Massachusetts needs independent look at gaming

Your View: Massachusetts needs independent look at gaming

By TOM LARKIN
Tom Larkin is a licensed psychologist. He is president of United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts, Concord. He lives in Bedford.

"There is nothing, either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." Shakespeare

New Bedford Mayor Scott Lang has signed onto a letter to Governor Patrick, Speaker DeLeo and Senate President Murray urging legislation to expand gambling.

A minority of legislators think casinos and racinos are a good idea. They think it will create thousands of new jobs, generate hundreds of millions in new tax revenues and bring millions of dollars, currently wagered out of state, back into the Massachusetts economy.

Proponents use research to support this thinking from United for Jobs and Growth, an organization funded by the gambling industry.

A minority of legislators opposed have research studies supporting their view. For example, "Gambling in America - Costs and Benefits," an independent study by Earl Grinols, a Baylor University economics professor, in 2004 concluded costs outweighed benefits $3 to $1.

Most Massachusetts legislators are, in fact, ambivalent.

What do you think? Consider the economic, social and political impact.

Casinos are going bankrupt and race tracks are failing all over the country, even after slot machines are authorized.

Nationwide, casino employees are being laid off in large numbers. According to the Springfield Republican, (Feb. 13, 2011) Mohegan Sun laid off 355 employees in September, 2010 and has a debt of over $2 billion as of Dec. 30, 2010.

Gambling revenue is down over 10 percent nationwide in 2009 and 2010. According to TIME (June 28, 2010) the highest fiscal year 2011 budget deficits and unemployment levels are in casino states.

Distinguished economists like Paul Samuelson and Warren Buffett think the more money lost gambling, the more money cannibalized from the normal entrepreneurial economy. They think gambling is economically sterile and gambling revenue is not new, but money siphoned away from small businesses, the state lottery and mostly low- and middle-income families.

Most Massachusetts social workers and the League of Women Voters think increasing the availability of gambling will regressively redistribute income and increase individual debt, suicides, domestic violence, youth gambling, criminal behavior, recidivism, and addictions of all kinds, especially alcoholism, smoking and gambling.

A new state agency, with about 500 new employees, will be created to regulate a business that thrives on political influence.

According to The U.S. International Gambling Report, (John Kindt, Editor, 2008) the gambling industry is the biggest financial lobbying group in Washington, D.C., and in over half the states, bigger than defense, pharmaceuticals and tobacco.

In Massachusetts, the gambling industry spent over $6 million in 2009 and 20110 on political contributions, front groups, labor unions, lobbyists and friendly research.

United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts (USSMASS) a non-partisan, non-profit organization, analyzed the House of Representative votes in 2006 for and against slots at tracks; in 2008 for and against Governor Patrick's three casino plan; and in 2010 for and against Speaker DeLeo's two casino/four racino plan. They found 29 House members always voted no and 42 always voted yes.

The majority, over 100, sometimes voted no and sometimes voted yes.

USSMASS concludes most legislators have no consistent individual position for or against expanded gambling! Also, one out of five current legislators never voted yes or no on expanded gambling, because they just took office in January 2011.

To better understand unique local economic, social and political issues, the National Gambling Impact Study Commission (online 1999) urged individual states to conduct an independent cost-benefit analysis, before authorizing Class III gambling (slot machines). There has never been an independent cost-benefit analysis of any previous proposal to expand gambling in Massachusetts.

In the absence of such an independent analysis, Mayor Lang must depend upon gambling-industry funded studies. He cannot know whether expanded gambling economic, social and political benefits exceed their costs to the city of New Bedford.

In February, 2011, Senator Steven Brewer proposed legislation (SB339) requiring an independent cost-benefit analysis of any new plan to expand gambling in Massachusetts. Proponents like Mayor Lang, opponents like USSMASS and especially the majority (who do not know what to think), should support SB 339.

Go to USSMASS.Org for more information.