STATEMENT OF GOVERNOR DEVAL PATRICK
BOSTON – Saturday, July 31, 2010 – The following is a statement from Governor Deval Patrick.“The decision we make to expand gaming in Massachusetts will impact our state for decades. We have to get it right. Destination resort casinos will bring thousands of new jobs and increased economic development. Slots parlors will not. That is why I proposed licensing up to 3 destination resort casinos, and chose not to include slots parlors in my original bill.
“I believe that the bill before the Legislature provides for more licenses than the market can bear, and will therefore not produce the job creation and economic benefits that destination resort casinos would provide. In addition, the inclusion of two slots facilities for the tracks brings social costs without the benefits, and amounts to a “no-bid” contract for the track owners. I have been clear from the beginning that is not something I can accept.
“I have proposed a compromise that provides for one slots facility in addition to destination resorts, so long as that competition for that license is open and transparent. The Legislature has so far rejected that compromise.
“If the Legislature insists on sending me their gaming bill in its current form without addressing these concerns, I will send it back for amendment. The amendment will largely be the full text of the destination resort casino bill passed by the Senate last month, which is similar to and based on the legislation I filed in 2008.
“This amendment keeps faith with my convictions about the best long-term interests of the Commonwealth and with our shared interest in job creation. I hope the Legislature will see their way to enact the amendment. However, if the House and Senate choose to send back a bill with two slots facilities and without a truly open and competitive licensing process, I will veto that measure.
“Whether we ultimately agree on a gaming bill or not, it is imperative to the people of the Commonwealth that we see final action on the other pending measures that will expand job opportunities and on which there is support in both houses. Bills are ready for final action to promote further economic growth, to gain access to credit and lower health insurance premiums for small businesses, to reform our broken CORI system and enable former offenders to get back into the job market, and to lower energy costs by enabling more wind power. They all deserve favorable action before the Legislature adjourns tonight.”
Visiting the State House to observe the frantic closing day of the 2010 Legislative session, gubernatorial candidate Jill Stein offered the following comments:
<
p>”The orgy of backroom deals culminating here today is another disservice to the people of Massachusetts, and a troubling reminder of how dysfunctional Beacon Hill has become.”
<
p>”Example one is the fact that the Legislative leadership and the Governor have made casino gambling the centerpiece of their response to our failing economy. Casinos are not a solution. They are job killers, not job creators. Just look at Nevada if you want to see where the casino economy is going. This poster-child of legalized gambling has the highest unemployment rate in the nation, five times the national rate of foreclosures, and one of the highest state budget deficits. In the end, all our debate over licensing one, two, or three racinos is meaningless. Once the gambling industry moves in, the gambling industry gets what it wants. That’s been the story across the nation. In Nevada there are slot machines in bars, restaurants, grocery stores, gas stations and drug stores.”
<
p>”The closing days of the Legislative session has been marked by secrecy, finger-pointing, favors for lobbyists, and selling off rights to exploit constituents. Concerned citizens are not only unwelcome, they are kept out of the room while the deals are being made. There are no winners in this game except for the politicians who will cement their friendships with their big campaign donors. Any member of the public who takes a hard look at what’s happening here will realize that we need some real changes on Beacon Hill.”
<
p>”Bills that appear from behind closed conference room doors are being rushed into law without scrutiny by rank-and-file legislators. And the Legislature is just not facing up to the real problems of our Commonwealth. 300,000 workers are jobless. 33,000 homeowners are at risk for foreclosure (that’s up 50%). And bankruptcies are up 25%, with 12,000 filings in the first half of this year alone. CORI reform and foreclosure protection for tenants are very important steps forward, whose passage is an enormous credit to the years of hard work by grassroots advocacy groups. But aside from those two achievements, the growing problems in our economy are overwhelming the few public interest solutions we push through the Legislature. With the culture of influence generally calling the shots, Beacon Hill is not delivering the sound policies needed to put Massachusetts back on course.”
<
p>”In the end, only one group will benefit from casinos: The politicians who will collect big checks for passing regulations favorable to the casino lobbyists and be able to hand out hundreds of patronage jobs in a new gaming bureaucracy.”
<
p>”If the casino schemes fall apart, that would be a fortunate outcome for families, businesses and taxpayers of the Commonwealth. Then we might have a chance to get focused on creating real jobs in a sustainable economy – jobs that can be created in every town, not just in three casino communities. We can’t afford to neglect the jobs that strengthen our families, small businesses and communities – jobs that don’t leave us with a rash of problems as casinos do.”
<
p>###
For the 2010 Tax Expenditure menu of loopholes, special deals, corporate welfare, and general bleed go to see The Tax Expenditure Budget for 2010 replete, even bulging with deferrals, giveaways, interest free loans, and a loss of approximately 50% of tax revenue, all done without significant transparency and some still dripping away the Commonwealth’s lifeblood despite being enacted about a century ago, like excluding telephone infrastructure from taxation to promote the brand new hard wired telephone.
<
p>A little birdie tells me that the “Economic Stimulus Bill” in fact has a bountiful harvest of yet more deferrals, credits, giveaways, and freebies for corporate, lobbied interests.
<
p>Tell me it is not true! As human service cuts mean that the indigent must go without dentures and gum down their food once again, it is steak on our tax dollars for these corporate interests who feed off the Tax Expenditure Budget like ticks on a prairie dog.
That annoying sucking sound, heard round the world, and eminating from Beacon Hill seems to have…..muted.
<
p>Let’s hope it is silenced.
<
p>So glad it was easy and not at all messy this go around.
<
p>
Couldn’t have said it better myself. And, incidentally, an impressive stand for jobs for Massachusetts and against hackishness and insider deals that are not good for the commonwealth as a whole.
Bob. State House News is reporting that Senate sources are making a distinction between “may” and “shall” on issuing slots licenses by the Commission that the Gov controls. As enacted, the Commission “may” issue licenses. So the Governor’s choice is legislative (veto/send back the bill) which kills gaming. Or administrative (sign the bill but stack the Commission so no slots licenses issue, at least to the next Governor) which allows casinos and stops/delays slots. Interesting choice. And telling.
Globe has a story refuting this claim. Big issue is Gov only has one seat on the panel.
<
p>http://www.boston.com/news/loc…
And Martha is no fan of slots. But we’ll see. If the Governor holds firm, I suspect it is dead. Until the next Governor.
The bill sent to him essentially allows the race tracks the chance to bid for the casino licenes AND profit from slots without any competition in the process…don’t see how the state benefits from that.
…so instead of a law being enacted in August there will be one at the beginning of 2011. Less than a year away.
If they pass this same bill at the beginning of 2011, they still don’t have close to the votes needed to override a veto in the Senate.
Hopefully you will realize that resort casinos are not a good option either, but every victory is welcome.
Supporting casinos is still supporting gambling. It’s like being a little bit pregnant – you either are or you’re not. I don’t see a moral high ground here for the Governor or the Legislature. And for all those who think supporting casinos only will protect the little grannies from spending their social security checks on slots – think again. There will be buses picking them up and taking them to the casinos for a day of fun.
<
p>
that includes Keno, scratch off, powahball, the works.
<
p>Does that mean everybody is a little bit pregnant?
But voted on before my time. I just don’t see how anyone thinks they’re coming out of this one smelling like a rose.
The lottery is an incredibly regressive tax, plain and simple. It creates billions of revenue that would otherwise have to be offset by honest taxes.
<
p>There are some on Beacon Hill who would abolish the lottery, but none of them are in the leadership. And the excuse I hear when I ask is “People will just cross state lines to play because every other state has a lottery.”
meaning this bill getting killed. I trust the gambling lobbyists to do all they can to get their foot in the door. I hope they fail.
According to the Herald, the legislature finally passed CORI reform, which I think they really didn’t want to do, for whatever reason. The Gov asked them for some action on this (and other matters) as a condition of him approving a slots parlor- though they didn’t do everything he wanted, he’s the one who set up the “quid pro quo” dynamic in the first place- I think he owes them a little quo.
He’s been saying all along he didn’t want slot parlors. He finally agreed to give them one, competitively bid, if they do the other stuff. So they give him two, not competitively bid, and they do the other stuff. Not the deal he offered.
Are slots so much different, really?
Anti-gambling liberals or unemployed carpenters and electricians? Gambling in general, and more specifically, the nuances of high-end destination casinos versus slots, isn’t comparable to issues like torture or fake WMD’s, and it’s not gonna make me break for Stein to help Baker. I guess I just don’t care enough about the evils of slots, and I don’t think it’s a winner for Patrick.
anti-gambling opponents as “liberals” !
<
p>You’re clearly unaware that the United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts coalition is composed of both ends of the political spectrum.
<
p>Polling seems to indicate that Republicans heavily oppose expanded gambling – it certainly could have something to do with the BLOATED REGULATORY BUREAUCRACY required for oversight. In the Commonwealth, we might expect it to replace the Probation Dept. as Hack-O-Rama for political hacks and relatives. Do you know what that Bureaucracy will cost?
<
p>No?
<
p>Neither does the legislature that has refused to conduct an Independent Cost Benefit Analysis, but spent + $300,000 taxpayer funds on BENEFITS STUDIES.
<
p>Do you know what the additional personnel in the State Police will cost?
<
p>They don’t either.
<
p>And how about the Attorney General’s Office?
<
p>A spokesperson for the Speaker’s Office place the cost of the Regulatory Bureaucracy at $5 million.
<
p>Does that sound reasonable?
<
p>The current Racing Commission costs almost that to oversee operations that are NOT 24/7/365.
<
p>And what of the local impacts that have been estimated at $50 million?
<
p>That’s not what’s in the legislation.
<
p>Just as a point of information, for $600 million, you get a SLOT BARN not the high-end destination casinos you seem to believe.
<
p>Posted here with links:
Race to the bottom
<
p>
<
p>You might want to consider ALL of the issues before you make a judgement.
<
p>What other business would we welcome into the state and then mandate vehicles in the parking lot must be checked every 2 hours for kids and animals? What other business would we allow to serve free alcohol and then write loans?
<
p>Harrah’s determined that 90% of their profits came from 10% of their patrons. That’s ADDICTION.
<
p>Why would you support state-sponsored addiction?
<
p>You post like a really smart person and it seems to me you might want to take a look at what has some folks so upset.
gambling? Would you favor elimination of the lottery? I guess my only point is that “Predatory Gambling” has been Deval’s baby all along. In the beginning it was Deval v. DiMasi vis a vis casinos. Now Deleo wants a piece of the pie, for his own constituents, which is only natural. Probably he overplayed his hand in trying to score two slot parlors, but it’s important to remember that Patrick started the conversation about expanded gambling. He is very much pro-gambling, and there is nothing particularly principled in what is shaping up to look like an ego battle with Deleo.
<
p>You are right, however, in that I have very little personal experience with, or knowledge of, gambling addiction. My opinion on addiction is that it is up to the addicts themselves to realize they have a problem, and then to seek out help. Prohibition didn’t cure alcoholism or alcohol-related social problems. Anyone can get illegal drugs if they want them. I don’t think it should be the government’s job to save adults from themselves by forcing us to only do healthy things.
I have not been a fan of the Governor lately but give him credit for saying no to the bill. He was very clear about what he would sign and compromised to agree to 1 slot license open for bidding. DeLeo then set him up with the bill that is a giveaway to race tracks and then blasted the Governor in the media for doing what he said he would do. That is unacceptable conduct by the House Speaker. I think DeLeo has to go.
<
p>I thank all the legislators who voted against the bill, including both of mine (Donnelly and Garballey).
<
p>The bigger story is the continued disfunction of the legislature. (Another reason DeLeo has to go.) They have a 19 month session (January 2009-June 2010) and yet important bills (CORI, gambling, who knows what else) are not reviewed, debated, and voted on early but get stuck to the last minute. And they run out of time on other bills. And continue to sneak law amendments into supplemental budgets without hearing or public notice. The General Court needs a complete overhaul.
<
p>EBB
What is the principle involved?
<
p>Some of you are speaking as if his point about competitive license-bidding somehow endorses your entire anti-casino position. It obviously doesn’t.
<
p>What does it do? It says we should get a bit more money out of bidding out the slot licenses. How on earth does that justify the
<
p>His principles are that 1, He has come around to clearly support a multi-site, full-service gambling industry in the state; 2, he was willing to compromise on the details in order to get stalled bills through. SO compromise a bit more already and get done what you say you want done.
<
p>I like the governor a lot, and I don’t mind him standing down the leg. But I can’t get excited about the substance on this.
I’m glad the Governor rejected the bill. But I’d be upset if, on the first day of the new legislative session, the legislature sends him the bill he says he’d sign and he signs it. For those of us against “resort-style casinos” or any expansion of gambling in the Commonwealth, this is not really a victory, but just a reprieve. It seems to me we need to use the summer to change some minds about this on Beacon Hill. I’m happy to say that both of my legislators (Rep. Scaccia and Sen. Walsh) voted against the bill.
<
p>TedF
I assume these public servants get about three weeks paid vacation, so we should be looking at late August or so to get back to work, right?
They are done for the year. See section 12A here. (That’s a bill establishing the joint rules for the General Court, and gets passed every session.) They conclude the session on July 31 in even-numbered years so they can campaign, basically. (In the odd-numbered years the session ends before Thanksgiving.)
<
p>Now, they can still meet in an “informal” session, but as I understand it, bills in informal session must be passed unanimously. A single “nay” would kill it.
If you’re unopposed, seems like you get one hell of a vacation.
Constitutent service is a year-round proposition.