Today’s Globe reports that the pro-casino, anti-repeal forces have released their first TV ad. It is focused entirely on the economic benefits to the city of Springfield that a casino supposedly will provide, and per the Globe will run in both Boston and western MA TV markets.
Also of interest, though unsurprising, is the list of the top 5 contributors to the ballot committee opposing repeal (officially called “Coalition to Protect Mass Jobs”):
Massachusetts AFL-CIO, Painters Union District Council 35, Springfield Chamber of Commerce, MGM Resorts International, Penn National Gaming
Here it is. Note the absence of the word “casino,” “gambling,” “gaming,” or anything else on what the issue in question 3 actually is.
Please share widely!
Denial is not a river in Egypt. This rubbish turns handsprings to deny the truth about question 3. One wonders what motivates the creators of the ad to so carefully deny this truth.
What a disgustingly dishonest ad. What shameless pandering to ignorance and self-interest.
Nauseating. Truly nauseating.
Is that the number of construction jobs, or direct casino jobs, or restaurant jobs (mentioned in the video), or all of that combined?
I have a good question for people, especially the Republicans, who support the casino and cite jobs as the reason. If it comes before you to vote on a bailout of the casino to “save the jobs” then will you be voting for or against? If jobs are the all important factor, I find it hard to believe anyone against a bailout is being sincere at this time. Of course they will vote to save the jobs.
MGM has said (and, listen, I recognize that this is an estimate and nothing more) that it will create 3,000 direct jobs working for the casino (including in it’s own restaurants and other attached businesses). The proposal claims 2,000 construction jobs and “thousands” of “indirect” jobs.
Does anyone know how many jobs are created/needed to serve the occasion where a middle aged woman extorts her employer and spends her family savings to fund her gambling addiction? (Middle aged women are the prime targets of gambling syndicates) This woman’s actions alone will result in the need for police, detectives, lawyers, judges, and the supporting cast players in her arrest and if she is not lucky, conviction and imprisonment which will lead to MORE JOBS as correctional officers and so on. This does not even count the resulting divorce which will create a need for more lawyers, social workers, moving companies, and finally, dating sites for singles!
http://thegazette.com/subject/news/public-safety/crime/theft/north-liberty-woman-accused-of-gambling-away-30000-of-another-persons-money-20140922
http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/woman-accused-of-gambling-with-funds-raised-for-wounded-veterans-b99353357z1-275381171.html
http://www.gazettextra.com/20140902/woman_accused_of_stealing_from_employer_to_feed_gambling_addiction
technically speaking, that is.
Nope, it does not mention casinos, gambling, corruption, slots barns, addiction, crime, predation. It does not do our job for us.
Absent the old fairness doctrine we are going to be hugely outspent and this is a good example of the high-quality stuff that will be on the airwaves.
Not a slam dunk for us by a long shot.
Very good ad. I wish Don Berwick had ads like that. All it does is link “No on 3” to “jobs” and “economic development.” And that’s all it needs to do. Very compelling. Anyone who thought that these ads would be held up as a beacon of truthfulness is kidding themselves. VOTE “YES” on 3, OF COURSE.
These pro-casino NIMBYs are a joke.
Springfield’s unemployment has been (pre-recession) and will continue to be higher than the state average without real economic development and sustained multi-pronged social, educational interventions. A casino will not change that…..it will only prey on local low rollers and deepen the cycle of poverty as they have proven to do in other depressed urban centers.
Posted in today’s Masslive.com:
going to go to Springfield to the casino, then stay there and spend money. That isn’t going to happen. Gamblers are either going to drive there by highway, get off the exit and go directly to the casino lot, gamble, then go home. For all the junketers who take the buses from other locations, the trip will be even quicker and more direct. No outside commerce for Springfield. It’s hard to argue with jobs. Yes, there will be good paying construction jobs, but absent the casino project, wouldn’t they be working on something else. How many real, good jobs will the casino create for the average person, or are we looking at mostly high class Dunkin Donuts positions? Are these worth the risks and undesirable side effects of a casino? The real seduction is the promise of million$ from the casinos for the city. Imagine how much they will rake in and take from visitors and the state if they are willing to offer this kind of money.
Atlantic city is closing 4 casino’s, internet gambling is legal in Delaware and will be expanding. This is such a bad idea for Massachusetts.
opposed them please