MILFORD CITIZENS FORUM: WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 30th at 7:00 p.m.

Great speakers! Don't miss this one!

Dear Friends:

We have heard that many of you have not received our notices indicating that we had to reschedule the Citizens Forum on the Casino. This important event was originally scheduled to be held tonight. However, due to our speakers’ availability, we had to change the date.

The Citizens Forum will now be held WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 30^th at 7:00 p.m. in Upper Town Hall.

The Citizens Forum will include brief presentations by several select speakers:

· Psychologist Tom Larkin will discuss the social impact of casino gambling on a community.

· Former Congressman Robert Steele will share the impacts experienced in Connecticut following the opening of Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun.

· David Morganelli, a tax attorney and member of the Milford Finance Committee, will discuss the host community agreement and its lack of protections.

· And Chairman William D. Buckley will share his own personal opinions regarding the impact of the proposed casino on Milford.

Following the presentations, each of the speakers will sit on a panel and answer questions from the audience.

Get the facts, print and share our forum invitation flyer, and sign up for email updates on CasinoFreeMilford.com. And please forward this email to at least 5 of your friends and neighbors inviting them to join you on Wednesday, October 30th.

Thank you. We look forward to seeing everyone on the 30^th.
John Seaver and Steve Trettel

Troubling Truth

Troubling truth

Louis Ciarlone, the Electrical Workers business manager, accuses Bill Walczak of “sanctimonious hypocrisy” because he works for a company that specializes in gaming construction (“Union boss blasts mayoral hopeful on casino ‘hypocrisy,’ ” Aug. 21). I’ve never met Walczak, but his singular voice against the economic and social hypocrisy of casinos is courageous and rational.

Ciarlone is actually acting against his own union’s long term interests. Trying to get more people to lose more and more money in slot machines is an ugly economic model and fundamentally unjust because about 80 percent of the money lost comes from about 20 percent of the gamblers, mostly workers with low income. I remember when union leaders spoke out forcibly for both jobs and justice.

When is a Massachusetts union leader going to show courage and rationality on casinos and slots?—

Tom Larkin, Bedford

- See more at: http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/2013/08/letters_to_the_editor_monday_aug_226#sthash.lTJ4bHAW.QuW4MFbn.dpuf

Massachusetts: 154 Amendments

Massachusetts House members propose changes to casino bill, debate to begin next week
By Dan Ring, The Republican

Members of the state House of Representatives on Friday filed 154 proposed changes to a casino bill including measures to legalize Internet poker and change the minimum investment required for a casino [slot barn].

House members are set to debate a bill on Wednesday and possibly Thursday that calls for constructing three casinos in three regions of the state, including one for anywhere in the four counties of Western Massachusetts. The deadline for filing amendments was 3 p.m..

Rep. Daniel Winslow, a Norfolk Republican, filed an amendment that he said seeks to make Massachusetts the first state to legalize Internet poker.

Winslow's amendment would create five licenses for Internet poker for companies with operations in Massachusetts. Winslow said he supports the casino bill but wants to add Internet poker to the mix.

Entrepreneurs in the college-rich Pioneer Valley would benefit from Internet poker, he said. "It's high-tech," he said outside the House clerk's office. "You don't need the bricks and mortar. You need smarts."

Winslow, who grew up in Amherst, filed an amendment that would ban elected, politically appointed and political party officials from working for a casino or obtaining a license for a casino in the state until at least two years after leaving office. Winslow said the amendment seeks to ensure public trust and confidence in the process.

Rep. Michael F. Kane, a Holyoke Democrat who supports a casino for his city, filed an amendment that seeks to require a minimum investment of $400 million to $600 million per casino. The bill currently sets $500 million as a minimum investment. [For $500 million, you get a Slot Barn.]

Kane said he wants to give more flexibility to a gambling commission that would oversee and license casinos. "The experts are in the gaming commission," he said. "Allow them to make that decision."

Rep. Nicholas A. Boldyga, a Southwick Republican, filed an amendment that seeks to guarantee that at least a majority of jobs at a casino go to legal Massachusetts residents.

"This is supposed to create jobs," he said of casinos. "Nowhere does the bill say that these jobs should go to legal Massachusetts residents."

Casino opponents, including church leaders, are planning a press conference at the Statehouse on Tuesday.

Thomas Larkin , of Bedford, president of United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts, said opponents want to appeal to Gov. Deval Patrick and his values on social justice. Larkin said casinos will get most of their revenues by exploiting lower- and middle-income people.

"We want to express that there is a long, deep rooted, still very active opposition to bringing casinos and slot machines to Massachusetts," Larkin said. "I think the whole thing is just a bad, bad idea."

Pitting States Against Each Other in Race to the Bottom

Our View: State needs to think long-term on casinos

Gov. Andrew Cuomo raised some eyebrows last week when he disclosed that his administration has been exploring the possibility of expanding legalized gambling so commercial, non-Indian casinos could operate within New York's borders.

Cuomo went as far as to suggest that allowing casinos might not require a constitutional amendment - which is a lengthy and costly process. He said the restriction in the state constitution on traditional casino games and slot machines may not apply to electronic versions of many games and video slot machines.

Cuomo's words were quickly seized upon by casino operators, who have been spending millions of dollars lobbying state governments around the country to legalize gambling.

The casino supporters have been quick to cite the revenues they could bring to state governments, most of which are struggling financially right now.

What they fail to address in this lobbying effort is the source of this revenue that goes to the states - taxpayers.

Casinos, first and foremost, are built to take people's money. A lot of it goes to the casino owners; some of it goes to the state.

"The more people that lose money, the worse off the economy is," said Tom Larkin who leads an anti-casino group in Massachusetts. "The worst thing you can do is say, ‘Look, we have an economic problem, let's have more people lose more money.'"

A similar casino push is happening in Massachusetts, where, not surprisingly, the casino operators last week began pitting both states against each other, saying one cannot afford to let the other go forward with legalized gambling.

We urge the governor and Legislature to be thorough in their analysis of this issue.

Don't allow a short-term desire for more money to play with in the state budget lead to long-term problems that can come with widescale legalized casino gambling.

NY Gov.'s casino comments raise Mass. eyebrows

NY Gov.'s casino comments raise Mass. eyebrows
By Steve LeBlanc

BOSTON (AP) — Legislative leaders in Massachusetts are putting the finishing touches on a sweeping casino bill even as another nearby state could soon be ramping up the competition for gamblers looking for a place to roll the dice.

Tom Larkin, president of United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts, said casino operators are adept at pitting states against each other in the rush to expand gambling.

"There's a sibling rivalry going on among states, but it's pretty destructive as far as we're concerned," Larkin said. "I think the gambling industry exploits these budgetary problems that the states are having."

Opponents also are skeptical of states putting all their chips on casinos to help them balance their budgets.

"The more people that lose money, the worse off the economy is," Larkin said. "The worst thing you can do is say: 'Look we have an economic problem, let's have more people lose more money."'

Former Massachusetts Attorney General Scott Harshbarger, another gambling critic, said New York only demonstrates how easily states can get hooked on what he called "the culture of dependence and greed" that casinos create.

That inevitably leads to pressure to add more gambling venues, he said.

"It is time for all of our elected officials to do their homework, to update outdated cost-benefit analyses and have a full, transparent debate about the pros and cons of welcoming this industry to Massachusetts," Harshbarger said.

An Associated Press review of records filed with the secretary of state's office has also found no letup in the flood of dollars aimed at pressuring lawmakers to approve a casino deal.

Gambling interests spent more than $1.3 million in the first six months of the year lobbying Beacon Hill lawmakers.

The $1.35 million came from casino development firms, manufacturers of slot machines and federally recognized Indian tribes. Gambling interests spent more than $3 million in all of 2010 on lobbying.

The gambling arms race

The gambling arms race
Paul Davies

New York Gov. Cuomo’s comments in support of gambling, ramped up pressure on lawmakers in Massachusetts to move forward with a proposed bill to expand gambling there. States are desperate for tax revenue and many are looking to gambling as a quick and easy way to raise money.

Gambling supporters use the same tired arguments: we need the money and other states are doing it. But Tom Larkin, president of United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts, makes the smart case against this is a failed logic. “The gambling industry exploits these budgetary problems,” he said.

Larkin points out how state lawmakers ignore the policy implications of more gambling. “The more people that lose money, the worse off the economy is,” he said. “The worst thing you can do is say: ‘Look we have an economic problem, let’s have more people lose more money.’ ”

Former Massachusetts Attorney General Scott Harshbarger, said more and more lawmakers are getting hooked on “the culture of dependence and greed” that casinos create, which adds pressure to add even more gambling. “It is time for all of our elected officials to do their homework, to update outdated cost-benefit analyses and have a full, transparent debate about the pros and cons of welcoming this industry to Massachusetts,” Harshbarger said.

Well said.

How addictions interact

How addictions interact
By Tom Larkin / As you were saying...

“It isn’t that they can’t see the solution. It is that they can’t see the problem.” — G.K. Chesterton

Gambling and drinking alcohol interact and reinforce one another.

For most people, gambling and drinking are not self-defeating. However, about 80 percent of alcohol is consumed by about 20 percent of the drinkers and about 80 percent of money lost comes from about 20 percent of the gamblers. Disproportionately they are returning veterans, the less educated, minorities, the formerly incarcerated and mostly working people with moderate to low incomes.

Nevada has the highest per-capita alcohol consumption rate. Lottery revenues in Massachusetts would decrease significantly if Keno machines were removed from drinking establishments. Lottery and casino managers understand full well that increased drinking leads to increased gambling profits.

Proponents of expanding gambling in Massachusetts attempt to minimize the gambling and drinking connection. They use outdated projections suggesting gambling addiction is insignificant, unique and manageable compared to alcohol problems. That is not true. According to the National Gambling Impact Study Commission, about one of three active gamblers has some level of mild, moderate to severe problem and the prevalence of this behavior will increase as availability increases:

■ Mild (at risk gamblers) — about 18 percent of active gamblers
■ Moderate (problem gamblers) — about 9 percent of active gamblers
■ Severe (pathological gamblers) — about 4 percent of active gamblers
Irrational instant gratification thinking drives all addictions. Alcohol disinhibits. It is considered a gateway to gambling and other related self-defeating behaviors and feelings, including smoking, drug abuse, domestic violence, child neglect, suicide, increased debt, criminal behaviors and the intensity, duration and frequency of many emotional problems.

More than 50 percent of people with gambling problems are estimated to have alcohol and other drug problems. About one-third of people with drinking problems are estimated to have gambling problems. Alcohol and/or drug use are involved in about 80 percent of arrests and incarcerations. About 30 percent to 40 percent of the incarcerated are estimated to have gambling problems. Repeated criminal activity is “a gamble.” It can be defined as a persistent, hard to change pattern of risky behaviors. About two out of three of the formerly incarcerated are rearrested within three years, according to a 15-state, 2002 U.S. Justice Department study. For those who stay sober, recidivism rates drop to about one out of three. Therefore, recidivism is clearly related directly to relapse.

Self-referrals for gambling problems are much lower (3 percent) when compared to people who self refer for alcohol (15 percent) and drugs (25 percent). It is reasonable to assume self-defeating gambling behaviors are underreported. The commission study found the number of pathological gamblers double within a 50-mile radius of new casinos.

Many elected officials fail to understand how addictions are acquired, interact and reinforce each other. Therefore, they can’t see the problem.

Tom Larkin is a psychologist and president of United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts.

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.

Tom Larkin offers clarity

The proponents of expanded gambling take advantage of the confusion between;

-How much Money is spent gambling?
-How much Money is lost gambling?
-How much Revenue goes to the state?

The proponents will make a the statement

Casinos in Ma. will generate 1 billion dollars a year

(This is a projection provided by the Gambling Industry, but let's assume it is true.)

The implication is the state has lost revenue of 1 billion dollars..

Some facts:

-Money spent gambling usually nets about 10% to 15% profit for the Casino.

-To be fair, the billion dollars spent does contribute to money won, salaries and other expenses, which helps the casino economic system..

-However, the billion dollars is re-cycled away from other spending options in the normal entrepreneurial economic system. This is not new money.

--Where does the billion come from? It doesn't come from those who do not gamble (about 1/3rd of the population disproportionately represented by middle to upper income levels.)

It does not come from the majority of people who gamble. The casino economic system cannot be sustained by casual gamblers. About 80 to 90% comes from 10 to 20% of the gamblers, disproportionately represented by middle to low income groups.
-The net profit, of 1 billion spent in the Casino is about 100 to 150 million (10 to 15% of money spent)

-The State receives about 25% of the net profit which ranges from 25 to 35 million...NOT 25% of money spent.

-Therefore, for the state to receive 1 billion dollars, about 10 billion would have to be recycled out of the normal economic exchange of goods, and spent gambling. That is alot of discretionary money re-directed away from the people who can least afford it.!!!!!!!!

And, of course the social consequences consequences follow.... increases in poverty, crime, alcoholism, debt and relapse etc.


The proponents consistently over-simplify..."This is a Jobs bill...Casinos will generate 1 billion dollars." etc.

But, MOST OF THEM KNOW THE FACTS.

The more knowledgeable they are, the more irresponsible they are behaving.

Tom Larkin

Boston Union Teacher

Below is an article that will appear in the October edition of the Boston Union Teacher, the newspaper of the Boston Teachers Union (BTU) on Youth Gambling forwarded to me by the author, Tom Larkin.

This newspaper will be delivered to all BTU members, including retirees, in a few days. It references Scott Harshbarger' s research, when he was Attorney General.

This needs to be a crucial part of our discussion regarding predatory gambling and the flawed public policy of relying on gambling revenues to resolve temporary budget problems.

I have witnessed children buying Scratch Tickets, yet nothing is done to address the issue.

Commentary: Tom Larkin
Youth Gambling
“We will face, in the next decade
or so, more problems with youth
gambling than we will face with
drug use.”
– Howard Shaffer,
Harvard Medical School

Public officials promoting expanded legalized gambling
should pause, do some independent homework and re-think the
consequences. Independent studies consistently demonstrate long
term costs easily outweigh short term benefits by $3 to $1. (Gambling
in America-Costs and Benefits by Earl Grinols, 2004)

The costs of expanded gambling include increases in crime,
bankruptcy, addictions of all kinds. Youth gambling is an existing,
under recognized and poorly understood cost.

The National Gambling Impact Study Commission (NGISC-1999)
provided evidence that more money is spent on college campuses
on gambling than on alcohol.

They cite a study by former Attorney General Scott Harshbarger
that minors as young as 9 years old were able to purchase
lottery tickets 80% of their attempts, 60% of minors were able
to place bets on Keno machines and 75% of high school seniors
report having played the lottery.

The Illinois Institute for Addiction Recovery reports 80% of those
between 12 and 17 say they have gambled in the last 12 months and
35% report they gamble at least once a week. Robert Goodman,
in The Luck Business (1996), reported evidence that gambling is
the fastest growing teenage addiction, with the rate of pathological
gambling twice that of adults. A McGill University review of the literature
(Youth Gambling Problems- 2005-on line) cites research
correlating adolescent problem gambling with delinquency, alcohol
use, adult criminal behavior, depression and suicide. They confirm
that 4% to 8% of adolescents (compared to 1% to 3% for adults)
have very serious gambling problems, while another 10 to 15% are
at risk.

Habits like smoking, gambling and alcohol use are learned. Gambling
is the only addiction promoted by government. According
to one NGISC study a new gambling facility doubles the problem
and pathological gamblers within a 50 mile radius.
Internet gambling is a potentially dangerous habit, especially
youth gambling. Electronic gambling becomes available at every
school desk, work station and living room. The US International
Gambling Report, (John Kindt, editor, 2008) cites research on the
dangerous link between gambling sites and video games. In a 2005

Media Awareness Network survey, 23% of male students in grades
10 and 11 reported visiting a gambling internet site in the past year.

Of particular concern is the special attraction of on line sports wagering
to youth.

The NGISC unanimously recommended legislation to ban
internet gambling. The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement
Act Legislation of 2006 was passed, with the support of 49
state Attorney Generals. Despite this, Massachusetts Congressman
Barney Frank has filed a bill to repeal it. (Kindt)

Uninformed advocates belief gambling is economically beneficial
and will support educational funding. In most states, legislators
reduced educational allotments from the general fund by about the
same amount raised through gambling revenues. Independent
economists cite evidence that gambling is economically sterile,
ultimately destabilizing mature economies. (Kindt)

The values of hard work, doing the best you can (win, lose or
draw) and long term thinking are in conflict with the “casino culture”
values of materialism, dependence on luck and instant gratification.

Youth learn to gamble in the same ways they learn to smoke, to
drink, to over eat or to acquire any other healthy or unhealthy habit,
by acquiring a value-based attitude.

Young people today are the first generation to grow up with video
games, computers and an environment in which gambling has been
legal their entire life. They are particularly vulnerable to its lure.

The gambling industry, like the tobacco industry before it, is a
predator. Public officials should be alarmed and alert to their influence.

(Tom Larkin is a retired Boston
School Psychologist and SMART
Recovery Facilitator.)