Caesars spent over a hundred million in having what it believed was a fair shot for a casino at Suffolk Downs.
Massachusetts begged them to apply. Told them everything was on the up and up. Told them and their competitors there will be no hanky panky and appearance of conflict is numero uno.
Told them a burden was put upon the commission and its employees like none in the history of state jobs.
“Why not”, say Caesars. And all in it went. Winner take all.
Then after the plunge in the deep end they learn Chairman Crosby, the big kahuna of the whole operation, has a friend and former business partner perched to make millions if Steve Winn gets the nod.
This friend/former partner was so good that after he entered Crosby’s fledging company with money and advice revenue’s increased 12 fold and it was sold for huge gains.
This is the same guy that purportedly has a silent partner in on the Wynn deal. Bad enough he’s silent but the guy spent time in the can and has shady written all over him.
So Caesars has a right to feel screwed. With all of Wynn’s questionable dealings in Macau and MGM’s past board members why did Caesar’s get asked to leave the dance?
So Caesar’s wants to be made whole and I don’t see why they shouldn’t. The state may be on the hook for all the dough Caesars spent. if Everett gets the license Suffolk Downs will join in. If Revere gets it Wynn will join in.
Thanks Steve
I’m so old I can remember when Republican governors would threaten to allow casinos to force some budget cuts.
Their threat is Patrick’s best economic development plan. Of all the investments Deval Patrick pushed for, and all the initiatives he did right, he just had to push the casino economy on us.
His only chance for a positive legacy is if the law is repealed. Otherwise when the next Governor steps up and takes away (or takes credit for) funding for all his biotech and other initiatives, the only visible thing in the state left with Patrick’s stamp on it for the next several decades will be… casinos.
say last night that the gaming legislation had stricter ethics standards for casinos written into it. He referenced something about anyone ever having done business with commissioners. Anyone have that language?
Laws like that aren’t enforced in administrations headed by Democrats; it was only included in case there ever was a Republican governor again.
No need for downratings there.
…gets a quick driveby downrate from me on principle. Porcupine often contributes substantively, but from time to time sinks into look-at-what-the-Democrats-did mode.
n/t
More mishaugas like this and the whole of the Commonwealth will back down on Gaming by Ballot Initiative…This is good news.
Elias N
That’s an exceedingly strained metaphor there… Dookhan didn’t just do her job poorly, she actually did it wrong. Not wrong as in, “oops, I used metric when I shoulda used imperial…” No. Wrong as in, “I made the whole thing up”. Nobody is saying that about Crosby. The metaphor doesn’t make any sense at all.
There are a half-dozen easier metaphors within a much shorter reach: Flaherty, FInneran and DiMasi being only the really obvious. Heck, If you still want to indulge your sexist side, you coulda invoked the name of Dianne Wilkerson.
The conduct isn’t especially similar, but the impact on the system is. What Dookhan did has made people question the integrity of the entire criminal justice system, at least when it comes to drug crimes. This Crosby business is making people question the integrity of the whole casino regulatory apparatus, to the point that lawsuits are being filed (and there may well be more to come). Crosby’s affiliation with one of Wynn’s guys makes it fairly easy to question just about any action that the Commission has taken, or will take.
It’s a mess.
… why not just a headline that reads “Steve Crosby Sued By Caesars for delegitimizing the Gaming Commission“?
Seriously, the first thing I thought about was Steve Crosby faking spreadsheets which is not even close to what he’s being accused of doing… I think that anybody who doesn’t know who Dookhan is won’t get the reference and anybody who does know who Dookhan is won’t get the reference right.
True that. I guess, however, I have to ask how come the actions of Flaherty, Finneran and DiMasi, who demonstrably did do things very similar to the accusations swirling around Crosby, didn’t call into question the integrity of the entire legislature?
the only thing the Gaming Commission is supposed to do is regulate casinos in Massachusetts. Crosby had an undisclosed affiliation with one of the small handful of players who wanted to operate a casino in Massachusetts – and, because the players are so few in number, every decision about any player affects the interests of all the others in direct and concrete ways. Therefore, the affiliation tarnishes everything the Commission is supposed to do. Whereas with, say, DiMasi, his stupidity on Cognos doesn’t extend into, say, transportation policy or health care in any obvious way.
Here’s why I think the Annie Dookhan case is an excellent and well-targeted metaphor.
I simply don’t believe that prosecutors and members of the Attorney General’s office didn’t know what Annie Dookhan was doing. I think they quickly determined that they had much to gain and little to lose if they preserved their own “plausible deniability” (to use a Watergate-era phrase).
I, similarly, don’t believe that other people on Beacon Hill didn’t know about both Mr. Crosby and with the Gaming Commission. I think they plan to cram it down our throats anyway, just as the Dookhan thing is being crammed down our throats.
Both episodes contribute to the increasingly strong appearance of corruption on Beacon Hill. As Martha Coakley’s star continues to rise, I predict that this will become an equally strong and equally increasing factor in the campaign.
Opposition to casino gambling in Massachusetts is strong and widespread. A widely-held view is that corrupt Massachusetts government officials are on the take as Beacon Hill steamrolls the introduction to Massachusetts of an industry that has had strong ties to organized crime for its entire history. Like it or not, the party affiliation of those officials is “Democrat”.
I hope that Massachusetts Democratic Party figures out, before it’s too late, that MASSACHUSETTS VOTERS REJECT CORRUPTION. This issue will be very hard to handle in the upcoming campaign, especially if the current front-runner is our candidate.