Lambert: Blackmail for casino support

Lambert: Blackmail for casino support
The MetroWest Daily News
MARLBOROUGH —

The Massachusetts Cultural Council has solicited from recipients of its funding implicit favorable comment for casino legislation in Massachusetts. The Council expects passage of the bill will provide arts and non-profit cultural organizations in the state new revenues from expanded gambling. How much and for how long is not stated, but "several million dollars could result" for the Council Investment Portfolio (CIP). That portfolio consists of grants to the various cultural organizations.

For taking the requested action on casino initiatives, grant applicants will get "credit" (sic) in their present and future funding requests. How "credit" affects MCC action on the funding applications can only be guessed from the Council e-mails on casino legislation. Recognize the "credit" ploy for what it is: plain and simple political blackmail. Write your legislator tacitly supporting the casino provisions or risk rejection of your grant applications for funding.

However, as to funding from casino revenues, experience with similar other legislative promises in the past recommends caution. Over the years, state government has reneged on its promises to devote specific revenues to particular interests.

Sales tax receipts were originally supposed to be wholly directed to the support of public education. But portions have since been diverted elsewhere.

Billions extracted in settlements with tobacco companies were meant for anti-smoking campaigns and off-sets for medical expenses incurred by the state in the treatment of tobacco sickened citizens. Significant portions of those revenues have been directed elsewhere.

Editorial boards have minimized the rates of gambling addiction in the population and praised elements in the proposed casino legislation providing payments for the treatment of addicts. The editors did not (do not) mention that in the current recession the treatment and casino funding therefore have been sharply reduced elsewhere and even eliminated (Wall Street Journal). Massachusetts is likely to do the same in future downturns and fiscal distress.

But unkept promises aside, it is disappointing that the MCC would seek to benefit from predations on the very populations MCC serves and the cultural values it wishes to advance. Arts, drama and music require discipline, hard work, skill and craftsmanship. Gambling instills a counter-culture elevating all the contrary behaviors. One would think MCC would be more squeamish about the sources of its money. Apparently it is not. Accordingly, it submits to the political bribery and thuggery employed in the advancement of casino legislation.

JOHN P. LAMBERT,
Marlborough