional. Thus the sham of a bill they tried to pass in the last session would not have survived a legal challenge in the courts. (Another reason the session was a waste) At the same time, I opposed what Williams was trying to do. The Governor didn't put his plan on the agenda so it should never have been addressed. Passing it would have been just as unconstitutional as the slots bill.

Hopefully in January they can come together to find better ways to help the ailing horse industry. And if they still want to pursue slots and gambling then pass a resolution to amend the constitution and put it before the people. Any other sleight of hand method would be clearly unconstitutional.

Now let's turn to my bigger problem with the whole push for gambling. I have some concerns over making gambling constitutional. I think that proponents of gambling overestimate the possible "revenues" and underestimate the costs associated with legalized gambling. Just look at the results of the lottery. Has it been the panacea that it was promoted to be? If it was then we wouldn't be talking about expanded gambling today. I think there have been negative costs associated with the lottery that were downplayed at the time. How many times have you been to a convenient store and see some person who doesn't look like they have much money plopping down $40 or more on lottery tickets? Are we really helping these people by providing them an avenue of false hope in which to pour their money ?

Legalized gambling will just bring more of the same.

At the same time I am believer in freedom. While I might disagree with people throwing their money away seeking nirvana, it is their right to do such a thing. Which is why if the people want gambling then I have no problem with it being legalized. Heck I would actively promote the cause if it wasn't for my biggest concern. The true reason Democrats want to legalize gambling. They are not doing it because of some fundamental right. No. They want to realize a windfall for government. It provides them with an opportunity to enhance money flowing into the state's coffers. Money which will allow them to further enlarge the size of and scope of government. A move that would inevitably encroach and restrict me freedoms.

It is for that reason, that I hope legalized gambling continues to fail in the legislature. If they want my support then they must a) pass an amendment to the constitution and b) make sure it doesn't  create a windfall for government. Until that point, I will actively work for its defeat.

Posted by brians at 6:25 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (1)

Monday, 29 June 2009

The Lost Session

The legislative session ended last week and it was a complete waste of time and money. What did they accomplish? They passed a bill allowing Beshear to cut the budget. Something he already had the authority to do. They also passed a bill that provided a whole bunch of tax breaks. Turns out we couldn't even afford those tax breaks.
State officials are still trying to determine how much the state must cut from its budget because lawmakers approved a host of tax breaks included in a bill that was signed into law on Friday by Gov. Steve Beshear.

The measure includes tax breaks for active-duty military personnel, those who buy new cars and for people who buy newly built homes. Beshear signed the bill, which also included an overhaul of the state’s economic incentive programs that Beshear pushed, despite misgivings about the the impact the tax breaks added by lawmakers will have on the state’s shaky finances.
Normally, I don't have a problem with tax breaks, but did they have to be passed right now? Couldn't they have waited until the January session. It's not like the state is rolling in money. We didn't need a special session to spend money that we don't have. We can do that just as effectively in a normal session.

But then again the special session wasn't for budget cuts or tax breaks. No. The special session was all about an unconstitutional slots gaming bill. One that had no chance of passing from the onset. They had to put all kinds of goodies into the measure just to get it out of the house. And as expected it died in the Senate on a 10-5 vote by the budget committee. Is anyone really shocked that it died in committee? Especially when Sen Williams predicted as such months in advance.

At the end of the day, the session was pointless. An exercise in futility. A waste of taxpayer money. A waste of legislators time. A waste of a lot of things. It was a lost session.




Posted by brians at 9:53 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)

Out Last Week

The lack of blogging last week was brought to you by Lyme Disease. At this point I would have to say that I don't recommend contracting it. Not fun. Sigh.

Apparently I missed the end of the session and a number of other fun stories. I'll be wrapping up last week news stories tomorrow and then will begin normal blogging on Tuesday.
Posted by brians at 2:37 AM in Announcements
Responses (0)

Saturday, 20 June 2009

How Much Do 52 Votes In KY House Cost?

If anyone wondered how much money it takes to garner 52 votes in the Kentucky House, the question can finally be answered. The cost is a princely $1.3 Billion. That is the amount of money the "slots for tracks" bill will spend on school and university construction projects. If you doubt votes were bought, read Will Coursey of Benton's explanation of his vote.
Democrat Will Coursey of Benton said his vote for the bill was difficult, but in the end he couldn't turn down $40million in new schools for his district.

"I've visited with a number of school superintendents and school board members and folks I wouldn't have imagined would have supported the legislation and they're in favor of it," he said. "So it was just a vote for my district, and I'm prepared to support it."

He added, "My district won't see a single video lottery terminal."
It is obvious reading these remarks that the only reason he supports "slots at tracks" was the money for schools in his district. I imagine he wasn't the only representative swayed by the huge sums of money. The whole legislative process has been turned into a sham by these legal bribes. Fortunately, it doesn't look like the Senate can be so easily bought.
Posted by brians at 12:30 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (1)

Iranians Rally For Freedom

It has been amazing to watch the Iranian people demonstrate the last few days in massive numbers. Standing up as one against their oppressive regime. As I write this many of these protesters are being beaten, gassed, and shot by the various police forces. It saddens me to see people be bludgeoned so violently for just voicing their yearnings for simple human freedoms. Freedoms we take for granted here in the U.S.

It makes you realize how fortunate we are to be enjoying the freedoms we have. It brings to the forefront of our consciousness how important liberty truly is. More importantly how difficult it is to achieve. I only hope that we don't let those freedoms slip through our fingers to the hands of an ever expanding government.

Regardless, my prayers and thoughts today  go out  the Iranians who are struggling to earn their freedom. May they succeed in their struggle.
Posted by brians at 12:05 PM in Political Issues
Responses (0)

Thursday, 18 June 2009

Let's Spend The Money Before We Get It!

Stumbo's Slots for Tracks bill was in deep deep trouble. How do we know this? Because he attached 1.3 Billion in funding for schools to the legislation. He is already spending the money the slots will bring in based upon predictions of the revenue it will generate. A few questions. What happens if the slots don't bring in predicted revenue? What will happen to the funding for schools? Isn't Kentucky in financial trouble? Shouldn't we be saving this money until times get better?

I am sure Stumbo doesn't want to answer any of these questions. In fact, he just wants to ignore them. Why? So he can buy off votes of the other legislators. I mean what legislator wouldn't want to pump more money into education? This just provides them with a convenient excuse to vote for the bill they would normally oppose.

Personally, I find the whole thing a bit sureal. This is a replay of the original lottery debate. Remember how the lottery was going to save our educational system? Within a few years of the creation of the lottery,  most of the money generated was de-linked from education and placed into the general fund. Any bets that slots legislation will end up with the same fate?

Another thing I find amusing is the amount of money that Stumbo is trying to wring out of the tracks.

Speaker Pro Tem Larry Clark, D-Louisville, predicted that tracks will complain about the higher taxes and fees but said their new slots construction may be eligible for tourism incentives as well.

The higher taxes and fees should not result in the tracks building smaller facilities because of the increased costs, Stumbo said.

Turfway Park President Bob Elliston, whose Florence track would have the highest license fee and likely would be in the upper tax bracket beginning in year six, said the new fees and tax are at the "upper limits of what we think is bankable, but we believe we can, in a tough way, make this happen."

Wasn't this legislation about helping the tracks? I thought saving the horse industry was the most important reason for the slots. If Turfway is going to have to struggle to make it work. How is it we are helping the horse industry with this legislation?

No, the fact that they are soaking the tracks for as much money as possible gets to the heart of the slots legislation. It was always about one thing. Giving the people in Frankfort more money to spend on stuff. Everything else is just a "reason" for them to take more money. Once you take a minute to delve past the surface it becomes obvious. The transparency of the whole scheme is pathetic. Fortunately, it doesn't look like they are going to get away with it.
Posted by brians at 8:37 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)

Wednesday, 17 June 2009

KY Democrat Informercial for Slots at Tracks

[Black Screen]
Announcer: This is a paid advertisement by the Democratic Party in Kentucky

[Fade into shot of Beshear behind his desk]

Beshear: As you all know, our state is facing difficult financial times. But it doesn't have to be that way. Government can be living the life of Reilly. It is possible with this amazing new system called "Slots at Tracks". "Slots at Tracks" is our specially designed new program where we will seek out people who can't do math and tell them they can win big money if they just shovel money into these bright and shiny machines called slots. It has worked elsewhere and it can work here! We believe their are enough gullible people in this great state to make all of government's dreams a reality. All you have to do is act now.

Announcer: But wait.. there is more!

[Cut to pictures of horses frolicking in a green field]

Beshear:  If you act now, not only will you save government but you will be able to save Kentucky's horse industry from disappearing.  That's right! "Slots At Tracks" will keep these beautiful animals from leaving our state forerver. Without "Slots At Tracks", these noble creatures will be gone by the end of the year! Acting today will keep these majestic horses in our state. So pick up the phone and dial your legislator right now and tell them you want "Slots at Tracks"!

[horn sounds]
Announcer: But wait... there is more!

[Cut to Stumbo on the house floor]

Stumbo: Not only will government get everything it needs to expand. Not only will we save the horse industry. But we will throw in an additional $700 million in free schools! That's right. $700 million in new schools. No more old and delapidated schools. No more schools that are older than 30 years. All you have to do is act now! Pick up your phone and call today!

[horn sounds]
Announcer: But wait... there is more!

Stumbo: That's right, not only will you get an expanding  government, horses in Kentucky, and $700 million in new schools, but if you call in the next 30 minutes we will even throw in a $130 million dollar science building for UK.  All of it will be yours as long as you order "Slots at Tracks" today. So what are you waiting for! Give us a call today!

Announcer: Pick up the phone right now and call your legislator and tell them you want "Slots at Tracks" today. Only you can save our great state! So call today and tell them you want "Slots at Tracks"!

[Faid to black with the following small print at the bottom of the screen]
The Democratic party and its members are not responsible for the results of "Slots at Tracks" nor do they guarantee any of the money that will be raised from the product. All results are based upon wild ass guesses pulled from thin air.


Posted by brians at 4:20 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)

Tuesday, 16 June 2009

Revenge Is Dish Best Served Cold

The Democrats are in full press mode on legislation that would allow slots at racetracks. Most of the dire warnings about the horse industry are attempts to put pressure on Sen David Williams in the Senate to pass the gambling bill. While many think Sen Williams will be the key person on this issue, I think another may turn out to play a bigger role on the issue of slots at tracks. The unlikely candidate? Spurned former Speaker of the House Jody Richards. He was the one who asked for the AG's  vapid opinion on the constitutionality of such legislation. It was in the story covering the AG's opinion  that I found this tidbit.

Richards said he tried to ask the question the same way it was posed to former Attorney General Ben Chandler, who said an amendment was needed.

The difference "just points up even more that there has to be a court decision on it," said Richards, adding that he believes an amendment is needed and that he will oppose Beshear's bill.

I imagine the Richards still has a substantial amount of support in the house. I know he lost the speakership, but I doubt it was by many votes. He probably still has a core collection of loyal supporters. If he rallies his troops and the Republicans mostly hold the line against the legislation then I doubt the slots bill will make it out of the house for the senate to even consider. A move the will embarass both the Speaker and the Governor.

For that reason alone I wouldn't be surprised if Richards silently leads the charge against slots. Why not? He was burned by the Governor two sessions ago over the gambling issue. Why would he carry his water now? The biggest proponent of the slots bill is the current Speaker, Greg Stumbo. What better way to get revenge from the person who took your place than to torpedo his  top legislative priority? I think this is a golden opportunity for Richards to pay back the Governor and Stumbo in spades.

Yes, I definitely think it will be interesting to see what happens this week in Frankfort.

Posted by brians at 3:43 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)

Monday, 15 June 2009

Vapid Opinion From KY AG

Jack Conway, the Kentucky AG is nothing but a Democratic shill. The latest example of this is his "opinion" that slots can be legally adopted without a constitutional amendment. Before we get into the details of his opinion let's remember these small facts. One his family is involved in the racing industry and his dad sits on the racing commission which endorsed slots at the track. Secondly, he is a Democrat whose party is pushing hard for the amendment. With both of these facts it is not at all surprising to get today's ruling. Now let's go through the specifics of his opinion. I am going to skip the superfluous stuff and dive into the heart of the matter.
In 1988, Kentucky voters adopted a constitutional amendment, codified at §226(1), permitting the General Assembly to establish a Kentucky state lottery.....House Bil 1 as enacted (1988 Ex. Sess.) provided that "'Lottery' mean(t) any game of chance approved by the corporation and operated pursuant to this chapter." KR §154A.010(3) (1988 Ex. Sess.) (Emphasis supplied). Further, the HB 1 permitted the Kentucky Lottery Corporation to specify "the types of games to be conducted, including but not limited to, instant lotteries, on-line games and other games traditional to the lottery..." Id. (Emphasis supplied).

This authority was revised in 1990, when the General Assembly amended KR Chapter 154A to prohibit the Kentucky Lottery Corporation from (1) approving or operating a lottery based on amateur athletics; (2) approving or operating any casino or similar gambling establishment; or (3) approving or operating any game played with cards, dice, dominos, slot machines, roulette wheels, or where winers are determined by the outcome of a sports contest.

The significance of the 1990 amendment to the state lottery is highlighted factual reasons. As is discussed below in section F of this here for legal as well as opinion if casino-style games and slot machines were unconstitutional, why then was there a need to ban these games by statute?
Here we begin to see the forming of his opinion. He asks why they banned these games by statute if the Kentucky Lottery wasn't able to enact any of these games. The answer is obvious for anyone with a brain. They put it in there not because it is constitutionally possible. They put it in there because they didn't want people in the future coming in and doing what Beshear and his conspirators are trying to do now. Redefining lotteries to mean all forms of gaming. They were trying to ensure the definition of a lottery was not expanded in the future.

To bolster this preposterous argument he turns to "constitutional principles"
Legislative enactments carry a strong presumption of constitutionality. Kentucky Sheriffs Assn Inc. v. Fischer, Ky., 986 S.W.2d 44, 447 (1999); Rose v. Council for Better Education, Inc., Ky., 790 S.W.2d 186, 209 (1989). Doubts regarding the constitutionality of a legislative enactment must be resolved in favor of the sovereign authority of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, which is retained by its citizenry and vested in the lawmaking authority of Kentucky's legislators, who are as representatives of its citizenry.
Here he is arguing that all acts of the legislature carry a "strong presumption of constitutionality". That means that since the previous amendment put mention to other forms of gaming then they were making a comment on the constitutionality of what lotteries were. In this case he is basically taking the opposite meaning of what the legislators intended and uses it to bolster his argument. Amazing.

Now we turn to the meaning of a "lottery" and we start with a look at the Jockey Club decision.
Based on this interpretation of lotteries, the Court held that parimutuel wagering on horse racing did not fall within the general prohibition against lotteries. The Court opined that while chance may be essential to the result, a horse race depends on more than mere chance, as distinguished from a traditional concept of a lottery. Id. at 992.
The Jockey Club ruling basically stated that horse race gambling was a game of skill and not chance. Therefore it is not banned by the state's constitution.
Subsequent to the Jockey Club decision, lower court decisions in Kentucky's appellate courts have generally followed the reasoning that Section 226' s lottery prohibition applies to games of pure chance. (Bingo Lottery Act permitting cities to authorize bingo fell within Section 226' s lottery prohibition because, like a .traditional OAG 09-004 Page 10 lottery, the outcome was determined "purely by lot or chance")
Here we once again begin to see the broadening of the definition of a "lottery" to be any game of chance. This is where they forget about the secondary clause within the constitution.
Except as provided in this section, lotteries and gift enterprises are forbidden
If all games of chance are "lotteries" then what the heck is a gift enterprise? I think the definition of a lottery was very specific in the late 1800's. That is why the use of gift enterprises is put into the equation. It was meant as the primary clause for banning all games of chance. But nowhere does the AG address this clause of the constitution.

Next he moves into the "State Lottery" exemption and now some really fun legal jujitsu.

During the Regular Election of 1988, Kentucky voters approved a constitutional amendment, codified at Ky. Const. §226(1) permitting legislation for and the operation of a state lottery:

       The General Assembly may establish a state lottery to be conducted
       in cooperation with other states... (and) operated by or on behalf of
       the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

§226(1). During the course of the debates that resulted in §226(1), the legislature defeated language that would have constitutionally limited the state lottery to "weekly lotteries or drawings." HFA 3 to HB 1 (1988 Regular Session), Ky. H.R. Jour, 1988 Reg. Sess. at p. 2109. This House Floor Amendment sponsored by StateRepresentative Louis Johnson was an explicit attempt to exclude games that  could eventually be played on electronic devices or slot machines.

It is authoritative that the legislature defeated the amendment. Why the amendment was rejected is another matter entirely. In oping that §226(1) prohibited VLT's, OAG 99-008 relied upon the comment of Representative Donnermeyer out of context and concluded that the legislature specifically relied on ths "assurance" when rejecting the amendment. This conclusion in OAG 99-008 is highly speculative. To presume that the entire General Assembly voted on the amendment based entirely on a single comment is inconsistent with Kentucky law.
This is brilliant crap. The legislators have the presumption of constitutionality but only with what they pass and the debates have little play into the matter. What makes this hilarious is the fact that earlier he comments on how the courts used the nature of debate during the state constitutional convention to determine intent.
The Court carefully examined the proceedings of the 1890 Constitutional Convention to elucidate its interpretation
So it is OK to look at the proceedings of the Constitutional Convention to elucidate interpretation, but in this case it is entirely ridiculous. Hmmm, double standard? But we digress. Once again he uses the argument that because amendments were offered that the definition of the lottery must be broad.
By squarely rejectig the Johnon floor amendment, the General Assembly adopted a broader scope for the term "state lottery," supporting a conclusion that §226(1) permts the General Assembly to authorize electronic gaming under the auspices of the Kentucky Lottery Corporation without need for a constitutional amendment.
I find this whole opnion a bit specious. Using his arguments, I could easily make a case against slots. Didn't the legislators last session vote against an amendment that would allow casino style gambling in Kentucky? If that is the case, doesn't it say that they believed that an amendment was necessary for casino gambling in Kentucky? If that decision by the legislature carries a "presumption of constitutionality" then it could be argued that games found within a casino are illegal in Kenctucky. Last time I checked, slots were part of casino. If that is the case then slots would also be illegal without a constitional amendment.

The fact that I can make a counter argument using his "reasoning" illustrates how vapid his opinion on the matter is. No, this is not a serious legal document. It is a political football they are going to use to try and push through slots legislation. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.
Posted by brians at 9:47 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (1)

Saturday, 13 June 2009

We Need Creative Ideas And Not Government Run Health Care

It is true that the country has developed a problem with obesity. We have too many over weight people and it puts a strain on many aspects of our economy. The answer from Obama and the Democrats is to tell you what you should or shouldn't eat. The best way for them to accomplish the task is to take over the health care industry. That way in order to "control costs" they can make decisions on how you live your life. I swear that Obama and the Democrats are using George Orwell's book, 1984, as a manual instead of a warning, but I digress.

The worst thing we can do is have government telling us what we need to eat. Instead, we need a better method of distributing information to the public. I don't think anyone wants to be fat, I just don't think they have the tools necessary to eat smarter. I came across a really good idea the other day on how we might begin to address the problem without government mandating to everyone what they must eat.
We need to make the next step in food labeling. Our current macro-nutrient profiles can hide how our foods are often devoid of phytonutrients. What we need is to have every packaged food to be given a grade by the FDA: A – F.

Then, like using Michi’s Ladder, you’d be encouraged to eat higher grade foods. Of course we’d have corporate lobbying and disputed grades but, for the most part, good foods would still be obvious. For example, maybe a good potato chip would get a C while a bad one got an F, but no potato chip could ever get better than a C because no matter how you look at it these have no place in your diet other than as an indulgence. Ditto for ice cream and most desserts. All fruits and veggies would be A or B. No sense splitting hairs here. We’ll want to do this as consumers but veggies from nutrient depleted soil are still better than the best French fry.

Next, the government only allows food stamps to pay for A and B grade foods. If we don’t allow them to be used for beer and smokes, how can we allow them to be used for Coke and Cheetoes, which are arguably worse for you? There is no way a person on assisted living should be able to be obese. Yet this demographic is now highly obese and putting a huge strain on our health care system because of it.
Normally I am not a fan of new government policy, but this idea has merit. If we are going to label the nutrition contents of the food then we might as well take it to the next step and simplify the information. That way you don't have to be a nutrition expert to determine the healthiness of a particular food. You could quickly go through  your shopping cart and determine how healthy your diet is.

I especially like the part where people on food stamps have to purchase A and B level foods. If we are going to give them "free food" then it should be healthy and not necessarily something they crave. If you want to take government assistance then you are going to have to eat healthier food. I agree with Steve that their is no reason people at the poverty level should be overweight.

The best part of this idea is that it wouldn't involve the governments take over of the health care system. It would be a small tweak to something the government already does. I suspect it would do more to make America healthy than a government take over of the health system. That is why we need creative ideas and not government mandates.



Posted by brians at 1:43 PM in Health
Responses (0)

Is McConnell Trying To Turn the Republicans into Democrats?

First McConnell tries to keep Bunning from seeking re-election and now he is endorsing Crist in Florida. What the heck is going on?

Bunning has consistently been one of the more conservative members of the Senate. He apparently wants him to step down to be replaced by someone who will more likely be more moderate than Bunning. And now he is endorsing Crist in Floriday? Crist is at best a squish Republican. He would be the equivalent of electing another Arlen "Ship Jumper" Specter to the senate. Why the heck are the top Republicans wanting Republicans who will consistently vote with the Democrats on key conservative issues.

The Florida endorsement is very disturbing as the Speaker of the Republican led house, Mark Rubio, is also running for the seat. Mr. Rubio is infinitely more personable than Crist and more importantly a solid conservative. Florida has traditionally been a red state. If it were Massachusettes I could understand the endorsement. But Florida? Why the heck is McConnell endorsing a ultra moderate Republican when the real conservative in the race would assuredly win the general election. Next year will undoubtedly be a banner year for Republicans yet he acts like it will be a huge Dem year. It makes no sense. The best thing he could have done is stay out of the primary and see who wins it.

I used to be a huge fan of McConnell and thought he would be an excellent leader of the Republican party in the senate. I am no longer sure if that is the case. He has definitely gone wobbly. He apparently looks to be shaping the Republican party into the Democrat Lights. Why vote for the light version when you can get the real thing. I can't explain it. The only thing I can come up with is it must be the toxic air in Washington DC. Maybe McConnell should come and spend a few months back in Kentucky so he can clear his head and start doing the right thing.



Posted by brians at 12:50 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)

Thursday, 11 June 2009

Would Slots Even Be Legal?

I am not a lawyer, but I am going to take a stab at the question would slots legislation be legal? I decided to explore this question by taking a look at the original Kentucky constitution and what provisions it has against gaming. Here is the text from state constitution before 1992.
226 - Lotteries and gift enterprises forbidden. Lotteries and gift enterprises are forbidden, and no privileges shall be granted for such purposes, and none shall be exercised, and no schemes for similar purposes shall be allowed. The General Assembly shall enforce this section by proper penalties. All lottery privileges or charters heretofore granted are revoked
The key question I had from reading the constitution above is what are lotteries and gift enterprises? I did some searching on Google until I came across the case STATE v SHUGART that was taken before the Alabama Supreme Court. It provided the definition for these terms.
To be a criminal lottery, there must be a consideration, and when small amounts are hazarded to gain large amounts, and the result of winning to be determined by the use of a contrivance of chance, in which neither choice nor skill can exert any effect, it is gambling by lot, or a prohibited lottery. It was also said in this case that lot  has been defined to be a contrivance to determine a question by chance or without the action of man's choice or will.
Wow, that is confusing. From what I gather lotteries are "games" of chance in which a person takes a "lot" and if his "lot" is selected a larger prize is gained. This is the way that current lotteries work.  A person takes a "lot" or a set of numbers and if those numbers are drawn (lot selected) then the person receives a large chunk of money. Raffles and other drawings would seem to me to fall into the category of lotteries.

So what is a "gift enterprise"? The court goes on to define that as well.
What constitutes a "gift enterprise"... The statute does not, in terms, define it. The thing denounced, "gift enterprise", is used in the statute in connection with "lottery", which is likewise denounced and prohibited. The term "gift enterprse" therefore, must be construed in connection with the context and the evil sought to be prohibited. The statute is manifestly directed against the vice of gaming. Without the aid of statutory definition of a "gift enterprise" suchs as the statute indeded to prohibit, we are left to determine its meaning by the context of the statute in which it is employed, and definitions given by lexicographers as well as by decisions of other courts.

In Bouvier's Law Dictionary the following definition is given - "Gift Enterprises" - a scheme for the division or distribution of certain articles of property, to be determined by chance, amongst those who have taken shares in the scheme....

The same definition is given in Black's Law Dictionary. In Anderson's Law Dictionary the following definition is given, "a gift enterprise, in common parlance, is a scheme for the division of distribution of certain articles of property, to be determined by chance, amoung those who have taken shares in the scheme.
The short of it is almost all gambling which is not a lottery fall into this definition of a gift enterprise. For example lets take a look at craps.  People put money (articles of property) down on the table and the winner is determined by the roll of the dice (chance) and the winners are given winnings based upon the result of the roll (shares in the scheme). Poker, blackjack, roulette and just about every form of gambling falls into this catch all. Thus the Kentucky constitution banned all forms of gambling. In 1992, the state ratified an update to the constitution that did two things. Allowed for a state lottery and legalized all forms of charitable gambling.
1) The General Assembly may establish a Kentucky state lottery and may establish a state lotter to be conducted in cooperation with other states. Any lottery so established shall be operated by or on behalf of the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

2) The General Assembly may by general law permit charitable lotteries and charitable gift enterprises...

3) Except as provided in this section, lotteries and gift enterprises are forbidden, and no privileges shall be granted for such purposes, and none shall be exercised, and no schemes for similar purposes shall be allowed. The General Assembly shall enforce this section by proper penalties. All lottery privileges or charters heretofore granted are revoked.
The modification of the law made it legal for the state to establish a state managed lottery organization. The Kentucky Lottery is that organization. To me the law is very specific on what is allowed. In this case only "lotteries" are allowed by the law.  All other forms of gaming are illegal.

Now we fast forward to Stumbo's oppinion on gambling while he was AG.
Such "lotteries' are generally characterized by the purchase of a card or ticket which entitles the holder to a prize should, purely by chance or lot, the numbers, letters, or symbols on the ticket match a winning combination. These types of games are known by many names, bingo, beano, keno, and lotto, as well as in slang references such as "numbers games', they they each carry recognizable indicia of a "lottery"...
What Stumbo argues is that slots are nothing but a "numbers game". Which means that "slots" fit into the definition of a "lottery" and is thus something that the Kentucky Lottery can introduce.

Here is my problem with Stumbo's argument. If you expand the definition of a "lottery" to be so broad then almost all forms of gambling would fall into a "numbers" game. Why wouldn't craps, roulette, or most casino games not also fall into this definition of a lottery? Roulette is a perfect example. You are buying a chance in a particular number and if the number comes up by chance you win.

One interesting things of note. Before the state constitution, the states actually licensed lotteries to be run by private citizens. The law basically canceled those licenses and made the practice of lotteries illegal.  So at the time, lotteries had a very definite and narrow meaning and the gift enterprises clause was a catch all for everything else. To expand the definition of lottery today well beyond the original concept defined by the framers seems to make a mockery of the original intent.

Therefore, it seems obvious to me that the video slots bill would be constitutionally illegal. Which means if they do pass the bill during the special session, there is an excellent chance that the law will be thrown out by the courts. It seems to me that the only legitimate way to legalize slots is to get a constitutional amendment to allow slots as a form of gambling in Kentucky. All other attempts run afoul of our state constitution and a waste of tax payer money.
Posted by brians at 3:18 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)

Wednesday, 10 June 2009

Here Comes The Push For Gambling

Beshear and the Democratic leaders want gambling in Kentucky. Does anyone doubt that? It looks like their defenders in the media are ramping up a full frontal media assault in support of legalized gambling. I predict these stories are just the tip of the ice burg. I wouldn't be surprised if we get a sob story every day between now and the end of the session about the ills of Kentucky's beloved horse industry.

Ok, I get it. The horse industry is in trouble. But why is the ONLY way to save the horse industry through legalized gambling? It seems to me that the concern should be over saving the horse industry rather than promoting such a polarizing issue. It seems to me that the more productive means of saving the horse industry is to have an open discusion and look for less divisive means for solving the problem. Seems to me that it is a perfect topic for the next regular legislative session in January.

So why force the gambling vote now? I know why. It is because it is the only way they can pass legalized gambling. Just look at the last session where gambling didn't even make it out of the Democratic controlled house for the answer. It just doesn't have the overwhelming support of Kentuckians. At best it is is 50/50 split. So why push it  now? Because the Dems are opportunists and they don't want a good crisis go to waste. They see the struggling horse industry as a means to bait the public into getting thier way.
Posted by brians at 4:14 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)

Tuesday, 9 June 2009

Beshear's Proposal For Slots

Beshear released his proposal today for a slots bill. Here is what he wants you to believe.
Kentucky’s signature horseracing industry is in a state of crisis,” Beshear said in a statement. “I believe my proposal will help level the playing field for Kentucky’s horse industry and help retain the 100,000 jobs and $4 billion economic impact that Kentucky enjoys as a result of horseracing.
Here is the true intent of the slots bill
Under Beshear’s proposal, each track facility would pay an initial application fee of $25,000, plus additional license fees that would generate $360 million for the state’s General Fund.
This was never about the horse industry. It was all about increasing revenue for government. These guys don't want to reduce the size of government. They don't see a limited role for government. They want to continue increasing the size of government. The only way to do that is to take in more revenue. This is just the latest scheme in an attempt to confiscate more taxpayer money.   What I think is funny is the attempt to buy off Kentuckian's support with a "tax cut".

Also, Kentuckians would see some of their tax liabilities lessened beginning in January 2010 through the implementation of this proposal.

Beginning Jan. 1, 2010, taxpayers would save an estimated $30 million through a nonrefundable individual income tax credit equal to 50 percent of the state property tax paid on registered motor vehicles, not to exceed $500 per tax year.

Kentucky has an estimated two million cars. That means the average car driver would get a $15 refund from the state. Wow, I guess they believe Kentuckians can be bought on the cheap. I still can't believe we have a special session just to "legalize" gambling in Kentucky. Can't this wait until the next regular session instead of waisting taxpayer money on a special session? Especially for a bill that will most likely get rejected by the courts even if it does pass.
Posted by brians at 1:56 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)

Monday, 8 June 2009

Gov Beshear's Unnecessary Special Session

Apparently the agenda is set for next weeks special session of the legislature.  And it is a very full docket.
Beshear’s agenda will include a plan to deal with a $1 billion shortfall in the state budget for the fiscal year that begins July 1, slots at the tracks, an economic incentives package and the mega-transportation projects.
The first thing I am baffled by is the economic incentive packages and mega-transportation projects. Are these really so important that they can't wait 6 months until the regular session. Especially the mega-transportation projects. It's not like these issues are going anywhere in the next six months. I have no idea why these items were crammed into the agenda for the special session. Do we really need to spend money in a "special session" now when we are dealing with a billion dollar shortfall?

Of course, I know the real reason these items have been added. It is an attempt to provide cover for the true purpose of the special session. Slots at tracks. Is there anyone in this state who doesn't believe the sole reason for the session is slots? Even with all of these tack on issues it is obvious this session is all about slots.

Let's go through the progression again. First, he called the session to "solve" the debt problem. But Sen Williams already said that was unnecessary.  He already had the authority to make the cuts. The next reason was to "save" the horse industry. But the fact that Beshear left Sen Williams competing idea on saving the industry off the agenda tells me he doesn't want to save the horse industry. He wants legalized gambling in Kentucky. The fact that he dissed Sen Williams idea almost assuredly dooms slots for the session.

So what are we left with? A session to approve cuts Beshear already had the power to do. A slots bill that has zero chance to pass. And two agenda items that could have waited 6 months till the net regular session. I think that qualifies as an unnecessary session.
Posted by brians at 9:01 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)

Saturday, 6 June 2009

Ghoulish Vigil

I am not here to defend Scott Roeder's actions. I think it was wrong for him to gun down Dr. Tiller in front of his church. I hope Mr Roeder gets the maximum sentence possible under law for his vile crime. While I don't believe Dr. Tiller should have been gunned down in front of his church, I don't understand the need to celebrate his life.
About 30 people gathered last night at First Unitarian Church at a vigil for a late-term abortion provider who was gunned down in a Kansas church on Sunday....Speakers condemned violence and applauded Tiller's commitment to his practice despite having been targeted by anti-abortion demonstrations and shot by a protester in 1993.
This baffles me. They condemn violence but praise a doctor whose only job was the butchering of  unborn children. What he did for a living was not something praise worthy. It is a despicable profession that makes a mockery of the Hippocratic Oath. An oath all doctors vow to follow. I don't think anyone should be gunned down, but I find the whole praising of Dr. Twiller a bit ghoulish.
Posted by brians at 10:58 AM in Political Issues
Responses (1)

Friday, 5 June 2009

It Was Never About Saving The "Horse Industry"

The Governor's plea to save the horse industry was nothing but a ruse to legalize slot machines. It was never about saving the horse industry. It was all about bringing new revenue into the state. They want to expand gambling so they can get their greedy hands on more money. The Governor all but admitted it today when he refused to place Sen Williams proposal as an agenda item for the special session.
But the Democratic governor said he would not amend his call to include a proposal by Senate President David Williams , R-Burkesville, to improve purses at racetracks without expanded gambling ... Williams’ plan would generate about $83 million a year for the horse industry by putting a 10 percent surcharge on lottery tickets, dedicating various taxes and fees for the industry’s use and levying a 1.5 percent tax on out-of-state wagering.

Beshear said he had concerns about Williams’ package and prefers that the legislature vote up or down on his plan to allow video lottery terminals at the tracks.

If Beshear was truly concerned about the survival of the horse industry, he would have been excited about the possibility of an alternative to expanded gambling. Instead he doesn't even think it is worthy of debate.

Personally, I think this is a brilliant move by Sen Williams. The Democrats have been whining about saving the horse industry as justification for expanded gambling. Sen Williams called them on it by offering an alternate proposal to help the tracks without gambling. A move that will bring no new revenue to the state but will help the tracks generate bigger purses. If this was only about "saving the horse industry" the Democrats would be glad for the alternative. Obviously the Governor is not.

The funny thing is Stumbo knows the Democrats has been outflanked by Williams and has the common sense to understand they have to add it to the debate even if they don't want to pass it. Otherwise they will look like fools.

Stumbo released a statement, saying it is Beshear’s prerogative to amend the call, “but we are looking at President Williams’ proposal.

“It contains many recommendations that have been offered by the horse industry in the past and should be part of the debate. I am glad to see there appears to be full agreement that help is needed for the horse industry.”

Asked if Stumbo wants the governor to add Williams’ plan to the special session call, Stumbo spokesman Brian Wilkerson said Stumbo “is looking at this for inclusion in the debate; that’s all.”

Stumbo's statement leaves Beshear empty handed. Beshear appears to be nothing but a two year old who wants it his way or the highway. I wouldn't be surprised if he "changes his mind" in the coming days and includes the Senators proposals on the agenda. Otherwise, Sen Williams has all of the ammo he needs to kill off the slots bill.
Posted by brians at 3:40 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)

Thursday, 4 June 2009

Gov Beshear Wastes Money With Special Session

I have to give the Governor credit for one thing. He is slashing government because of slumping revenue. From what I have read, it seems like he is doing an OK job of it. I would have slashed programs and tried to remove the employees who are dead weight, but he choose not to go that route (That would only piss off his biggest supporters - government workers). Instead he is using federal "stimulus" money and some creative "cuts" to scape up the money he needed to deal with the short fall.

What I don't understand is why he called a special session for June 15th to approve the cuts.

Senate President David Williams, R-Burkesville, said early Wednesday that Beshear’s plan backs up what he has said all along — the state’s financial problems were manageable. Williams had argued that Beshear could make the cuts without legislative approval and that a special session was not needed.

When the primary leader of the opposition thinks the cuts can be made without a special session, then why call it? Who is going to complain? Especially since slots are not going to be part of the special session. What? What's that you say? Oh, slots ARE going to be part of the special session. Now it all becomes clear. The cuts are just a "pretense" to get call the session. Gee wiz, since we are already meeting let's through slots in with the mix.

What an absolute waste of taxpayer money. All so they can pay back their biggest donors from the last election. I can't wait to see what silly games they play to try to ram this through the legislature. I am sure Stumbo will force it through the house and then try to twist David Williams arm to pass it. I wonder how that will turn out? At least the special session should prove interesting even if it isn't necessary.

Posted by brians at 4:55 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)
« June »
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930