p>Gladys — don’t believe the governor when he says all he has heard is emotional argument. He’s not stupid. And you would be gullible to buy that line.
<
p>He’s employing a technique I’ve seen used often in education. When criticism or concerns are received, they are diffused by trivializing them. The most common line I’ve heard is “You’re the only person I’ve heard that from” — and then you find out no, there have been dozens of similar comments.
<
p>In this case, the governor is making it seem that the opposition is only offering emotional arguments. See a further description of the technique here.
But sharp language may be the only thing he hears. We need to have that adult conversation on revenue issues in this state – and no matter how you slice it, casino revenue isn’t going to lead to any answers. There are tons of better options out there we, as citizens, desperately need to address, from the rising costs of health care to the rising costs of being dependent on foreign oil and its effects on the environment. These are issues we can’t talk about while we’re hearing all about the bells and whistles of casinos, while not hearing anything about how they’re actually bad for our state economy.
<
p>Governor Patrick is someone who I supported whole heartedly in the primary election. Very few people were as vocal as I was. All that said, ultimately governors have to be accountable to their constituents and not the other way around. If he doesn’t want to have an honest and frank discussion about casinos in Massachusetts, something that would alter this state permanently and forever, then we’re going to have to speak so loudly on this issue that he’ll hear us anyway. Luckily, since the facts are on our side, the more people hear about casinos and their economic impacts, the less people tend to want them.
johnksays
To be fair, Patrick hasn’t shared his either. That’s what I would like too see.
<
p>Adult conversation is acknowledging that Massachusetts already has state-sponsored gambling via the lottery and it provides over 900 million in revenue annually.
<
p>I have a question for you. Do you propose that we cut 900 million in revenue in our budget today? Disband the lottery. The lottery is gambling so by the same token (pun intended) it’s actually bad for our economy, right? What’s the impact to our schools if we do that and the money currently allotted to towns.
<
p>I would like to see the numbers, and I would like to have an adult conversation about our budget, that’s means casino discussion is included.
heartlanddemsays
There have been dozens and dozens of posts on the casino industry numbers on BMG since July. Ryan has been a major poster dissecting the (pathetic) Barrows Plan which was is apparently what the Governor, or whichever novice staffers, used to develop the Bad Bill. It’s such a piece of crap legislation, that is hard to describe.
<
p>Let’s have an adult conversation on the budget, revenues, tax structure and the progressive steps needed, along with the continued search for greater efficiencies (is there a search, Governor?) to make government affordable and function well. Let’s get busy laughing down the ballot initative to repeal the income tax. It could actually pass given the huge disconnect and antipathy of citizens.
<
p>Let’s discuss whether or not we want the Commonwealth to continue to be a leader in education and fund the programs that we already have (K-12) before bringing on new programs. Let’s discuss the need for job training for a new economy and the ridiculous assertion that 20,000 “new” jobs will be created with casinos. Let’s discuss the Governor’s proposal to increase the number of foreign worker (H1B)visas for jobs that will not go to a Massachusetts resident when his proposal is granted.
<
p>The lottery is a drug and we are addicted. Should we increase the dose with casinos to get the right “fix”? Shit, no.
heartlanddemsays
johnksays
Find me a single post with numbers. Barrow’s plan has been singled out and Windmer’s group reviewed Barrow’s numbers and took the low ball figures to say it’s a few 100 million less. But those aren’t the numbers. Patrick said he took information from a variety of sources, we don’t have that information.
<
p>Nor has anyone against casinos EVER put up any kind of numbers whatsoever. They have done jack s—. All I have seen so far is a link to Barrows which hasn’t been confirmed as the sole resource, and then an attack on Barrows. That’s not numbers. That might not even be fact. Looking forward to any details that you could provide. Patrick hasn’t given us anything so far either and DiMasi said they are conducting a study. So maybe 1st quarter ’08 before we see anything? Who knows.
<
p>So you are for abolishing the lottery? The argument in the post is that we are actually going to lose money on gambling, so if that’s the case we’re going to make money by stopping the lottery in our state? Are we going to save a billion each year by not having the lottery, the revenues are above 900 million — I don’t think so. What I do think is that we do need to be adult and review everything at our disposal. If it’s not gambling, then fine it’s not. But what I’ve seen so far is a whole lot of nothing.
heartlanddemsays
If you use the search feature “casino” on the BMG blog you will find about 120 posts on this subject in the past four months. There are plenty of studies, numbers and opinions to be found. Enjoy.
johnksays
They are not there. All that’s out there are some of Barrow’s numbers, which at this point don’t mean much.
heartlanddemsays
Ok, last try to help you out. Did you search and follow the many links in the posts?
<
p>Here are some more.
<
p>”Statement to the Metro Ethics Coalition Project”. J Terrence Brunner, Executive Director. Better Government Association. 1997 June 23.
<
p>”Outlook: Slots of Trouble?” The Washington Post. William Thompson Professor, University of Nevada/Las Vegas. 2004 July 19.
<
p>”Robert Kerr: Economics of Casinos vs. Manufacturing”. The Providence Journal. 2004 June 1.
<
p>”Gambling in America: Costs and Benefits”. Gringols, Earl PH.D. 2005
<
p>”Rapid onsets of Pathological Gambling in Machine Gamblers”. Breen, Robert; Mark Zimmerman. Department of Pyschiatry and Human Behavior, Brown University School of Medicine.
<
p>Already mentioned in the posts are the UConn study, the Boston Federal Reserve Bank study, The Mass Tax Payers Foundation study, Bosley’s studies.
johnksays
FYI – the Mass Tax Payers Foundation study – is Barrow’s but using his low ball figures for revenue.
johnksays
I thought Bosley said that they are “working” on a report for next year? That’s what I’ve noted as DiMasi…
johnksays
They quoted The Center for Policy Analysis at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth — me thinks that means Barrows.
<
p>The quote about ancillary spending came from a quote from casino owner Wynn. No numbers or facts involved here, they only numbers they gave is from Atlantic City in the 70s and the number of restaurants in the area. That’s it, tell me something that I’m missing?
Who’s questioning legalized gambling in Massachusetts. That’s niether here nor there. The question is casinos, which are much more than gambling. They’re shops, they’re restaurants, they’re clubs, they’re big shows… they’re a lot of things that drive local economies out of business, or really hit up their local margin. I don’t need to be an economist to tell you that when you spend money in local businesses, that money stays in the community. When people went to my step mother’s travel agency and bought a cruise from her, the money she earned from it went back into the local hair salon or pizza shop. Casinos don’t work that way.
<
p>Furthermore, what money people spend inside casinos is money they can’t spend outside casinos. That’s why, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, up to 70% of all casino revenue is redistributed from other sectors of the economy. That means it’s money Massachusetts was making already. It also means it’s money that was going into the local economy and no longer is.
<
p>Casinos represent a fraction of the revenue we need to sustain the current budget. What would be far more rewarding for our state is if we tackled things like affordable health care. It’s not just your budget being effected by rising health care costs, or your boss’s. Just ask your local school committee members what health care costs are doing to schools: they’re driving towns bankrupt. The money our town could have saved if health care were available at reasonable rates would have been the difference between keeping an elementary school open this year and closing it. Needless to say, it closed – and it was a Compass school for heaven’s sake (that means one of the best public schools in the state, according to the Department of Education).
<
p>Yet, we can’t talk about any of these issues because, for months, Beacon Hill has been enamored with casinos as a mysterious quick fix. It’s not a quick fix – just look around at Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania and New Jersey. What two things do they all have in common? They all have casinos and they all have higher income taxes. They also all have ignored the same key questions Massachusetts is now ignoring, when it gets obsessed over the gimmicky casino issue. It’s time to have a real conversation about the real issues that could solve our state’s problems. It’s time for Beacon Hill to grow up and act like the very leaders they claim to be.
johnksays
I agree that casinos is not a fix for the entire budget, but I don’t think that it’s being sold that way. It’s being sold as increased revenue for the state, not the entire solution.
<
p>Local business are more effected by Home Depot and WalMart than casinos, the same can be said for the large chain stores / malls that are continually being built. What they do have in common is that they also create jobs, those jobs and payroll taxes are mostly Massachusetts residents, so those residents to go to the local pizza shop and stores around town. That’s unless they go Home Depot instead of the local hardware store.
<
p>We needed move money around this year and vote for an override to our budget to pay for our school’s electricity bills. It seems like towns are living paycheck to paycheck and you are correct that we need to take a hard look at why it’s costing so much. Health care and pensions for town staff is an area that has been discuss many times. The GIC seems as a reasonable idea for towns to get health care, but we have the issue with unions. Hard decision #1, Patrick needs to have towns not get consent from the unions. Maybe not be popular with the union folk here, but that has to be on the top of the list for towns.
<
p>I would still like to see the numbers for casinos prior to making a final decision. The Barrow’s attack on Patrick really turned me off with the anti-casino group. It basically told me that they have no clue of what’s really going on. You can’t just make stuff up and attack someone. Some good numbers for both sides and a debate on the facts is what’s needed, we don’t have that yet from either side, but at this point I still think that casinos could be part of the solution.
Governor Patrick is selling it as far more than merely increased revenue. Let’s look at what his proposal tries to accomplish:
<
p>-It’s going to lower your property taxes!
-It’s going to pay to fix the failing infrastructure!
-And it’ll have so much money left over, that it’ll even pay for all the mitigating social costs!
<
p>I’m sorry, but either Governor Patrick is being woefully inept in this regard thinking he can spread such a small sum of money around to so many places (and let’s get this straight: I don’t think Patrick is dumb at all, which is why I supported him so whole-heartedly since the early days of the primary), or Governor Patrick is billing this as a quick fix, even if it’s a message only being pitched to the not-clued-in (because the things most people will hear about casinos is where the revenue will go).
<
p>Not only won’t casinos put a dent into quickly rising property taxes and the infrastructure, but it couldn’t even manage to pay the way of a small fraction of the new train the Governor has promised New Bedford. Let’s get this straight: even if we ignore the income redistribution, if we put all the revenue of the proposed casinos into only one single infrastructure project, it wouldn’t pay for half of it.
<
p>That’s not a real conversation. Those are gimmicks designed to show the people of this state that he’s doing something, when all of his much-better initiatives have been blocked so far by the Speaker. We don’t need that childish game of gimme politics. We need real conversations, real leadership and most importantly – real solutions.
<
p>So, the problem in our state is that we can’t pay for all of our services. Your town and my town know this tale well. The real question isn’t casinos, it’s what is causing those problems? Casinos, so far, are neither the cause, nor the solution. The problems are largely two fold: the increasingly expensive cost of health insurance and special education. That’s why your town has to have overrides every few years. Let’s get this straight: Casinos will have zero – and I mean zero – impact on your town in that regard.
<
p>Why? Let’s take another look at the numbers.
<
p>50% of the money will go into property tax reduction, but that’s such a small amount of money that you won’t see much of it. This will do nothing to help your town pay for its services.
<
p>Most of the rest will go into infrastructure, some of it will go into mitigation. You won’t feel any of the above effects, because this money has been sliced too many times. But, again, notice it isn’t going to help your town pay for your teachers and police officers.
<
p>Furthermore, up to 70% of a casino’s profits are just redistributed from other sectors of your economy
<
p>And note that even Treasurer Cahill has publicly acknowledged the state lottery – which does go to your town – will take a decent hit at about 5%, which is tens of thousands for your town (want some more layoffs?). I say that’s a low-balled number from a big casino supporter, so expect a few more layoffs on top of that.
<
p>Not only will casinos NOT help the revenue situation in your town, but it will actually make it worse. Between local businesses taking a hit and taking a hit from the money you would have received in the state lottery, a lot of towns could be devestated with a casino nearby – such as a Saugus, or a Lynn, a Dartmouth, and even towns like Springfield and Worcester, (the casinos will only be nearby those towns and cities, not in them, so they get all of the same costs and none of the casino’s property taxes), etc.
<
p>NOTHING is going toward paying for the rising costs of your town.
<
p>In leau of talking about our real problems, our leadership is debating gimmicky solutions that aren’t going to solve, or even contribute to solving, any of our problems. It’s like a little kid being told to do their chores, only to put their hands around their ears and scream “lalalalala.”
<
p>I want real solutions. This isn’t one of them, no matter how you slice it.
I didn’t answer this one point you made above, because quite frankly I had already written too much. However, I will, because you’re wrong in thinking that casinos hurt local economies.
<
p>
Local business are more effected by Home Depot and WalMart than casinos, the same can be said for the large chain stores / malls that are continually being built. What they do have in common is that they also create jobs, those jobs and payroll taxes are mostly Massachusetts residents, so those residents to go to the local pizza shop and stores around town.
<
p>1. You may think all jobs are created equally, but they’re not. There are several advantages of having local businesses over other ones – I’ll just list a few of them.
<
p>First, they pay more, at least more people get paid more. When casinos move in and many local businesses move out, that means people will either have to find new work or leave the area. Both hurt the community: even if people find new work, often it won’t pay nearly as well.
<
p>Second, when a person owns a business in their community, it’s their community – something they care about. Having taken an entire seminar to study cities at UMASS Dartmouth – and spending that entire time examining Lynn – I can tell you that Lynn’s problems began when they started losing locally-owned businesses. Why? Those people cared about their community, they sent their kids to Lynn’s schools, they invested in the city in ways that international casino developers never will. Furthermore, the city wasn’t beholden to international companies, willing to do anything the companies wanted in order to keep a fraction of the jobs inside the city.
<
p>Third, while a casino may bring some new jobs, many of those jobs aren’t from the community. And the people they ship in to do those jobs will put a tremendous strain on any community, be it needing affordable housing or on school systems. Furthermore, that money ISN’T going into the local economy at nearly the same rate. For starters, they aren’t making much money. But beyond that, they’ll be spending a lot of their own money at the casino.
<
p>Finally, I don’t think you quite grasp what net sum means. It means that money you spend at one place can’t be spent at another place. So, while Walmart hurt local businesses, people were still buying largely the same things, just at a different area. However, instead of spending money on ‘things’, when people are at a casino, they’re spending it on gambling. That puts nothing back into the economy. Not only does it put nothing into the economy, but now people are suddenly spending their daughters’ college fund or their mortgage. While people ultimately have to be accountable for themselves, this is an economic question at the community level – because these people do impact everyone. When they get sucked in, it’s us that has to bail them out. It’ll be you bailing our your neice and nephew. Or you paying for more cops in your town to help keep up with the uptick in theft (people do steal to get money for gambling, ask Lancaster, Connecticut).
<
p>So, to wrap this all up, casinos aren’t going to be anything but a strain on the economy. They’ll hurt the community on a number of fronts – and ultimately the jobs they create will never replace the ones we lose because of casinos.
because you’re wrong in thinking that casinos hurt WON’T local economies.
<
p>David, Charley and Bob… we need an edit button!!
johnksays
The angle of local business and casinos is a stretch in my opinion. I think the greatest impact is the building of malls in towns which are very active makes the greatest impact. Will there be an impact because of casinos? Yes, probably. The impact that you note I believe to be overstated. The fact of the matter is that local businesses are being attacked on an ongoing basis.
<
p>Up until last year, when I turned on to School St. in Mansfield on my way home from work I used to see a nice red farm house next to a pond and a long meadow to the street. I’m not making this up. It was pretty cool to see in the wintertime. When making that turn now, I see LL Bean, Best Buy, etc. and a large mall, it’s been billed as a 4 million increase in the town’s revenue, lower property tax and we’ll all be skipping and having sing a longs, blah, blah. But what’s the effect on the appliance store on Main Street? How long before that store closes it doors? What will my car insurance be with the increase of stolen cars in the town. What’s the impact of the need for more police and emergency responders in town? There is round the clock traffic details in the area now, what that impact. We need to upgrade infrastructure, sewer stations and sewer lines to accommodate the restaurants and other businesses. Everything has a cost, what we need to find out are the details. That’s what I want to see.
<
p>That is a greater impact than a casino, and that’s why I think you are overstating the local business side of the issue. They are slowly going away and it’s not because of casinos. As for buying “things”, well that depends on where the things are made. Entertainment expense is just that entertainment expense, it will likely overlap some other spending, but it’s probably not going to the mom and pop store in town and it’s taxed just the same.
<
p>This doesn’t mean that all the other issues will go away, it a look at what else we can do to increase our revenue base. What are we really going to make is your point, I agree I want to find out as well.
johnksays
This doesn’t mean that all the other issues will go away, it’s a look at what else we can do to increase our revenue base. What are we really going to make? I want to find out as well.
Local businesses are under assault and you recognize that, but want to drop the final nuke on them or something? I don’t get the rational behind your argument. It just isn’t logical. Malls are nothing compared to casinos, no where near the same threat.
<
p>I’ll try to explain this in a way that’s crystal clear. A resort casino isn’t just a casino. It’s also a mall. It’s also pretty much anything else you could think of. Furthermore, they’re far more dangerous than malls because not only do they have all the same stores (with free booze and more entertainment to keep people there), but casinos are a money pit. If you don’t lose your money gambling, you lose it at the show you spent a hundred bucks to see. If you didn’t lose it there, you lost it at the hundred or so stores at the mall. Or at the fancy restaurant. And at the end of the day, it’s a very small group of people that take the money home with them, much smaller than a casino and with far less money escaping the far-deeper Black Hole money pit.
<
p>Even at a mall, costumers exchange money for goods and/or services. It’s not a money pit. There’s not a negative exchange going there – money comes in and out at a far greater frequency. You spend money gambling and it goes right to the casino. No one had to build the products, or take care of them, or anything of the like. Furthermore, even at a mall there are going to be some local businesses or local chains, not just the national variety: people owning the carts, or owning a store front, etc. Of course, that’s becoming less and less so, but it still exists.
<
p>Furthermore, there’s usually some growth outside of a mall: thousands travel to the area and store owners may get cheaper rates and larger stores outside of the mall than inside. Malls have killed downtown areas, but they’ve also created new shopping zones. The same can’t be said of a casino, because casinos kill everything as they keep everyone inside. The power of free booze and entertainment and everything rolled into one is very difficult to overcome.
<
p>If we wanted to take this to it’s logical conclusion, a resort casino may just put malls on notice, never mind the local economy – which, in many places, may just be put out of their miseries, as you seem to be thinking it.
p>Here’s a photo of only one or two stores in the Forum at Caesar’s Palace, in Las Vegas. The entire mall has well over a hundred stores, several floors and is designed to look as though it were always a beautiful, Roman night. I was actually inside this building once and just knew my little sister, who loves to shop, would never want to leave. There was even a ripped, drop-dead, georgous, live Abercrombie Model standing at the doors to keep people nearby. Keep in mind, Deval Patrick wants to build 3 of these suckers, which would be within 50 miles of almost every single, last person in this state.
p>As we’ve seen in Atlantic City and other places, people don’t. The sad part? The proposed casino in Middleboro is far larger than Caesar’s Palace.
mcrdsays
first—what are the validity of these numbers? Why are they magical? They are simply hypothetical projections which could be grossly exaggerated, whichever way. Just like statistics and polling data—numbers are as good as what?
<
p>That being said, I read the other day that the town of Middleborough received a check from the Wampanoags for $250K. They were supposed to get $1 million. The town asked , “where’s the rest of the money” and the interim president of the Wampanoag tribal council started doing a tap dance. The board of selectmen stated that they are becoming increasingly concerned. There now appears to be an underlying current of doubt re the Wampanoags financial backing. They (selectmen) will hold the money in escrow rather than spending it on planning. It seems that there are now “problems.” The selectmen also stated that even with sufficient funding, that the permitting process will take at least several years as the enviromentalists have already stated that are amassing a large legal challenge to preclude the destruction of much watershed/green space in Middleborough. And that’s the tip of the iceberg. No doubt Mohegan Sun et al will be the financier for much of the legal challenges for permitting and that is just the first step. It also appears that there is a water issue. The Town’s watershed would be adversely impacted if the intended casino sank their own wells. Many hurdles and obstacles.
<
p>Our energy issues have been on the horizon for years. How many energy efficient schools have been built in the past five years. How many schools have thermostats set at 70F and have windows open, lights on in unoccupied rooms, rooms being heated that are unoccupied, school buses that stop in front of every house because Johnie or Mary won’t walk a quarter mile? And this is just the simple stuff. Thirty years ago I was spending out of pocket money for paint, colored pencils,poster board, colored paper and other stuff I can’t even remember for my wife’s science classes because the town was broke. I’m tired of the weeping. We can’t teach our kids the basic three R’s but we have to flog many PC programs to death because the do-gooders have taken over and folks with an ounce of common sense are cowering in the corners or don’t even show up anymore to school committee any longer for fear of the PC police. I am the average taxpayer. I worked my ass off as a young man to do the right thing and be a good member of the community. I don’t mind paying taxes, but”ll be damned if I will have my tax money pissed away. I am now at the point where I will spend every penny I can to torpedo the fraud, waste, and abuse of governmental spending. Many of you folks have the best of intentions and I applaud you for it. But you can’t see the forest for the trees. You think Huckabee is a clown and a comedy act. Personally he isn’t someone I would vote for, but there is a rising tsunami of folks who will. A dramatic shift in US politics may just over the horizon.
…but I pretty much agree with her assessment on this subject.
<
p>On the other hand, query the extent to which MA will be driven to allowing casinos because of neighboring states. It is highly unlikely that MA would have a state lottery if NH had not instituted one first.
<
p>I’d throw up my hands in frustration: they shouldn’t be allowed anywhere other than Lost Vegas, but unfortunately they are spreading.
Based on the Federal recognition of Native American tribes, and that Deval was merely tryinh to “get in on the action”, so to speak. I guess I’m completely wrong? Meanwhile, I’m not sure how anybody can blame Patrick for the corporate tax reform and municipal finance options being relegated to purgatory. That was old-fashioned, Finneran-style legislative obstructionism orchestrated by fellows like Scaccia and DiMasi, unless I’m missing something. It seems that the MA republican party is trying to be cute by pretending to have “liked Deval at first”, when in fact they’re nothing but old Yankee aristocrats pining away for pre-1850’s Beacon Hill society- the types of scum who voted for old W and would probably like to see Chenet run for president.
To have full-scale casinos, Massachusetts would have to legalize Class 3 Gambling, which would allow for slot machines. Currently, we don’t allow slots, thus – because of federal law – the native tribes in Massachusetts couldn’t use slots either. The way federal law works is that tribal casinos can use anything already legal in the state, so as long as Class 3 remains banned, so will full-scale tribal casinos.
<
p>That isn’t to say the Wampanoags couldn’t build a glorified Bingo Hall, but that wouldn’t have nearly the same consequences to the economy or surrounding communities. It still won’t exactly be good for either, but it represents a far more manageable threat.
The governor has to sign a compact with the Wampanoag. Of course, Deval seems eager to do so, but it IS a necessary procedural step.
<
p>As for the Class 3 legalization, there have been cases in the US where tribes have had equipment for class 3 gaming flown directly into legally sovereign territory under Native title, creating a rather bad legal snarl.
rajsays
…earmuffs do not cancel ambient noise. Noise cancelling headphones manufactured (or at least distributed) by Massachusetts’s own Bose Corporation do.
from China. Giving away our biotech to the Chinese no doubt.
Hat tip to the Squaring the Globe for this delightful phrase.
<
p>Gladys — don’t believe the governor when he says all he has heard is emotional argument. He’s not stupid. And you would be gullible to buy that line.
<
p>He’s employing a technique I’ve seen used often in education. When criticism or concerns are received, they are diffused by trivializing them. The most common line I’ve heard is “You’re the only person I’ve heard that from” — and then you find out no, there have been dozens of similar comments.
<
p>In this case, the governor is making it seem that the opposition is only offering emotional arguments. See a further description of the technique here.
<
p>And stop believing everything you hear. đŸ™‚
But sharp language may be the only thing he hears. We need to have that adult conversation on revenue issues in this state – and no matter how you slice it, casino revenue isn’t going to lead to any answers. There are tons of better options out there we, as citizens, desperately need to address, from the rising costs of health care to the rising costs of being dependent on foreign oil and its effects on the environment. These are issues we can’t talk about while we’re hearing all about the bells and whistles of casinos, while not hearing anything about how they’re actually bad for our state economy.
<
p>Governor Patrick is someone who I supported whole heartedly in the primary election. Very few people were as vocal as I was. All that said, ultimately governors have to be accountable to their constituents and not the other way around. If he doesn’t want to have an honest and frank discussion about casinos in Massachusetts, something that would alter this state permanently and forever, then we’re going to have to speak so loudly on this issue that he’ll hear us anyway. Luckily, since the facts are on our side, the more people hear about casinos and their economic impacts, the less people tend to want them.
To be fair, Patrick hasn’t shared his either. That’s what I would like too see.
<
p>Adult conversation is acknowledging that Massachusetts already has state-sponsored gambling via the lottery and it provides over 900 million in revenue annually.
<
p>I have a question for you. Do you propose that we cut 900 million in revenue in our budget today? Disband the lottery. The lottery is gambling so by the same token (pun intended) it’s actually bad for our economy, right? What’s the impact to our schools if we do that and the money currently allotted to towns.
<
p>I would like to see the numbers, and I would like to have an adult conversation about our budget, that’s means casino discussion is included.
There have been dozens and dozens of posts on the casino industry numbers on BMG since July. Ryan has been a major poster dissecting the (pathetic) Barrows Plan which was is apparently what the Governor, or whichever novice staffers, used to develop the Bad Bill. It’s such a piece of crap legislation, that is hard to describe.
<
p>Let’s have an adult conversation on the budget, revenues, tax structure and the progressive steps needed, along with the continued search for greater efficiencies (is there a search, Governor?) to make government affordable and function well. Let’s get busy laughing down the ballot initative to repeal the income tax. It could actually pass given the huge disconnect and antipathy of citizens.
<
p>Let’s discuss whether or not we want the Commonwealth to continue to be a leader in education and fund the programs that we already have (K-12) before bringing on new programs. Let’s discuss the need for job training for a new economy and the ridiculous assertion that 20,000 “new” jobs will be created with casinos. Let’s discuss the Governor’s proposal to increase the number of foreign worker (H1B)visas for jobs that will not go to a Massachusetts resident when his proposal is granted.
<
p>The lottery is a drug and we are addicted. Should we increase the dose with casinos to get the right “fix”? Shit, no.
Find me a single post with numbers. Barrow’s plan has been singled out and Windmer’s group reviewed Barrow’s numbers and took the low ball figures to say it’s a few 100 million less. But those aren’t the numbers. Patrick said he took information from a variety of sources, we don’t have that information.
<
p>Nor has anyone against casinos EVER put up any kind of numbers whatsoever. They have done jack s—. All I have seen so far is a link to Barrows which hasn’t been confirmed as the sole resource, and then an attack on Barrows. That’s not numbers. That might not even be fact. Looking forward to any details that you could provide. Patrick hasn’t given us anything so far either and DiMasi said they are conducting a study. So maybe 1st quarter ’08 before we see anything? Who knows.
<
p>So you are for abolishing the lottery? The argument in the post is that we are actually going to lose money on gambling, so if that’s the case we’re going to make money by stopping the lottery in our state? Are we going to save a billion each year by not having the lottery, the revenues are above 900 million — I don’t think so. What I do think is that we do need to be adult and review everything at our disposal. If it’s not gambling, then fine it’s not. But what I’ve seen so far is a whole lot of nothing.
If you use the search feature “casino” on the BMG blog you will find about 120 posts on this subject in the past four months. There are plenty of studies, numbers and opinions to be found. Enjoy.
They are not there. All that’s out there are some of Barrow’s numbers, which at this point don’t mean much.
Ok, last try to help you out. Did you search and follow the many links in the posts?
<
p>Here are some more.
<
p>”Statement to the Metro Ethics Coalition Project”. J Terrence Brunner, Executive Director. Better Government Association. 1997 June 23.
<
p>”Outlook: Slots of Trouble?” The Washington Post. William Thompson Professor, University of Nevada/Las Vegas. 2004 July 19.
<
p>”Robert Kerr: Economics of Casinos vs. Manufacturing”. The Providence Journal. 2004 June 1.
<
p>”Gambling in America: Costs and Benefits”. Gringols, Earl PH.D. 2005
<
p>”Rapid onsets of Pathological Gambling in Machine Gamblers”. Breen, Robert; Mark Zimmerman. Department of Pyschiatry and Human Behavior, Brown University School of Medicine.
<
p>Already mentioned in the posts are the UConn study, the Boston Federal Reserve Bank study, The Mass Tax Payers Foundation study, Bosley’s studies.
FYI – the Mass Tax Payers Foundation study – is Barrow’s but using his low ball figures for revenue.
I thought Bosley said that they are “working” on a report for next year? That’s what I’ve noted as DiMasi…
They quoted The Center for Policy Analysis at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth — me thinks that means Barrows.
<
p>The quote about ancillary spending came from a quote from casino owner Wynn. No numbers or facts involved here, they only numbers they gave is from Atlantic City in the 70s and the number of restaurants in the area. That’s it, tell me something that I’m missing?
Who’s questioning legalized gambling in Massachusetts. That’s niether here nor there. The question is casinos, which are much more than gambling. They’re shops, they’re restaurants, they’re clubs, they’re big shows… they’re a lot of things that drive local economies out of business, or really hit up their local margin. I don’t need to be an economist to tell you that when you spend money in local businesses, that money stays in the community. When people went to my step mother’s travel agency and bought a cruise from her, the money she earned from it went back into the local hair salon or pizza shop. Casinos don’t work that way.
<
p>Furthermore, what money people spend inside casinos is money they can’t spend outside casinos. That’s why, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, up to 70% of all casino revenue is redistributed from other sectors of the economy. That means it’s money Massachusetts was making already. It also means it’s money that was going into the local economy and no longer is.
<
p>Casinos represent a fraction of the revenue we need to sustain the current budget. What would be far more rewarding for our state is if we tackled things like affordable health care. It’s not just your budget being effected by rising health care costs, or your boss’s. Just ask your local school committee members what health care costs are doing to schools: they’re driving towns bankrupt. The money our town could have saved if health care were available at reasonable rates would have been the difference between keeping an elementary school open this year and closing it. Needless to say, it closed – and it was a Compass school for heaven’s sake (that means one of the best public schools in the state, according to the Department of Education).
<
p>Yet, we can’t talk about any of these issues because, for months, Beacon Hill has been enamored with casinos as a mysterious quick fix. It’s not a quick fix – just look around at Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania and New Jersey. What two things do they all have in common? They all have casinos and they all have higher income taxes. They also all have ignored the same key questions Massachusetts is now ignoring, when it gets obsessed over the gimmicky casino issue. It’s time to have a real conversation about the real issues that could solve our state’s problems. It’s time for Beacon Hill to grow up and act like the very leaders they claim to be.
I agree that casinos is not a fix for the entire budget, but I don’t think that it’s being sold that way. It’s being sold as increased revenue for the state, not the entire solution.
<
p>Local business are more effected by Home Depot and WalMart than casinos, the same can be said for the large chain stores / malls that are continually being built. What they do have in common is that they also create jobs, those jobs and payroll taxes are mostly Massachusetts residents, so those residents to go to the local pizza shop and stores around town. That’s unless they go Home Depot instead of the local hardware store.
<
p>We needed move money around this year and vote for an override to our budget to pay for our school’s electricity bills. It seems like towns are living paycheck to paycheck and you are correct that we need to take a hard look at why it’s costing so much. Health care and pensions for town staff is an area that has been discuss many times. The GIC seems as a reasonable idea for towns to get health care, but we have the issue with unions. Hard decision #1, Patrick needs to have towns not get consent from the unions. Maybe not be popular with the union folk here, but that has to be on the top of the list for towns.
<
p>I would still like to see the numbers for casinos prior to making a final decision. The Barrow’s attack on Patrick really turned me off with the anti-casino group. It basically told me that they have no clue of what’s really going on. You can’t just make stuff up and attack someone. Some good numbers for both sides and a debate on the facts is what’s needed, we don’t have that yet from either side, but at this point I still think that casinos could be part of the solution.
Governor Patrick is selling it as far more than merely increased revenue. Let’s look at what his proposal tries to accomplish:
<
p>-It’s going to lower your property taxes!
-It’s going to pay to fix the failing infrastructure!
-And it’ll have so much money left over, that it’ll even pay for all the mitigating social costs!
<
p>I’m sorry, but either Governor Patrick is being woefully inept in this regard thinking he can spread such a small sum of money around to so many places (and let’s get this straight: I don’t think Patrick is dumb at all, which is why I supported him so whole-heartedly since the early days of the primary), or Governor Patrick is billing this as a quick fix, even if it’s a message only being pitched to the not-clued-in (because the things most people will hear about casinos is where the revenue will go).
<
p>Not only won’t casinos put a dent into quickly rising property taxes and the infrastructure, but it couldn’t even manage to pay the way of a small fraction of the new train the Governor has promised New Bedford. Let’s get this straight: even if we ignore the income redistribution, if we put all the revenue of the proposed casinos into only one single infrastructure project, it wouldn’t pay for half of it.
<
p>That’s not a real conversation. Those are gimmicks designed to show the people of this state that he’s doing something, when all of his much-better initiatives have been blocked so far by the Speaker. We don’t need that childish game of gimme politics. We need real conversations, real leadership and most importantly – real solutions.
<
p>So, the problem in our state is that we can’t pay for all of our services. Your town and my town know this tale well. The real question isn’t casinos, it’s what is causing those problems? Casinos, so far, are neither the cause, nor the solution. The problems are largely two fold: the increasingly expensive cost of health insurance and special education. That’s why your town has to have overrides every few years. Let’s get this straight: Casinos will have zero – and I mean zero – impact on your town in that regard.
<
p>Why? Let’s take another look at the numbers.
<
p>50% of the money will go into property tax reduction, but that’s such a small amount of money that you won’t see much of it. This will do nothing to help your town pay for its services.
<
p>Most of the rest will go into infrastructure, some of it will go into mitigation. You won’t feel any of the above effects, because this money has been sliced too many times. But, again, notice it isn’t going to help your town pay for your teachers and police officers.
<
p>Furthermore, up to 70% of a casino’s profits are just redistributed from other sectors of your economy
<
p>And note that even Treasurer Cahill has publicly acknowledged the state lottery – which does go to your town – will take a decent hit at about 5%, which is tens of thousands for your town (want some more layoffs?). I say that’s a low-balled number from a big casino supporter, so expect a few more layoffs on top of that.
<
p>Not only will casinos NOT help the revenue situation in your town, but it will actually make it worse. Between local businesses taking a hit and taking a hit from the money you would have received in the state lottery, a lot of towns could be devestated with a casino nearby – such as a Saugus, or a Lynn, a Dartmouth, and even towns like Springfield and Worcester, (the casinos will only be nearby those towns and cities, not in them, so they get all of the same costs and none of the casino’s property taxes), etc.
<
p>NOTHING is going toward paying for the rising costs of your town.
<
p>In leau of talking about our real problems, our leadership is debating gimmicky solutions that aren’t going to solve, or even contribute to solving, any of our problems. It’s like a little kid being told to do their chores, only to put their hands around their ears and scream “lalalalala.”
<
p>I want real solutions. This isn’t one of them, no matter how you slice it.
I didn’t answer this one point you made above, because quite frankly I had already written too much. However, I will, because you’re wrong in thinking that casinos hurt local economies.
<
p>
<
p>1. You may think all jobs are created equally, but they’re not. There are several advantages of having local businesses over other ones – I’ll just list a few of them.
<
p>First, they pay more, at least more people get paid more. When casinos move in and many local businesses move out, that means people will either have to find new work or leave the area. Both hurt the community: even if people find new work, often it won’t pay nearly as well.
<
p>Second, when a person owns a business in their community, it’s their community – something they care about. Having taken an entire seminar to study cities at UMASS Dartmouth – and spending that entire time examining Lynn – I can tell you that Lynn’s problems began when they started losing locally-owned businesses. Why? Those people cared about their community, they sent their kids to Lynn’s schools, they invested in the city in ways that international casino developers never will. Furthermore, the city wasn’t beholden to international companies, willing to do anything the companies wanted in order to keep a fraction of the jobs inside the city.
<
p>Third, while a casino may bring some new jobs, many of those jobs aren’t from the community. And the people they ship in to do those jobs will put a tremendous strain on any community, be it needing affordable housing or on school systems. Furthermore, that money ISN’T going into the local economy at nearly the same rate. For starters, they aren’t making much money. But beyond that, they’ll be spending a lot of their own money at the casino.
<
p>Finally, I don’t think you quite grasp what net sum means. It means that money you spend at one place can’t be spent at another place. So, while Walmart hurt local businesses, people were still buying largely the same things, just at a different area. However, instead of spending money on ‘things’, when people are at a casino, they’re spending it on gambling. That puts nothing back into the economy. Not only does it put nothing into the economy, but now people are suddenly spending their daughters’ college fund or their mortgage. While people ultimately have to be accountable for themselves, this is an economic question at the community level – because these people do impact everyone. When they get sucked in, it’s us that has to bail them out. It’ll be you bailing our your neice and nephew. Or you paying for more cops in your town to help keep up with the uptick in theft (people do steal to get money for gambling, ask Lancaster, Connecticut).
<
p>So, to wrap this all up, casinos aren’t going to be anything but a strain on the economy. They’ll hurt the community on a number of fronts – and ultimately the jobs they create will never replace the ones we lose because of casinos.
Right up top, here’s the fix:
<
p>
<
p>David, Charley and Bob… we need an edit button!!
The angle of local business and casinos is a stretch in my opinion. I think the greatest impact is the building of malls in towns which are very active makes the greatest impact. Will there be an impact because of casinos? Yes, probably. The impact that you note I believe to be overstated. The fact of the matter is that local businesses are being attacked on an ongoing basis.
<
p>Up until last year, when I turned on to School St. in Mansfield on my way home from work I used to see a nice red farm house next to a pond and a long meadow to the street. I’m not making this up. It was pretty cool to see in the wintertime. When making that turn now, I see LL Bean, Best Buy, etc. and a large mall, it’s been billed as a 4 million increase in the town’s revenue, lower property tax and we’ll all be skipping and having sing a longs, blah, blah. But what’s the effect on the appliance store on Main Street? How long before that store closes it doors? What will my car insurance be with the increase of stolen cars in the town. What’s the impact of the need for more police and emergency responders in town? There is round the clock traffic details in the area now, what that impact. We need to upgrade infrastructure, sewer stations and sewer lines to accommodate the restaurants and other businesses. Everything has a cost, what we need to find out are the details. That’s what I want to see.
<
p>That is a greater impact than a casino, and that’s why I think you are overstating the local business side of the issue. They are slowly going away and it’s not because of casinos. As for buying “things”, well that depends on where the things are made. Entertainment expense is just that entertainment expense, it will likely overlap some other spending, but it’s probably not going to the mom and pop store in town and it’s taxed just the same.
<
p>This doesn’t mean that all the other issues will go away, it a look at what else we can do to increase our revenue base. What are we really going to make is your point, I agree I want to find out as well.
This doesn’t mean that all the other issues will go away, it’s a look at what else we can do to increase our revenue base. What are we really going to make? I want to find out as well.
Local businesses are under assault and you recognize that, but want to drop the final nuke on them or something? I don’t get the rational behind your argument. It just isn’t logical. Malls are nothing compared to casinos, no where near the same threat.
<
p>I’ll try to explain this in a way that’s crystal clear. A resort casino isn’t just a casino. It’s also a mall. It’s also pretty much anything else you could think of. Furthermore, they’re far more dangerous than malls because not only do they have all the same stores (with free booze and more entertainment to keep people there), but casinos are a money pit. If you don’t lose your money gambling, you lose it at the show you spent a hundred bucks to see. If you didn’t lose it there, you lost it at the hundred or so stores at the mall. Or at the fancy restaurant. And at the end of the day, it’s a very small group of people that take the money home with them, much smaller than a casino and with far less money escaping the far-deeper Black Hole money pit.
<
p>Even at a mall, costumers exchange money for goods and/or services. It’s not a money pit. There’s not a negative exchange going there – money comes in and out at a far greater frequency. You spend money gambling and it goes right to the casino. No one had to build the products, or take care of them, or anything of the like. Furthermore, even at a mall there are going to be some local businesses or local chains, not just the national variety: people owning the carts, or owning a store front, etc. Of course, that’s becoming less and less so, but it still exists.
<
p>Furthermore, there’s usually some growth outside of a mall: thousands travel to the area and store owners may get cheaper rates and larger stores outside of the mall than inside. Malls have killed downtown areas, but they’ve also created new shopping zones. The same can’t be said of a casino, because casinos kill everything as they keep everyone inside. The power of free booze and entertainment and everything rolled into one is very difficult to overcome.
<
p>If we wanted to take this to it’s logical conclusion, a resort casino may just put malls on notice, never mind the local economy – which, in many places, may just be put out of their miseries, as you seem to be thinking it.
<
p>Here’s a photo of only one or two stores in the Forum at Caesar’s Palace, in Las Vegas. The entire mall has well over a hundred stores, several floors and is designed to look as though it were always a beautiful, Roman night. I was actually inside this building once and just knew my little sister, who loves to shop, would never want to leave. There was even a ripped, drop-dead, georgous, live Abercrombie Model standing at the doors to keep people nearby. Keep in mind, Deval Patrick wants to build 3 of these suckers, which would be within 50 miles of almost every single, last person in this state.
<
p>Between the actual casino, grounds, extremely cheap rooms (especially for 4 stars) and all the entertainment you could possibly dream of, why bother shopping anywhere else? Or going anywhere else?
<
p>As we’ve seen in Atlantic City and other places, people don’t. The sad part? The proposed casino in Middleboro is far larger than Caesar’s Palace.
first—what are the validity of these numbers? Why are they magical? They are simply hypothetical projections which could be grossly exaggerated, whichever way. Just like statistics and polling data—numbers are as good as what?
<
p>That being said, I read the other day that the town of Middleborough received a check from the Wampanoags for $250K. They were supposed to get $1 million. The town asked , “where’s the rest of the money” and the interim president of the Wampanoag tribal council started doing a tap dance. The board of selectmen stated that they are becoming increasingly concerned. There now appears to be an underlying current of doubt re the Wampanoags financial backing. They (selectmen) will hold the money in escrow rather than spending it on planning. It seems that there are now “problems.” The selectmen also stated that even with sufficient funding, that the permitting process will take at least several years as the enviromentalists have already stated that are amassing a large legal challenge to preclude the destruction of much watershed/green space in Middleborough. And that’s the tip of the iceberg. No doubt Mohegan Sun et al will be the financier for much of the legal challenges for permitting and that is just the first step. It also appears that there is a water issue. The Town’s watershed would be adversely impacted if the intended casino sank their own wells. Many hurdles and obstacles.
<
p>Our energy issues have been on the horizon for years. How many energy efficient schools have been built in the past five years. How many schools have thermostats set at 70F and have windows open, lights on in unoccupied rooms, rooms being heated that are unoccupied, school buses that stop in front of every house because Johnie or Mary won’t walk a quarter mile? And this is just the simple stuff. Thirty years ago I was spending out of pocket money for paint, colored pencils,poster board, colored paper and other stuff I can’t even remember for my wife’s science classes because the town was broke. I’m tired of the weeping. We can’t teach our kids the basic three R’s but we have to flog many PC programs to death because the do-gooders have taken over and folks with an ounce of common sense are cowering in the corners or don’t even show up anymore to school committee any longer for fear of the PC police. I am the average taxpayer. I worked my ass off as a young man to do the right thing and be a good member of the community. I don’t mind paying taxes, but”ll be damned if I will have my tax money pissed away. I am now at the point where I will spend every penny I can to torpedo the fraud, waste, and abuse of governmental spending. Many of you folks have the best of intentions and I applaud you for it. But you can’t see the forest for the trees. You think Huckabee is a clown and a comedy act. Personally he isn’t someone I would vote for, but there is a rising tsunami of folks who will. A dramatic shift in US politics may just over the horizon.
That I can answer with some confidence.
…but I pretty much agree with her assessment on this subject.
<
p>On the other hand, query the extent to which MA will be driven to allowing casinos because of neighboring states. It is highly unlikely that MA would have a state lottery if NH had not instituted one first.
<
p>I’d throw up my hands in frustration: they shouldn’t be allowed anywhere other than Lost Vegas, but unfortunately they are spreading.
Based on the Federal recognition of Native American tribes, and that Deval was merely tryinh to “get in on the action”, so to speak. I guess I’m completely wrong? Meanwhile, I’m not sure how anybody can blame Patrick for the corporate tax reform and municipal finance options being relegated to purgatory. That was old-fashioned, Finneran-style legislative obstructionism orchestrated by fellows like Scaccia and DiMasi, unless I’m missing something. It seems that the MA republican party is trying to be cute by pretending to have “liked Deval at first”, when in fact they’re nothing but old Yankee aristocrats pining away for pre-1850’s Beacon Hill society- the types of scum who voted for old W and would probably like to see Chenet run for president.
To have full-scale casinos, Massachusetts would have to legalize Class 3 Gambling, which would allow for slot machines. Currently, we don’t allow slots, thus – because of federal law – the native tribes in Massachusetts couldn’t use slots either. The way federal law works is that tribal casinos can use anything already legal in the state, so as long as Class 3 remains banned, so will full-scale tribal casinos.
<
p>That isn’t to say the Wampanoags couldn’t build a glorified Bingo Hall, but that wouldn’t have nearly the same consequences to the economy or surrounding communities. It still won’t exactly be good for either, but it represents a far more manageable threat.
The governor has to sign a compact with the Wampanoag. Of course, Deval seems eager to do so, but it IS a necessary procedural step.
<
p>As for the Class 3 legalization, there have been cases in the US where tribes have had equipment for class 3 gaming flown directly into legally sovereign territory under Native title, creating a rather bad legal snarl.
…earmuffs do not cancel ambient noise. Noise cancelling headphones manufactured (or at least distributed) by Massachusetts’s own Bose Corporation do.
Thanks a million, raj. Got it.
<
p>(Totally not pedantic at all, BTW. Good job.)