FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 20, 2003

Contact: Christian Klein
(440) 572-1796

CLEVELAND, OH - Today the Ohio Supreme Court refused to hear the case challenging Ohio's entrance into the MegaMillions multi-state lottery game. The Ohio Roundtable, the Ohio Methodist Church, and several citizens challenged Ohio's participation in a multi-state lottery on three key points across the state. The case, Roundtable v. Taft was originally filed in Franklin County Court in January of 2002.

At the trial court the Plaintiffs won a significant claim regarding a 1987 constitutional amendment passed by Ohio voters to direct lottery proceeds to education funding. The Ohio General Assembly was attempting to redirect proceeds from MegaMillions into the General Revenue Fund. The trial court agreed with the plaintiffs and ordered the state to adhere to the direct instruction of the constitution and place all MegaMillions proceeds into education funding. The Appellate Court upheld this decision.

Plaintiffs also claimed the original constitutional amendment of 1973 authorizing the creation of the Ohio Lottery could not be interpreted to sanction a multi-state game since no such game existed in 1973. Citing the historic ban on legalized gambling, plaintiffs challenged the state's authority to conduct a form of gambling not directly authorized by the voters in 1973. Commenting for the plaintiffs, David Zanotti, President of the Ohio Roundtable questioned:

"If the Governor and Legislature can expand the definition of the 1973 language to include MegaMillions, what is to stop them from expanding the definition to include casinos operated by the Lottery Commission? This case presented a clear constitutional question with huge economic, political, and social consequence. The failure of the Ohio Supreme Court to hear this case leaves this question hanging in mid-air.  The people of Ohio were poorly served by the Court ducking their duty."

The suit contained a third claim challenging the process used by the General Assembly to pass MegaMillions.  Plaintiffs claimed rolling MegaMillions into a bill originally designed for MRDD services and funding was a clear violation of the "single issue" provision of the Ohio Constitution. Both the trial court and the appellate court denied this claim but recognized this issue as part of a continuing legal debate. A debate plaintiffs hoped to see resolved by the Ohio Supreme Court.

"Once again this case proves gambling and good government don't mix," Zanotti concluded. "Ohio voters should beware. The words and meanings of gambling laws can become very flexible when politicians are looking for more revenue."

- end -