Here is the link.
Given that 1.14 million (as of a few weeks ago) was paid to lobbyists so that absentee owners in Malaysia and elsewhere could truck money out of Massachusetts and lure more suckers into losing money, it sure seems delusional to claim that Casinos and other expansions of gambling will make our economy stronger!
No competent or current or even arguably neutral cost benefit analysis…and every casino zone I have seen looks like it has been sucked of life by vampire zombies once you walk one block away from the neon zone.
Anyway, the letter by Tom Larkin, link above, is well worth reading.
Please share widely!
It’s clear legislators and the Governor have allowed themselves to be blinded by Lobbyists in back room deals, instead of considering the costs and impacts.
If Gambling costs Oklahome $7 BILLION, what will it cost the Commonwealth?
Oklahoma: $7 billion annual cost of Gambling Addiction
Or what you think.
Or what the Globe thinks.
Or what their membership thinks, as they have them in their grip.
Or what the voters think as their super-majority status makes them impervious to the electorate.
Does the proposed expanded predatory welfare gambling legislation require Governor Patrick and the Gaming Commission to comply with MGL for the procurement of their $5,000,000 (million) dollar proposal to create a Compact with a Native American Tribe, or is that just part of the gambling-politician-lobbyist-special interest revolving fund, fronted by the taxpayers and a giveaway to lawyer friends???
Local government must have competitive bids for goods and services $5,000 (thousand) and above.
If this is a not a welfare bill, why do racing industry/commission employees get preference and pension protections?
VOTE NO
The problem with competitive bidding is the way it was written. Anyone can bid for the slot barn that has a race track in Deleo’s district, on 1234 Main St….
After the bid is received, they will choose it.
Ahh, the wonder of it all!
I know Tom feels strongly about this, largely because of his professional work, but in my previous discussions with him he has not come across as not believing someone could legitimately have a different opinion as he seems to in this letter.