Jump to content

Governor John Kasich

Guest BuckeyeB
Guest BuckeyeB
in Ohio Politics

Featured Replies

I love how only the extreme borders of the state have Amtrak service. Everything runs along Lake Erie and the Ohio River (with the exception of the Pittsburgh split). It makes me wonder if their survival has more to due with the bordering states than the state of Ohio...

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Views 51.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

The Amtrak service that runs through Cleveland, IMO, has survived and will continue to survive for one reason.... it is right on the b-line from Chicago to the east coast.

The Amtrak service that runs through Cleveland, IMO, has survived and will continue to survive for one reason.... it is right on the b-line from Chicago to the east coast.

 

Yep, we in the rail advocacy community have joked that the only reason why Ohio has any passenger train service is because Kentucky and Canada are too far out of the way for Amtrak to travel from Chicago to the East Coast. So Amtrak does the next best thing -- travel through Ohio in the middle of the night.

 

I create this map a few years ago to make the point to Amtrak that Ohio's service is inaccessible. Amtrak's response is that Ohio will get better service when it becomes a state sponsor (see how I brought this discussion back around to the topic of Kasich!) of Amtrak like Illinois, Michigan, Pennsylvania or New York. Amtrak says "Why should Ohio get the good part of the trains' schedule when those others states are making an investment in train services"...

 

ohiomiddleofnighttrainsS.jpg

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

The Amtrak service that runs through Cleveland, IMO, has survived and will continue to survive for one reason.... it is right on the b-line from Chicago to the east coast.

 

Ditto with Toledo. I suspect the only reason it has maintained its title as top station in Ohio (like being top in Ohio means anything) is because of its Chicago trains. Sandusky also benefits greatly by being between Toledo and Cleveland. And Bryan will always have an edge over Columbus when it comes to passenger rail.

Amtrak says "Why should Ohio get the good part of the trains' schedule when those others states are making an investment in train services"...

 

Bingo. That's what I was getting at. Michigan, the birthplace of mass automobile production, is actually going to leave us in the dust. Why is Rick Snyder bucking the Republican trend of his brethren in Ohio and Wisconsin? Why is Kasich the head of the anti-rail and anti-mass transit movement? Who is paying Kasich for this? Which one of his old drinking/golf buddies is getting rich off this? There has got to be more motivating Kasich than blind anti-rail bias. This isn't just party politics:

 

MDOT Applies for High Speed Rail Funds, Demonstrating Gov. Synder’s Support

 

As reported by the Detroit News, Michigan among states vying for $2.4B for high-speed rail. Michigan and 23 other states have submitted applications for high-speed rail funding after Florida returned money it was allocated. Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder’s office said the state sought more than $200 million for four projects, including $196.5 million for a program to complete a “corridor enhancement program over the next three years between Kalamazoo and Dearborn” and would allow trains to travel up to 110 mph in that stretch.

 

http://michigancompletestreets.wordpress.com/2011/04/07/mdot-applies-for-high-speed-rail-funds-demonstrating-gov-synders-support/

 

What is fundamentally so different in Michigan? How come Kasich and Walker haven't been able to get Snyder on board the anti-rail train? Don't they still have frat parties where they discuss this stuff over drunken business deals? It's just plain stupid to have Ohio miss out on all the expansions taking place in Michigan, Illinois, and New York. I suspect Kasich's money trail has all the answers.

And Wisconsin. Walker recently backtracked to seek $150 million in federal funds for improving Amtrak's Chicago-Milwaukee Hiawatha Corridor service.

 

And Kasich? He's still trying to run over us non-adherents with his magic bus.

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

^Then I take back what I said about Walker being "a team player." It sounds like the team is just Kasich's team.

Bingo. That's what I was getting at. Michigan, the birthplace of mass automobile production, is actually going to leave us in the dust. Why is Rick Snyder bucking the Republican trend of his brethren in Ohio and Wisconsin? Why is Kasich the head of the anti-rail and anti-mass transit movement? Who is paying Kasich for this? Which one of his old drinking/golf buddies is getting rich off this? There has got to be more motivating Kasich than blind anti-rail bias. This isn't just party politics

 

Michigan already left us in the dust and did so quite a while back. First, the Chicago-Detroit route was a part of the Amtrak system from day one and it always had at least two daytime round trips. Also, since these were Amtrak basic system trains, the state did not have to pick up the tab for operating costs, giving them something to build on, unlike Ohio with its middle-of-the-night "service."

 

Second, previous governors there realized that rail made sense and were willing to spend a limited amount of state funds on it. Third, somewhere along the line there was a ruling that the state constitution defined railroads as another form of highway, which meant that a limited amount of state gas tax revenue could go to the trains. That meant there were capital dollars available and no operating costs for Chicago-Detroit. Fourth, When Conrail was formed, Amtrak inherited the Kalamazoo-Porter IN segment and has upgraded it to 95 mph with a mix of federal and state dollars.

 

Michigan is now poised to acquire the line from Kalamazoo to near Detroit, since NS only uses it for local freight. This will give Michigan a nearly totally dedicated passenger line all the way from Porter to Detroit, about 200 miles. This is an existing program which is much harder to kill. They are WAY ahead of us.

 

Kasich is a rail hating ideologue. Nothing could change his mind. I don't think anyone has to pay him for his views. This is just what he believes. Our loss.

Walker recently backtracked to seek $150 million in federal funds for improving Amtrak's Chicago-Milwaukee Hiawatha Corridor service.

 

Did he really?  This IS news!

 

 

It seems this would be a smart line to upgrade.  I always said that high-speed rail money should have went here, to these lines out of Chicago, instead of Ohio. 

 

Kaisch was a movement conservative back in the 1980s, thats how we was portrayed in the media, part of the new breed of conservatives coming to power during the Reagan/Bush era.

 

Did he really?  This IS news!

 

 

It seems this would be a smart line to upgrade.  I always said that high-speed rail money should have went here, to these lines out of Chicago, instead of Ohio. 

 

Kaisch was a movement conservative back in the 1980s, thats how we was portrayed in the media, part of the new breed of conservatives coming to power during the Reagan/Bush era.

 

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/118842999.html

 

Kasich has been approached by numerous interests about supporting federal funding for improvements to east-west Amtrak service across Northern Ohio, between Chicago and the East Coast. Some of those interests include those who he might listen to, such as Rep. Steve LaTourette or the Youngstown-Warren Regional Chamber of Commerce. But so far Kasich hasn't responded, but his support is really need anyway....

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

There is a Gov. William J. Lepetomane joke in here somewhere with all the talk of the govenor and the railroads.Except the towns want the trains to run through them in our case.

 

"I didn't get a Huh-rumph outta that guy...."

Have you gone beserk?

give the Governor a a huh-rumph!

I think if there was an eligibility issue, Strickland's team would have dug it up during the campaign.

give the Governor a a huh-rumph!

 

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

Interesting article in Crains Cleveland editorial, making the point that local budgets should've been slashed 2 years ago, except for the lifeline they were thrown via the Stimulus bill.  Even so, they had ample time since to make plans for drastic cuts, but haven't, and those cuts would've come even if Strickland had been re-elected.

 

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20110425/SUB1/304259983

 

Back in February 2009, state Rep. Bill Batchelder of Medina warned that the use of stimulus dollars to cover the state's operating expenses “is dangerous to taxpayers, as it creates a structural imbalance that will only put off and exacerbate our budget problems into the future.” Well, the future is here, and as Rep. Batchelder correctly predicted, the consequences of filling budget holes with temporary money will be severe, both for Ohio and for many of its towns and school districts.

 

The surprise with which mayors and school superintendents are reacting to the cuts they're about to see in their share of state general fund money is hard to understand. They could have used the last two years to evaluate their operations and to draw up contingency plans for the inevitable reduction in state support that was bound to occur once the stimulus money vanished. It appears many did not — and that's not Gov. Kasich's fault.

 

Though your Governor is no saint- he is, at least, what he has appeared to be all along.  Your neighbors to the north have had some of the same "buyer's remorse" with Gov. Snyder due to the fact that he never really made it clear WHAT kind of governor he would be, if elected.  Now that the types of decisions he is making are coming to light, people are not quite as enamoured with him.  Even a lot of my Republican family and friends are really dissappointed with him.

 

Kasich doesn't appear to have a compromising bone in his body, though.  That is what rubs me the wrong way about him and makes me glad he is not my Governor.  He seems to be cut out of the same cloth as the gang that just took over in Washington.  Historically, the Center has always been the best place to plant one's feet when governing.  Those who govern from the extreme ends of the spectrum tend to make the most enemies.

 

Though I don't know if Michigan will be leaving anyone in the dust in ANYTHING in the foreseeable future, I will say this about the rail discussion as it relates to our state:  There is not any widespread opposition or even fear of improvements to Michigan's passenger rail infrastructure.  It has been supported and expanded under administrations of both parties and has never been a campaign theme.  We are not as far along with it as we should be nor are we ready to pull the plug on it either.  It's just always just been there and we are lucky to be able to say that.  Occasionally, one will find a letter to the editor decrying continued funding to Amtrak on the national level, or something of that nature but it is usually the ramblings of someone parroting something they heard on conservative talk-radio (Is there really any other kind of talk radio anymore?  Other than sports talk).

 

I will give credit to Gov. Snyder for being willing to accept any and all help from the Feds re: passenger rail.  He is, at least, smart enough to realize that accepting money for something that can benefit the citizens and communities of his state is more important than worrying about thowing up opposition to the guy in the White House just on politcal principles-benefits to the state-be-damned!  Kasich is nothing more than a blow-hard political idealogue.  Snyder is a guy whose unpopularity comes about by having to make unpopular decisions. 

The center can be a lonely place in politics these days, Jeff.  Well said.

Interesting article in Crains Cleveland editorial, making the point that local budgets should've been slashed 2 years ago, except for the lifeline they were thrown via the Stimulus bill.  Even so, they had ample time since to make plans for drastic cuts, but haven't, and those cuts would've come even if Strickland had been re-elected.

 

While it's true that the loss of stimulus money would have meant some cuts, the cuts would have been half as large without the Republican tax cuts. 

 

In his budget proposal, Ohio Republican Gov. John Kasich continues a generous 21 percent cut in state income-tax rates. The measure originally was part of a 2005 tax overhaul by Republicans that replaced the state corporate income tax and phased out a business property tax.

 

The tax cuts were supposed to stimulate Ohio's economy and create jobs. But that didn't happen once the economy tanked. Instead, the changes ended up costing Ohio more than $2billion a year in lost tax revenue - money that would go a long way toward closing the state's $8 billion budget gap over the next two fiscal years.

http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/national_world/stories/2011/03/30/copy/states-tax-cut-fervor-helps-feed-deficits.html?sid=101

 

If you want some interesting reading, do some background checks on the two companies Kasich hired to consult him on the Casino deals. One of the companies was just founded a few years ago by a man who was mentored by Michael Milken, the Junk Bond King.  Simply incredible

That scumbag hands out tax breaks and state grants like they're halloween candy but when him and his freaks are morally opposed to something, than he becomes captain corporate tax.

He's looting Ohio.

That scumbag hands out tax breaks and state grants like they're halloween candy but when him and his freaks are morally opposed to something, than he becomes captain corporate tax.

 

QFT

 

The fact that the tax rate was approved by referendum and encoded in the Constitution (an aspect which I personally opposed) makes it 1) a blatant disregard of the will of the people, as they spoke on the same day they elected him and 2) a blatant disregard of the supremacy of the Constitution.

 

While I agree the tax rate is too low, this is just ridiculous. He is not acting on behalf of the people who thought the tax rate should have been higher (including me). He is not acting on behalf of the people who thought the tax rate and other regulations should not be encoded in the Constitution (including me). He is not acting on behalf of the small government/lower taxes crowd. He is not acting on behalf of the hard-core Constitutionalists. He is acting on behalf of 1) the people who are morally opposed to casinos, who were soundly defeated on election day, and 2) his cronies.

 

Does anyone here care to dispute this, because I really find it hard to defend what he's doing. As someone who actually opposed this Amendment largely due to this exact issue (too low taxes -- and also the fact that the tax rate was too rigid by being encoded in the Constitution), the fact that I can't get behind what he is doing makes it really clear the whole thing stinks to high heaven.

 

If anything, he should let the casinos be built and begin operations, then look for a way to increase taxes over time (likely by amending the Constitution).

  • 2 weeks later...

Cross-posted from the casino poltics thread....

 

When I first heard about this fundamentalist belief, I said, boy that sounds just like Kasich. He's a religious wingnut and he hates cities. Wonder if there is a correlation to this sort of anti-urban fundamentalism?.....

 

Whenever there are large groups of people living together, the congested conditions

always bring out the worst of human behavior.  The history of urbanization might very well

also be a history of human criminal behavior.  From cities of ancient times like Babel,

before Sodom and Gomorra, to modern day urban centers, cities foster all types of human

perversions.  Therefore, the question must be asked, why pick out Sodom and Gomorra

from all cities to destroy? 

 

http://www.koshertorah.com/PDF/SodomandGomorra.pdf

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

I don't like this Governor...

The Republicans ran on "creating jobs" and, when it mattered, they destroyed prospective jobs. 

"Kasich: He just didn't get the jobs done..."

 

The Republicans ran on "creating jobs" and, when it mattered, they destroyed prospective jobs. 

 

Kasich has already said he doesn't care if he's a one-term governor. But what impact might Kasich have on the next elections for state senators and representatives? Might it cause the loss of seats to the Democrats? If that's likely, wouldn't it make sense for Ohio's Republican party leadership to tell Kasich to step down now so that any GOP losses are minimized?

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

A few Republican legislators have "pushed back" on issues like drilling for gas in Ohio's state parks. 

Why does Kasick keep concerning himself with making sure the taxpayers are being "treated fairly" regarding the casino deal? It seems like there isn't much opposition to the venue being built, yet he jumps in and halts construction. I don't care about the casino one way or another (I would much rather see the streetcar built), I just don't like how he goes about handling issues. It's similar to when you're a kid and you ask your mom to let you do something and she says yes, then dad comes home and says NO, and usually he ends up having the final say.

 

Kasick has placed yet another project on hold, and he claims he all about creating jobs. BTW, if the casino doesn't get built, what are they going to do about that huge hole in the ground?

 

Kasick has placed yet another project on hold, and he claims he all about creating jobs. BTW, if the casino doesn't get built, what are they going to do about that huge hole in the ground?

 

Moreso, what are they going to do about the holes in the city's budgets? If you're John Kasich and you're on a holy crusade against cities, getting more tax revenues out of the casinos for the state to give to the suburbs, exurbs and rural areas is a good thing (remember that 100% of state aid to cities is being cut, while only 30% to suburbs is being cut). And if the casino developers continue to keep their projects in suspension, ol' Johnny boy is fine with that too. It means a huge loss of funding for city budgets that are already hurting badly. In K-Sick's wacky mind, his anti-urban cause is served no matter what.

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

Before the election, I tried to warn everyone I knew that this guy could become the worst governor any state has ever seen.

 

I think he's turning out to be even worse than I expected.

While I'm not happy to see the work stoppage on the casinos, I am glad the tax issue is being revisited.  When Issue 3 was put in front of the voters, it was so obviously written FOR the casinos and BY the casinos.  It's a shame nothing was done back then to amend or correct it. 

 

"In 2009, when casinos' one-sided deal confronted Ohio voters, then-Gov. Ted Strickland, a Democrat, seemed to develop laryngitis. But last week, Republican Gov. John Kasich said,"I think the taxpayers of Ohio got a bad deal."

 

He's right. They did. And though Kasich didn't create this mess, he's duty-bound to clean it up."

 

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2011/04/ohio_needs_to_rework_one-sided.html

 

^What specifically about the tax and fee structure makes it a bad deal for Ohio?  What do other states do that we didn't?

Ohio's deal bases the taxes on casino REVENUE, other states base the taxes on total WAGERING.  HUGE difference

^Is that true?  That can't be true.  How do they keep track of each individual bet at table games?

gottaplan, the problem that I see is the hypocrisy by the right wing kooks. All those scum scream for is less tax for the rich and big business and more tax for the middle class. Diebold gets tax breaks, republicans cry that Cuyahoga county doesn't give enough tax breaks to keep companies. The right are the ones who quickly give in to, and encourage, corporate extortion at the expense of the everyday tax payer. BUT, now you flip the situation and make one of those companies one that the religious freaks are against (because it will hurt their bingo nights and casino nights) and all of a sudden they want more tax and what's fair for the regular tax payer. BS!!!

 

As far as I knew, the 33% tax rate wasn't even that bad, it was the license fee that we kind of low at 50mil seeing as how other companies agreed to pay more than double that amount. And as an educated person, I knew this and still voted for this because it's better to get this going then keep revisiting the same ol same ol year after year and getting nothing. Not to mention that this included 4 casinos, so we got 200mil instead of maybe just one casino in Ohio where they pay 100 or even 150mil for a license.

Found a good resource that explains how many states tax their casinos.  It looks to me like Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, and Missouri are the only states that have some form of tax based on gross receipts or proceeds.  It would take a bit more research to figure out how each of the taxes are actually applied, but I can't imagine any of these states force the casinos to pay tax on gross receipts at table games.  I can't think of an easy way to keep track...

 

http://www.ncsl.org/IssuesResearch/EconomicDevelopmentTradeCulturalAffairs/StateCasinoTaxes/tabid/12805/Default.aspx

Don't get fooled by the 33% tax rate.  It's all in how that number is applied...  to gross revenue (income minus operating expenses) or to gross wagering. 

Don't get fooled by the 33% tax rate.  It's all in how that number is applied...  to gross revenue (income minus operating expenses) or to gross wagering. 

 

Exactly, but it appears that most states tax gross revenue, not receipts.  And based on this graphic below is looks like most states receive less than 33% of casino gross revenue in taxes.  Even the 33% tax rate, when applied to gross revenue, would still be one of the highest in the nation.  I don't understand how we're getting "screwed."

 

http://media.cleveland.com/opinion_impact/photo/chartjpg-9dc46015c2d8557a.jpg

Don't get fooled by the 33% tax rate.  It's all in how that number is applied...  to gross revenue (income minus operating expenses) or to gross wagering.

 

I'm not fooled by anything, the sheeple are fooled by the scare tactics and lies by the right wing conservatives. And why no response to the comparison of all the other tax cuts for major corporations? I'm not against high tax on the rich and big business, not at all. I just don't want a religious agenda to play a part in blockading a citizen voted plan from going through to completion. We have a company willing to pay a good amount of tax and create half way decent jobs (I would never call 30K a year a good job) not to mention all the trickle down jobs it will create in construction, service industries, retail and so on. Anyone who's backing Kasich on this is worthless and should leave Ohio asap.

Seems like Kasich is guilty of what the 'liberal elites' are accused of: thinking they know better than the voters. If the tables were turned Conservatives would be screaming about how the voters are smart enough to decide for themselves.

 

Except, apparently, when we're not. 

Don't get fooled by the 33% tax rate.  It's all in how that number is applied...  to gross revenue (income minus operating expenses) or to gross wagering. 

 

Gross revenue is not income minus operating expenses.  That would be profit.  Gross revenue would be everything that is wagered.  Wagers minus payouts would be net revenue.  Net revenue minus operating expenses would be net profit.

 

Gross receipts and gross revenue are effectively the same thing in this case (gross receipts includes donations and things like that, usually used by non-profits, charities, etc.).

 

EDIT: Now reading the Constitutional Amendment has me all confused.  I know gross revenue is not income minus expenses, but I'm not sure I was right about gross revenue not being what I defined net revenue to be above as applied to casinos.

^Is that true?  That can't be true.  How do they keep track of each individual bet at table games?

I would assume this would be based on how many chips she buys, or how much he charges his electronic card, or whatever. It would only be difficult to track if people were betting in actual cash, which I highly doubt will be the case.

Go to topic listing

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.