Meetings & Information




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






Showing posts with label Granite State Coalition Against Expanded Gambling. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Granite State Coalition Against Expanded Gambling. Show all posts

Thursday, May 28, 2015

Casino Supporters Go Bipolar on Gambling Addiction



This was circulated in 2013:


Granite State Coalition
Against Expanded Gambling
 
 
Casino Supporters Go Bipolar on Gambling Addiction
 
 
Casino supporters have gone all bipolar over the costs of gambling addiction.
 
On one day, they claim that all the gambling addicts New Hampshire will ever see are lurking here symptom-free and that a casino here would cause no addiction increase.
Today, they make headlines about how Massachusetts casinos will cause gambling addiction increases here in New Hampshire.
 
So which is it? Judging from casino supporters' most recent mood swing on gambling addiction, they now agree that casinos increase gambling addiction.
 
At the center this of all this are projections by the New Hampshire Public Policy Research Center that the casino proposed in SB152 would be a net economic loser for our state, raising $45 in tax revenue but costing $47 million in crime and addiction-related social costs.
 
SB152 Casino Net Economic Cost Burden
Even though casino supporters (at least today to suit their constantly shifting PR and messaging strategy) now acknowledge that casinos cause increases in gambling addiction, they continue to attack the Center, charging it with having an "unproven" social cost model.
 
So ... our ask to casino supporters: Show us your social cost model.
 
Please make it something more scientific than anecdotes from a police chief in a gambling town (who just got bought 15 new cruisers by the casino) that he sees no crime in the casino parking lot.
As to the Granite State Coalition, we do have a social cost model, the one most often used in the published, peer-reviewed literature on gambling addiction. A single Salem casino as proposed in SB152 would cause $105 million dollars per year in increased costs of gambling addiction, more than double the Center's excessively conservative projection.
What are these costs?
  • Lost work days and decreased workplace productivity.
  • Money taken under false pretenses from friends and relatives.
  • Increased family bankruptcy.
  • Increased household debt loads and liquidated savings.
  • Increased family violence, child abuse, and divorce.
  • Increased serious crimes, including violent physical assault, breaking and entering, auto theft, and embezzlement.
  • Increased criminal justice, welfare, and social services costs paid by state and local taxpayers.
We urge the House to defeat any measure which would legalize casinos and to find a humane means to balance the state budget.
Respectfully,
Jim Rubens, Chair
 
 


Granite State Coalition
Against Expanded Gambling
Greetings!   
 
The New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies today released its new analysisas to the net economic impact of a Salem casino as proposed in SB152:
 
"a net loss to the state of roughly $2 million a year."
 
The analysis is bad news for Las Vegas-based Millennium Gaming, which, since 2005, has been peddling its Money From Thin Air fairy tales to a revenue hungry legislature.
 
Millennium Gaming Money from Thin Air  
Millennium Gaming (Fix It Now) website logo 2/28/13
 
Here are some verbatim quotes from the Center's analysis: 
  • While expanded gambling will yield revenue to the state, our model's estimates of the social costs of problem gambling suggest no long-term net state benefit when the tax on casino operations is set at 30 percent or less.
  • [P]redicting revenue from license fees is difficult, and budget writers should use caution in basing a budget on such revenue.
  • Gambling revenues continue to decline locally and nationally
  • Our model still does not account for a number of factors, including the potential positive or negative effects of expanded gambling on New Hampshire's "brand" (as a tourist destination and place to do business), the potential private costs associated with pathological gambling (so-called "abused dollars"). 
An Annual Loss of $67 Million if Full Social Costs Are Included
The Center's social cost estimates are extremely conservative. Using the most-frequently cited social cost numbers in the gambling impacts literature, a single Salem casino as proposed in SB152 would cost New Hampshire $67 million annually.
 
Economic Burden of Salem Casino   
 
Internet Gambling Will Drive Revenues Even Lower
Delaware, Nevada, and New Jersey have now legalized Internet gambling. Facing declining revenues at its three race track casinos due to neighboring state casino proliferation, Delaware was first to legalize Internet gambling in 2012. Illustrating the gambling proliferation problem, Delaware also legalized Keno-slots and sports betting at bars and restaurants throughout the state.
 
We've seen in industry after industry how quickly the Internet has devastated brick and mortar business models -- in books, electronics, and office supplies. Now it's about to happen to physical casinos.
 
Internet gambling means that the days of big tax money from slot machines at brick & mortar casinos are numbered. It means that any budget or spending promises from a casino tax had better be revised downward yet again. It means that casino taxes must not be the basis for support of any ongoing state programs, such as highways, mental health, or education.
 
The Coalition urges the legislature to defeat any casino legislation and to build a state budget without relying on casino license or tax revenues.
 
For Sobriety in Revenue Estimating,
Jim Rubens, Chair 
 

Wednesday, April 29, 2015

New Hampshire: We won!



Bravo, New Hampshire!




By a 50-vote margin, the NH House of Representatives again today rejected the legalization of casino gambling in New Hampshire.

We appreciate all the calls and emails supporters like you made to Legislators. These won the day!

Appreciatively,

Steve Duprey and Harold Janeway
For Casino Free NH and the Granite State Coalition Against Expanded Gambling

For more information: casinofreenh.org
Our mailing address is:
Casino Free New Hampshire
2 Eagle Square, Concord, NH, United States
Concord, NH 03301
 
 
 
 
 

Sunday, April 26, 2015

New Hampshire: Casino bill includes ample protections






Where have we heard that before?





Sunday, April 26, 2015

Casino bill includes ample protections



Telegraph Editorial
 



In a state whose motto is “Live Free or Die,” where the first state-sponsored lottery began in 1964, where you can drive without wearing a seat belt or having liability insurance, and where motorcycle helmets are optional, the intense opposition to casino gambling has always seemed a bit incongruous.
The aversion to expanded gambling becomes even more perplexing in the context of New Hampshire’s fondness for raising revenues from non-residents by taxing of other human vices such as alcohol and cigarettes
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Saturday, April 25, 2015

New Hampshire: Wednesday, April 29th Hearing






The House vote on Senate Bill 133 will be held next Wednesday, April 29. We ask that you reach out to your State Representative and urge them to vote against the bill.
Our message is simple. Don't push the panic button. For 30 years the state has balanced its budget and provided programs and services without resorting to casino gambling.
Any revenue the state may gain from casino gambling will be offset by crime, addiction and other social costs. Is it worth trading services to one group of vulnerable citizens by creating another group of vulnerable citizens?
The bottom line is that for casinos to win, state residents have to lose. Millennium Gaming will be the big winner if the State grants it a Salem casino monopoly and nothing can prevent a future legislature from diverting the promised revenue sharing that was tacked onto the bill as a sweetner.

Once casinos are legalized there is no turning back. No state stops at one.

Your call could make the difference in Wednesday's vote.

Appreciatively,

Steve Duprey and Harold Janeway
For Casino Free NH and the Granite State Coalition Against Expanded Gambling

For more information: casinofreenh.org
Our mailing address is:
Casino Free New Hampshire
2 Eagle Square, Concord, NH, United States
Concord, NH 03301


Saturday, April 4, 2015

Important casino bill hearing on Tuesday





The House Ways & Means Committee has scheduled a hearing on the newest casino legalization bill, SB 113, on Tuesday, April 7 at 10:00 a.m. in rooms 202-204 of the Legislative Office Building. The bill proposes to license two casinos.

It is important that we have as many people as we can show up for this. Even if you don’t plan to testify, it will be important to sign in in opposition.

Please also see our team member when you enter the hearing room to pick up your Casino Free NH sticker, so the committee knows we are out in force.

Please make every effort to attend!

Granite State Coalition Against Expanded Gambling
& Casino Free New Hampshire


Our mailing address is:
Casino Free New Hampshire
2 Eagle Square, Concord, NH, United States
Concord, NH 03301
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Sunday, February 22, 2015

New Hampshire: Letters/Calls Needed: NH Sen. Jerry Little wavering on casinos


Casino Free New Hampshire & Granite State Coalition Against Expanded Gambling



Good Afternoon:

Thanks to your help, we've made some progress. From the questions he was asking at last week's hearing, it was clear that Senator Feltes was listening to our arguments. Thank you for your efforts to contact him.

But unfortunately, we've been handed another challenge. Senator Gerald "Jerry" Little took over for Senator Bob Odell in NH's 8th Senate District. On his website, Senator Little states:
"
I do not support expanded gaming in New Hampshire."
But in last week's InterTown Record, Senator Little said in a meeting with local veterans,

"I told them that I didn't care for the idea, but that for a number of reasons, I'm worried about our ability to fund state government and, since I like tax increases even less, I am keeping an open mind about the casino legislation."

Because the vote is so close in the Senate, I urge constituents in his towns -- I'm one of them -- to contact him today or tomorrow to urge him to not change his stance on expanded gambling!
Senate District 8 includes: Acworth; Antrim; Bennington; Bradford; Croydon; Deering; Francestown; Goshen; Grantham; Hillsborough; Langdon; Lempster; Marlow; New London; Newbury; Newport; Springfield; Stoddard; Sunapee; Sutton; Unity; Washington; Weare; and Windsor.

The constituents in Hillsborough, Francetown, Bennington, Antrim, Deering, Weare, Windsor and Washington will all be within the 50 mile addiction zone of the proposed Salem casino AND a second proposed casino at the New Hampshire Motor Speedway in Loudon. New London, Sutton, and Sunapee will be in the 50-mile range of NH Motor Speedway. Senator Little's own town of Weare is closest and caught right in the crossfire from two casinos.

District 8 constituents, I urge you to contact Senator Little immediately. The Senate vote is imminent. His information is below.

Sen. Jerry Little
603-271-4151
Jerry.Little@leg.state.nh.us
NH State House, Rm 105-A
107 N. Main Street
Concord, NH 03301

Need some facts to include? Visit Casino Free NH's research page for lots reasons why NH needs to resist what one of our spokesmen, Steve Duprey, calls the "crack cocaine" of state funding.

Your words are POWERFUL. Thank you!

Brian Beihl, Field Organizer
Casino Free NH &
Granite State Coalition Against Expanded Gambling


Join our Facebook Page!

Casino Free New Hampshire & Granite State Coalition Against Expanded Gambling
Our mailing address is:
Casino Free New Hampshire
2 Eagle Square, Concord, NH, United States
Concord, NH 03301



N.H. lawmakers consider new casino bill




Tom Boucher: Would a NH casino do any good for local businesses? 
By TOM BOUCHER                           

WITH YET ANOTHER push from gaming advocates looking to bring a casino (now two) into New Hampshire, Granite Staters are weighing the positives and negatives of legalizing casino gambling.

To those people on the casino fence, I'd like to offer a point of consideration, "What good would a casino do for your business or the business for which you work?"

Research shows that most casino revenue comes from people who live within a 30-mile radius of a casino.

Let's imagine that you are an owner of a business in Greater Manchester and a casino opens in Salem.

I'd like you to try to think of a positive outcome that casino could provide for your business. Or imagine you are an employee of that business; how would a casino benefit your employment?

For those of you who thought, "Well, it will bring people to New Hampshire, where they will subsequently spend more money in surrounding businesses," you have been severely misled. Casinos have a marvelous ability to lure people and their money in, and let nothing escape.

I am not anti-gambling, and in fact I have visited many casinos. But I've never once left a casino, gotten into my car and visited another restaurant or business in that area after spending my time and money in the casino itself.

This is the true issue. The discretionary income that patrons spend at a casino is diverted from other businesses in the local economy.What some think is a profitable plan at the state level is a complete net zero.

In fact, I would argue it's worse than that because the profits from a casino are not reinvested and circulated into the local economy and other businesses.

It's estimated that the State of New Hampshire takes in about 15 percent of its revenue through taxes and other income sources that are directly related to businesses in the lodging and restaurant industries.

These taxes include, but aren't limited to, meals and rental taxes, liquor purchase profits, local property taxes, business enterprise taxes and business profits taxes.

The revenue from these taxes and other income sources is more than $300 million per year to the state, again directly related to the lodging and restaurant industry. No other industry contributes this amount to the state coffers. Adding even one casino to the mix will certainly dip deeply into this number.

Discretionary spending in Greater Manchester or southern New Hampshire will not increase with the legalization of casino gambling. It will simply be displaced.

Spending at casinos means less spending at local restaurants and businesses.

By taxing casino revenue, the state is simply taxing the same money that would have been spent elsewhere.

The major difference is that money spent by the public at local restaurants and other businesses is circulated back into the economy.

Money spent at casinos is lost to the black hole that is major gambling corporations.

As the owner and CEO of Great NH Restaurants (T-BONES, Cactus Jack's and Copper Door) and a board member of the Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce, supporting restaurants and local businesses is of high importance to me and, I believe, to the state.

However, restaurants aren't the only business that would be substantially affected by casinos in New Hampshire.Entertainment venues across the state will be every bit as impacted as local restaurants and small businesses within a casino's immediate region.

A casino steals their revenue simply by stealing entertainment acts.

For example, venues like the Verizon Wireless Arena or the Capitol Center for the Arts won't be able to compete for acts because they do not have the offsetting slot profits that a casino would have. Casinos can pay more for entertainment than private industry can.

And again, the magic of casinos is to keep patrons in-house. Catching a concert at a casino means people will be eating at whatever restaurant the casino has to offer.

Local entertainment venues, however, lend themselves to a symbiotic relationship with local restaurants, which in a city like Manchester or Concord help to fuel the economy.

These points are sufficient reasons for New Hampshire to abstain from the expanded gaming industry, but to add insult to injury, we as businesses are being sold more smoke and mirrors.

Businesses should not be duped into thinking that they will receive reduced business taxes if casinos are brought into the state.

Any claim that casino revenue will be used to offset or reduce the business enterprise tax, business profit tax, or anything of the like is completely unfounded.

There is nothing in any bill that promises business tax relief in perpetuity, and it would not be credible if it did.

If a casino did come with a promise to reduce business taxes, any Legislature at any point could change that promise and New Hampshire would still be stuck with one or two casinos taking valuable discretionary dollars out of our economy.

What is most important to realize is that if we ever legalize casino gambling, we're in it for good.

There is no backing up.

And for casino proponents to attempt to convince that state that there will only be one or two casinos is downright irresponsible. No state in this country has adopted expanded gambling and stayed at one casino.

The bill writers may say one thing, but history says otherwise.

As past chairman of the New Hampshire Lodging and Restaurants Association, as well as a director of the Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce, both of which have opposed casino legislation in the past, I encourage local business owners to consider the consequences of legalizing casino gambling in New Hampshire.

Once again, ask yourself this question:

"What good would a casino do for my business or the business I work for?"The answer is likely to be: "Nothing."

Tom Boucher is owner and CEO of Great NH Restaurants. He is a member of the board of directors of the Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce and former chairman of the board of the NH Lodging and Restaurant Association.

- See more at: http://www.unionleader.com/article/20150222/OPINION02/150229834#sthash.ypq7GLFy.dpuf


Thursday, February 19, 2015

New Hampshire: Racing to the Bottom









 Lawmakers push bills on casinos, keno

Monday, February 16, 2015

NH: Reminder: Hearing for SB113, 9 AM Tuesday





Good Afternoon:

Nice work, everyone. You've done a good job of calling and writing Senator Feltes. Thank you.

Tomorrow, the hearing takes place at the State House at 9 AM. If you are able to attend, having a "visual" of anti-casino folks would be great, because we expect labor unions to be there in force.

A clarification of my email from Friday: You will be sitting inside Representatives Hall, not in the gallery as I had said earlier. Please take the stair or elevator to the second floor. You'll see the handicapped ramp, and I'll be there to give you a sticker beginning at 8 a.m. Head up the ramp into the foyer, where there likely will be a sign in sheet. Sign in, even if you're not going to speak. It should give you the opportunity to check off "opposed" on the sheet. When you go in, please sit in the middle and as close as you can get.

See you tomorrow and THANK YOU!

Brian Beihl, Field Organizer
Casino Free NH &
Granite State Coalition Against Expanded Gambling


Join our Facebook Page!


Casino Free New Hampshire & Granite State Coalition Against Expanded Gambling
Our mailing address is:
Casino Free New Hampshire
2 Eagle Square, Concord, NH, United States
Concord, NH 03301


 
Our mailing address is:
Casino Free New Hampshire
2 Eagle Square, Concord, NH, United States
Concord, NH 03301

Friday, April 25, 2014

New Hampshire has spoken on casinos




My Turn: New Hampshire has spoken on casinos

Sunday, March 9, 2014

Empty promises


Massachusetts fell for the EMPTY PROMISES and OVERSTATED PROJECTIONS.

New Hampshire doesn't seem as willing.




My Turn; Empty promises on casino revenue, jobs

By GORDON ALLEN
For the Monitor
Wednesday, March 5, 2014

Many legislators leaning toward allowing casino gambling in New Hampshire do not like the social costs and risks it will bring. But they believe in the promises that gambling will provide stable tax revenue and good-paying jobs for New Hampshire residents.
 
The problem here is that these promises are just talk. Nowhere in the actual bill (HB 1633) being pushed by gambling interests is there anything in writing backing up these promises. There are absolutely no written guarantees for tax revenue and jobs in HB 1633. None. Nada. Zip.
 
To be specific, there is absolutely nothing in writing in all 99 pages of HB 1633 that requires even minimum levels of the tax revenue promised, or good pay and benefit levels for jobs, or even that most jobs will not go to Massachusetts workers. And despite the promises legislators hear over and over again, there is no answer to “show me the money” and “show me the jobs.”
As every legislator knows, if promises are not in writing in a bill, they are not real. Legislators can’t count on them or promise them. And passing HB 1633 based on these empty promises is not only unwise and irresponsible – it will be a disaster for our state.
 
The revenue promise that legislators hear all the time is a minimum of $104.6 million per year for the first year (increasing to $143 million in the 10th year) from the slots and table games at a 35 percent (slots) and 18 percent (table games) tax rate. In fact, the gambling lobbyists and their supporters often promise more because they say $104.6 million is a low estimate. But unless these promises are put in writing in HB 1633, they mean nothing – and it would certainly be foolhardy for the state to include this empty promise of $104.6 million in its budget.

New Hampshire deserves better. Lawmakers need to be sure those making the promises put their money where their mouth is. And if the gambling interests are so confident that New Hampshire will get at least this $104 million per year, why wouldn’t they jump at the chance of putting this requirement in HB 1633 and put these doubts and fears to rest?
Further, without written requirements for minimum revenue in this bill, we are in danger of falling into the same trap experienced by other states. This is where overly optimistic promises of high, stable and growing tax revenue are made before the vote. But then – after the vote – they fail to materialize. We need to learn from the costly mistakes of others. To protect us – the citizens of New Hampshire – our legislators must put producing $104.6 million as a non-negotiable condition for the gambling operator to keep its lucrative monopoly franchise.
Our legislators also hear over and over again similar promises about all the good-paying jobs that a slot casino will provide to state residents. Again, HB 1633 provides absolutely nothing in writing that requires the casino operator to pay a minimum livable wage. The same is true of setting minimum requirements for health, pension, vacation and sick-time benefits. There is nothing in HB 1633 to nail these promises down. Nothing. Nada. Zip.
 
There is at least a provision in HB 1633 suggesting that the casino gambling operator make some attempts to hire workers who live in New Hampshire. However, yet again, HB 1633 contains nothing in writing that even sets a goal for the proportion of workers who will be New Hampshire residents, let alone any penalties for missing it.
 
And without more teeth in HB 1633, most likely way over half of the casino workers will be from Massachusetts, not New Hampshire. A casino must be located near the Massachusetts border for maximum profits. This means the largest pool of casino workers will be from the Lawrence, Mass., labor market. Do we really want to bring a casino to New Hampshire, with all its costs and potential problems, to create jobs primarily for Massachusetts workers? This is not in the New Hampshire tradition.
 
There is no question our legislators have the right, as well as the clear responsibility, to put these promises in writing. A slot casino allowed to run 5,000 slots 24 hours a day and 365 days a year cannot exist without the Legislature overturning the 200-year-old law that prohibits it. Our legislators must make sure that in return for giving away all this – plus New Hampshire incurring all the new costs and other job and revenue losses that go along with it – this bill must include ironclad requirements.
 
To do anything less is clearly irresponsible and a reason in itself to kill HB 1633.
(Gordon Allen of Antrim is co-chairman of the Coalition for Open Democracy and chairman of WNHN-FM and the Granite State Coalition Against Expanded Gambling.)