Ben Donelan
Dr. De Brigard
5/12/10
Blog Entry
Gambling in the Bay State
As my home for the large majority of my life, Massachusetts has helped shape the person I am today. It is one of the most liberal states found in America and because of that, somewhat unusual. As one of the oldest states in the country, home to many founding fathers, diverse in most senses of the word, home of one of the most academic cities in the world, and brewing with controversial issues thanks to the sundry views spread throughout the state. Some controversial issues that Massachusetts helped/is helping pave the way for are: same-sex marriage, the abolishment of capital punishment, the decriminalization of cannabis, and healthcare reform. However, in addition to these headline topics, Massachusetts is currently dealing with one more. Massachusetts has been debating whether or not casinos will be legal in the Bay State, a bill proposed by its Governor, Deval Patrick.
The story starts almost forty years ago, in 1971, Massachusetts state legislature voted the approval of a state-sanctioned lottery. This was the first form of gambling in the Bay State since colonial days. The new game proved to be a hit with gambling deprived citizens, and to date the state lottery has earned 15.3 billion dollars, 3.5 of which has come in the past four years. This money has been distributed among statewide education, infrastructure, and public safety. Without the lottery these funds would have come from increased property taxes. (1)
The approval of the lottery in 1971 was a change in the status of gambling in the Bay State, but it is not the only gambling option for Massachusetts citizens. There are several dog tracks and horse tracks in Massachusetts, namely Eastern Massachusetts. Yet another option for those itching to risk their hard earned money is located just south of the border. Connecticut is home the Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun casinos, some of the largest in the United States. These casinos are located on the Mashantucket Pequot Indian Reservation and are considered by many to be the inspiration and template for the Gov. Patrick’s casino bill. In conjunction with gambling in Rhode Island, it is estimated that Massachusetts’ citizens spend $1.1 billion annually gambling in these two states.
Supporters of Patrick’s bill have several well-stated arguments that are backed up even more by the current state of the economy. First, and most formidably, there is obviously a demand for gambling, in more shapes and forms than it is currently presented in Massachusetts. Basic economics dictate that in an optimal economy, where there is a demand it should be met by a supply. Governor Patrick’s bill also requires the casino’s to pay taxes (approximately 40% of the casino makes) to produce tax revenues. According to Patrick’s plan these funds will go to supporting similar public works that the lottery supports. According to the bill’s supporters these tax revenues should be somewhere in the ballpark of $300 to $500 million per year. (2) On top of these revenues the proposed casinos will also bring in “user-fee” license revenues. If the bill is passed the plan is to award three casino licenses to the highest bidders. It is expected, by those who back the bill, that these licenses will sell for $100 million. This money, in theory, will also go to Massachusetts’ public works. Along side with these revenues brought in, possibly more important, is the amount of jobs created by these new businesses. According to the bill’s supporters, tens of thousands and even possibly a hundred thousand, new of jobs will be created by the introduction of these new casinos. All these arguments merge into one final statement: Massachusetts citizens are going to gamble, as a state we should accept this trend and better our community from it.
But don’t be convinced yet. The support for this topic is strong, but the opposition poses an equally compelling argument (this is a controversial issue after all). The overstated pro’s of Governor Patrick’s proposed bill are just that, overstated. The estimated tax revenues and created jobs are optimistic and not realistic. Citizens of Massachusetts can hope for these numbers to come true, but it’s just unlikely. After more than twenty years in business, Foxwoods Resort Casino (Connecticut) just approached $500 million in tax revenue. To think that the $1 billion spent by Massachusetts’ gambler annually would completely move back to Massachusetts immediately is unlikely. The fact of the matter is Patrick’s proposed casinos would be lucky to raise $300 million dollars in tax revenue the first couple of decades.
More importantly than looking at estimates numbers we can look at real cases and the repercussions involved with the introduction of gambling in communities. The introduction of gambling in Massachusetts’ communities will drop property values in an already undesirable market. It may come as a surprise, but of those that support Deval’s plan don’t want these casinos in their towns. If that doesn’t speak volumes about the issue, then what does? Just think about it, destinations like Las Vegas and Atlantic City are seen, as a great weekend but the majority of the people who visit don’t want to live there. The truth is these places are not desired destinations to live. These places attract what most consider bad things. Excessive drinking, drug use, prostitution, and poor judgment call casino towns home. Casinos attract these bad things in accompaniment with possibly the worst thing of all, a disease that is an inevitable presence in every casino: gambling addiction.
Gambling has been proven to be an addiction by countless professionals, as it is an impulsive-control disorder. A compulsive gambler suffers from a psychological disorder and shows many of the following signs:
1. Preoccupation with gambling
2. Raised tolerance
3. Withdrawal when gambling ceases
4. Using gambling as an escape
5. Chasing victories
6. Lying about gambling habits
7. Loss of control
8. Illegal acts in order to continue gambling
9. Risked significant relationship
10. Asks those close for bailout money
11. Biological Bases (the subject has a lack of norepinephrine)
(3)
It is simply immoral for someone to condone these actions. By following Kantian moral theory, the situation can be broken down into a categorical imperative: citizens should promote vices onto others who are prone to giving in to such acts, for the financial betterment of themselves. If everyone was to promote others vices to gain money, society would cease to progress. For each time a man would make an accomplishment it would et back others in his society. This is not a categorical imperative that we, as a state can allow to exist. The promotion of gambling is the promotion of immoral acts.
Gambling doesn’t have to necessarily prey on the poor, foreign, and uneducated, but it often does. One reason for this trend, is the illusion of victory. It is a casinos job to make the customer think they can win, when in all reality the odds are stacked against them. For example, when playing the slots, the casino’s take can be up to 35%. This means that if you bet $10 on average you will only walk away with $6.50. Then, on the rare occasion that a player wins, the casino still wins. Since the casino wins so much, and often, when a player wins he is just taking money from another player. This means that Massachusetts will catalyze a process of bankrupting its citizens that are already in financial trouble. (4)
Quite possibly the worst part about this plan, worse than the lowering or property values, the encouragement of “bad” things (addiction: alcohol, drugs, and gambling), and preying on the uneducated, is that the government will be backing all these actions. Since the government will be making an incredible amount of money off these casinos they will have no choice but to promote these wrongdoings. It can be compared to raising taxes, but only applying those taxes to people who need help with addiction, financial troubles, and education. The American democracy was built on the principles: by the people, for the people, yet this plan sounds like the government will be working against the people who need it most.
Massachusetts faces many controversies; however, none of which threatens so many serious and negative consequences. It is true that Massachusetts could use a boost, but politicians should be thinking of more moral and safe improvements. Despite the demand for gambling, tax revenue, license revenues, and increased jobs, allowing casinos would cause this financially stressed state even more stress. The undesirable aspect of casinos consist of lowering property values, attracting addiction, and the government backing these actions suggest that this bill should not be passed, in order to protect the betterment of the great Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Cited Sources
"Gambling." Massachusetts Council of Churches. Web. 12 May 2010.
"GAMBLING ADDICTION." Medical Search Engine & UK Family Health Guide - Medic8. Web. 12 May 2010.
Jarvis, Tyler J. Gambling: What Are the Odds. Gambling: What Are the Odds. Brigham Young University. Web.
"Massachusetts' Fortune Is with Gaming - The Boston Globe." Boston.com. Web. 12 May 2010.
Viser, Matt. "Would-be Hosts, Foes Rev up for Casino Bid." The Boston Globe [Boston] 17 Sept. 2007. Print.
http://www.thebostonchannel.com/politics/23154550/detail.html
No comments:
Post a Comment