Poll shows strong support for casinos

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) - Ohio voters continue to strongly support a proposal to put casinos in four cities less than two weeks before they head to the polls.

A poll commissioned by the state's eight biggest newspapers and released Sunday found that 57 percent of registered voters support Issue 3 on the Nov. 3 ballot.

Thirty-nine percent oppose the plan to put casinos in Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati and Toledo and four percent were undecided.

That compares to 59 percent in favor and 38 percent opposed a month ago.

The widespread support for the expansion of gambling reflected in the poll does not necessarily mean it will prove successful on Election Day.

Ohio voters have defeated gambling measures four times, beginning in 1990, and some of have received strong support in pre-election polls only to be defeated.

The issue's success depends on voter turnout, said Eric Rademacher, co-director of the University of Cincinnati's Institute for Policy Research, which conducted the poll.

"Opponents will need to ramp up the opposition," Rademacher said. "There's going to need to be a higher profile advertising effort on the 'no' side."

Kelly Collins of Cleveland is supporting Issue 3 after opposing a similar proposal in the past. Collins knows too many people going outside Ohio to gamble in West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Michigan.

"I'd rather those people spend their money in our state," said Collins, 27, an insurance company service representative.

James Stanaway of Springfield also supports casinos because of the additional tax revenue that will flow to the state.

"New jobs will be created and these dollars will be spent in Ohio, and these new jobs will be paying Ohio income and sales tax," said Stanaway, 64, a retiree.

But Mike Harbison of Montgomery in suburban Cincinnati opposes the idea, saying he's worried about increases in crime and gambling addictions driven by the casinos. He's also suspicious of the role casino backers played in creating the proposed constitutional amendment.

"I don't like an industry — any industry for that matter — supplying/providing input into the language that could change the state constitution," said Harbison, 61, a consulting engineer. "That's like having a wolf in a chicken's costume in the hen house."

Among those supporting casinos, 53 percent said the most important reason for expanded gambling was that Ohio needs the jobs. Thirty percent said Ohio loses too much gambling revenue to surrounding states.