Meetings & Information




*****************************
****************************************************
MUST READ:
GET THE FACTS!






Wednesday, January 9, 2013

New York: Another Harebrained Scheme

Folks have come up with some cock-a-mammy ideas to justify the community destruction that accompanies Predatory Gambling and promote the idea to the public, but New York deserves an award for this one!



NY proposal: Use some casino revenue to fund NY campaigns in effort to limit money in politics


Article by: MICHAEL GORMLEY, Associated Press
Updated: January 7, 2013

ALBANY, N.Y. - An innovative proposal expected in the New York Legislature would take some revenue from casino promoters and opponents who spend millions in campaign contributions and create a fund designed to reduce the influence of money in politics.

Good-government advocate Bill Samuels and Democratic state Sen. Liz Krueger said Monday that the money from the proposal expected to be introduced to the new Legislature would pay for voluntary public funding of campaigns and level the playing field for candidates, creating more competitive elections. They say it would also open politics to more people without depending on large contributions from special interests.

It may also be a unique way to channel gambling money. A dozen states use casino tax revenue most often for education, local governments, and the state general fund, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. New Jersey uses some for financial assistance to the elderly and disabled, while Colorado and South Dakota target some for historic preservation, and Puerto Rico uses some for tourism.

New York's so-called "grand bargain" would seek to tap into an anticipated deluge of campaign contributions from supporters and opponents of the proposal to allow casinos on non-Indian land in New York. The call for a publicly paid, matching fund system, as in New York City, has grown louder nationwide after the U.S. Supreme Court allowed a freer hand for corporations and other well-financed interests to fund massive TV ad blitzes under the Citizens United decision in 2010.

http://www.startribune.com/nation/185942812.html?refer=y

No comments: