Rickb: Here's a novel idea!

How about let's consider an INDEPENDENT COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS like the one conducted in New Hampshire that Beacon Hill refused to conduct?

We could consider:

1. the infrastructure costs that taxpayers will be forced to bear
2. the cost of gambling addiction estimated at + $13,000 per year (that figure is somewhat outdated and maybe we should assess a more accurate cost)
3. as you know, a federal report determined that every $1 in revenue produced by the Gambling Industry, the cost to taxpayers is $3 (that figure is probably outdated as well and should be re-assessed)
4. the cost of cannibalization of local businesses, theatres, other entertainment venues that will be lost
5. the impacts of increased bankruptcies, increased embezzlements, increased crime and so on, including increased court costs, increased incarceration on an already overburdened system
6. let's have an honest discussion about DUIs - more drunks on the road as a consequence of 24/7/365 FREE ALCOHOL
(please don't use the argument that you would have the same problem with a local venue because lawsuits, insurance costs and local enforcement would rid a community of a local establishment that has created the damage of the 2 Connecticut slot parlors.)

That's a good beginning.

Footnote: This is in response to a poster here.