Our neighbors to the north had the sense to appoint an independent commission to study the effects of SLOTS on their state, something Beacon Hill has refused to do. The election results speak for themselves.
A gambling message: Take it off the table
Here is a cautionary tale for New Hampshire politicians who aspire to "solve" the state's budget crisis with gambling revenue rather than spending cuts: Pro-gambling candidates didn't do very well in this week's primaries.
As Jim Rubens of the Granite State Coalition Against Expanded Gambling has pointed out, anti-casino Senate candidates Jeannie Forrester, Jim Forsythe, Ray White, Jim Luther and Amanda Merrill all won nominations while opposing expanded gambling as a way to fill the next budget's estimated $600 million to $800 million deficit. (Merrill, for the record, had only token opposition.)
Obviously, casinos were not the biggest topic in this election. But they came up in all of those races. If voters were hungry for candidates who promised to raise revenue instead of cutting spending, some of those races almost certainly would have turned out differently.
Instead, voters nominated candidates who were not in favor of balancing the budget by cashing in casino chips. The Republican candidates say, as Republican gubernatorial nominee John Stephen does, that the budget should be balanced before we begin talking about opening New Hampshire to casinos.
This is not a crushing defeat for the pro-casino crowd. But it does suggest that this year voters don't prefer candidates who advocate the casino cop-out.
A gambling message: Take it off the table
Here is a cautionary tale for New Hampshire politicians who aspire to "solve" the state's budget crisis with gambling revenue rather than spending cuts: Pro-gambling candidates didn't do very well in this week's primaries.
As Jim Rubens of the Granite State Coalition Against Expanded Gambling has pointed out, anti-casino Senate candidates Jeannie Forrester, Jim Forsythe, Ray White, Jim Luther and Amanda Merrill all won nominations while opposing expanded gambling as a way to fill the next budget's estimated $600 million to $800 million deficit. (Merrill, for the record, had only token opposition.)
Obviously, casinos were not the biggest topic in this election. But they came up in all of those races. If voters were hungry for candidates who promised to raise revenue instead of cutting spending, some of those races almost certainly would have turned out differently.
Instead, voters nominated candidates who were not in favor of balancing the budget by cashing in casino chips. The Republican candidates say, as Republican gubernatorial nominee John Stephen does, that the budget should be balanced before we begin talking about opening New Hampshire to casinos.
This is not a crushing defeat for the pro-casino crowd. But it does suggest that this year voters don't prefer candidates who advocate the casino cop-out.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment