I will vote no on Issue 2.
If Issue 2 is in the best interest of farmers and animal welfare, then our state legislature would enact such a law. If done by law, any oversight board would be subject to modification as needed.
To serve their purpose, the instigators of Issue 2 have drafted this as a constitutional amendment with the intended purpose of making it difficult or next to impossible to repeal or modify.
Issue 2 would hang Ohio taxpayers with a constitutionally mandated bureaucratic board not subject to modification or alteration. Constitutions are to establish the character, structure, and purpose of an organization or a government entity.
A constitution's purpose is then to be "fleshed out" by laws. My objection is to the format, not the purpose. If it is good for Ohio, then let our legislature take care of it.
Once enacted, it can prove its merit, or not.
DeFord R. Schwall
I go to Detroit casinos at least once a month. I hardly ever bring home more money then I took, but, win or lose, I'm doing what I want to do.
I enjoy casinos and I will continue to go to them. I used to go on vacation with my kids - camping, fishing trips, amusement parks, and so on. They are grown up now and do their own thing. Now I do my own thing.
What I'm saying is, I will continue to go to casinos and spend money but it would be better if I spend the money in Ohio, not a neighboring state.
I'm voting yes on Issue 3 and urge everyone else to vote yes.
The groups that oppose Issue 2 have me disturbed. I believe they do not fully understand the consequences of voting no.
People involved in agriculture production treat their animals and poultry with exceptionally good care. It is in their best interest to do so because it's their livelihood. So as a former poultry producer I urge you as thinking voters to vote yes on Issue 2.
James N. Figy
As a lifelong resident of this corner of Lucas County, I invite Toledo and Lucas County voters to drive down Telegraph Road from Alexis Road to Detroit Avenue if you want to see what many decades of established gambling has done for our community.
Businesses are flourishing? If you are a stripper, prostitute, masseuse, sell drugs or adult videos, or do "lingerie modeling," join the entrepreneurs. This XXX zone extends for about a three-mile radius.
If you want to run a motel that looks like it's been shut down about five years but actually is open for "small business" opportunities, Toledo, Lucas County, and Rossford citizens should get on the bandwagon for Issue 3. You too can take advantage of career opportunities even after the construction jobs are over and the casino maintenance jobs are hired.
Again citizens, take a ride if you haven't yet been to this corner of Toledo near Michigan and see for yourself what out-of-towners getting off I-75 to gamble see of our "elegant" city when they reach their destination.
These "business opportunities" might not be so blatantly obvious in Rossford as they are here, but be assured they will be there. It comes with the territory.
If you care about humane treatment of livestock, watch out for slick ads and commercials promoting Issue 2.
Powerful interests representing the 200 huge factory farms (confined animal feeding operations) in Ohio are pouring millions of dollars into amending the state constitution to make a board appointed by political interests and completely unregulated "to set standards for livestock care."
The practices being used to pack these animals in by the thousands is causing sickening misery, not to mention polluting our waters. This is an obvious attempt to protect these practices from being regulated and continue to be able to do whatever they want to animals without fear of regulation.
These farms are a shameful blot on our state, and the idea that we should let them set their own standards is ludicrous.
Look up the long list of organizations opposing Issue 2. These are groups that have proven themselves long-time supporters of small family farms, environmental issues, and humane conditions for animals; someare calling this issue "the greediest corporate agribusiness move we've ever seen."
This kind of unchecked power to decide any and all regulations related to animal agriculture should not be tolerated anywhere, let aloneenshrined in the Ohio
We're not vegetarians; but we try to make sure the animals we eat were allowed to live some semblance of a natural, healthy life. The more we turn a blind eye to the conditions on these farms, the more damage we do to ourselves as proud citizens of a decent country.
We have a decision to make about whether cheap food is our bottom line, no matter the suffering of the animals and the destruction of the land, or whether we choose to step upto make sure our livestock are treated humanely and our land is protected for the next generation as it was protected for us. Ask yourself why these European owners are not allowed to runmegafarms this wayin their own countries. And vote no on Issue 2.
It is puzzling to me why the Toledo Humane Society would oppose Issue 2.
First, it seems intuitive that any group that encourages positive care of animals should be in support of a board of Ohio experts specifically charged with ensuring the excellent care of farm animals.
Second, the language of Issue 2 requires that at least one of the 13 members on the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board represent a localhumane society, ensuring that groups like Toledo's have a voice at the table when considering issues related to farm animal well being.
Finally, Issue 2 represents a meaningful approach to livestock and poultry care in Ohio.
Some proposals by animal-rights extremist groups look at the narrow aspects of farm animal care, like housing.Issue 2 instead takes a broad, full approach. Board members are charged withconsidering how animal care impacts food safety, food affordability, animal disease prevention, bio-security, and much more.
The Ohio and American veterinary medical associations, the American HumaneAssociation, some local humane societies, and individual veterinarians all have endorsed Issue 2 because it will ensure the continued excellent care of Ohio's farm animals and provide for a safe, affordable, Ohio-raised supply of food.
Your Oct. 23 editorial, “Skeldon's got to go,” is journalism at its very finest. The attitude and actions of the Lucas County dog warden's department are embarrassing, disgusting, and inhumane.
Any county commissioner who does not act to bring about real change, especially the removal of Tom Skeldon from his post, needs to take note that the voters will remember come election day.
Dennis P. Beck