Massachusetts is better off without casinos

GUEST OPINION: Massachusetts is better off without casinos

By Scott Harshbarger and Kathleen Conley Norbut


Massachusetts is steeped in history and tradition, founded on the premise of promoting the common good for the community. Together, we have retained the historic fabric of our great state and moved forward with long-term, sustainable economic growth — from life sciences and health care to higher education and information technology.

The passage of legislation to legalize slots and casinos in Massachusetts will usher in a culture that will inexorably alter the landscape of our great Commonwealth. While it may bring desperately needed jobs and revenue, it will also bring increased corruption and crime, unexpected and unnecessary costs to taxpayers, damage small businesses at a perilous time. It is shameful the Legislature is considering all this without analyzing the costs and benefits.

Not only will legalizing slots and casinos in Massachusetts hurt our children and families, but they have been proven to increase corruption, crime and addiction. Massachusetts taxpayers and voters have had enough of corruption to allow it to be ignored in such important legislation.

When casinos come to town, crime goes up. Just look at states like Connecticut and New Jersey. Crime, including political corruption and embezzlement along with other crimes, increases 8 to 10 percent after a casino is built, and continues to increase after that. Local communities have to pick up the tab.

Problem gambling leads to distressed families, child neglect, suicide and bankruptcy. Domestic violence rates go up, as do foreclosures. “Convenience gambling,” closer to home as is envisioned in Massachusetts, creates more problem gamblers. Even proponents of expanded gambling freely admit that the number of problem gamblers grows as people have easier access to government-promoted slots.

Casino proponents promise increased revenues, jobs and benefits. But they are unwilling to even study the scores of hidden costs which will very quickly eat away at any benefits the state sees — costs that will be passed on to taxpayers.

Take another look at Connecticut, which has higher taxes and more significant fiscal problems than Massachusetts — despite the promise of vast riches. Casinos haven’t helped Connecticut and, rather, have hindered the economic development of host communities and neighboring areas. Connecticut’s sales tax hasn’t gone away, property taxes haven’t gone down and the state hasn’t been to balance its budget. Connecticut’s elected leaders proposed solution to their economic problems is more gambling.

The influx of casinos and slot machines to Massachusetts requires a dramatic and comprehensive regulatory enforcement regime, a new and costly government bureaucracy to audit, regulate, inspect and oversee casinos — to the tune of $20 million to 50 million, or greater.

Due to the predatory, addictive nature of casinos, Massachusetts can expect a 50 percent increase in the number of problem gamblers in Massachusetts if we expanded gambling.

According to the California Attorney General’s office, problem and pathological gamblers cost California $1 billion per year, while officials in Indiana, after an exhaustive review, estimated the cost of serving each problem gambler at $2,500 per year. This would add up to well over $750 million in costs for Massachusetts.

Expanded gambling poses a grave threat to small businesses and Massachusetts’ thriving tourism industry.

Casinos will hurt our local restaurants, hotels and entertainment businesses. Money that would otherwise be spent at locally-owned, small businesses will instead be spent at chain restaurants in casinos and lost on casino floors, where we know the owners will make huge profits.

Our elected officials clearly haven’t done their homework or analyzed how casinos and slots will negatively impact our Commonwealth. At a time when voter confidence in government is at an all-time low, it is wrong for legislators to rush through a complex, legislative process without thorough analysis.

The taxpaying citizens of Massachusetts deserve a full cost-benefit analysis of this legislation before it is approved or signed into law. If a data-driven study were done, the evidence is clear: Massachusetts should say no to casinos and slots and all the costs that come with them.

Scott Harshbarger is senior counsel at Proskauer and former Massachusetts Attorney General; Norbut is a former Selectman in Monson and president of United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts.