Lincoln horse race is a farce

Local View: Lincoln horse race is a farce

August 20, 2015 11:57 pm  •  BY PAT LOONTJER

Enlarge Photo

I found it very interesting that the Lincoln Race Course is so proud to announce its one day a year of horse racing in order to keep its simulcast license. They should be ashamed of themselves for bragging about this farce.

Nebraska horse tracks are the only business in the state allowed to gamble on simulcast races in other states. They were given that privilege years ago under the guise that they would use the profits to hold horse races and thus “save the horses.” Well, that never happened, and now they are back, saying they need slots to “save the horses.” When will the gambling industry admit that they don’t give a hoot about the horses and just want to use them to line their own pockets with gambling dollars?

Just look at what happened to our neighbor, Iowa. The gambling industry cried that they needed slots to “save the dogs.” They got the slots, but just last year a Council Bluffs casino announced it was losing $9 million a year keeping dog racing alive. They offered their Legislature millions to let them off the hook, dump the dogs and continue to make a fortune on slots. Proponents of the change said it was time for the dogs to go, as they are a dying breed. The same thing will happen to the poor horses that are being used as pawns in the Nebraska scenario.

A one- or two-day race season in Lincoln and Omaha is not live horse racing. The Racing Commission no longer exists to support live horse racing. They are working to transform horse tracks into other forms of gambling, like simulcasting and, their dream, slot machine parlors. This is not good for live horse racing or for Nebraska. The state racing commission fears its own end, since horse racing has effectively ended in Nebraska due to lack of public interest. 

“Give us the slots, and we’ll create jobs and save the horses,” they promise. Don’t bet on it! What it will do is increase gambling addiction, which in turn destroys families and legitimate businesses. Do we need more crime, more embezzlements, more divorces and more suicides? NO.

The Racing Board officials in Nebraska also announced that they will be back in the Legislature next year to try to get the “Historic Horse Racing Machines” put on the ballot. Remember that these are the same “Dead Horse Slot Machines” that have been defeated year after year. Rest assured, if they are coming back, then so will we. Gambling With the Good Life has protected Nebraska families and businesses against expanded gambling successfully for the past 20 years, and we are not about to give up now.

Pat Loontjer is executive director of Gambling With the Good Life, an organization that has been working against expanded gambling since 1995.

http://journalstar.com/news/opinion/editorial/columnists/local-view-lincoln-horse-race-is-a-farce/article_cd4ef4f5-2bbb-543f-a7d8-a07820dd3280.html

Advertisement (1 of 1): 0:09

Predatory Gambling In the Crosshairs

By Editor Filed in News July 24th, 2015 @ 8:34 am

It used to be that if you wanted to play slot machines, you’d have to go to Las Vegas or Atlantic City.

Now, they’re everywhere.











And not everyone is happy about it.

A grassroots movement is emerging to reverse the nationwide penetration of predatory gambling.

Grassroots organizers want to get rid of it. And by it they mean almost all forms of government sponsored gambling — slot machines, casinos, lotteries.

And they are starting to make a splash in the media.

Last year, comedian John Oliver did a 15 minute piece ripping apart lotteries.

Later this year, a documentary — Out of Luck — will be released exposing the downside of lotteries.

MIT Professor Natasha Schull has written a book length expose on slot machines titled Addiction by Design: Machine Gambling in Las Vegas. (Princeton University Press, 2012.)

CBS News’ 60 Minutes featured Schull on a 2011 piece titled Slot Machines: The Big Gamble.
And now, the grassroots movement has taken a page from the anti-tobacco warriors.

They’ve started a Predatory Gambling Liability Project.

And it’s headed by a former Assistant U.S. Attorney — Michael Fagan, with support from legendary tobacco litigator Richard Daynard and the Public Health Advocacy Institute.

“Most every successful social movement has had four pieces to win,” Les Bernal of Stop Predatory Gambling told Corporate Crime Reporter in an interview last week. “Legislation, education, direct action and litigation. As a movement over the last eight years, we have tried to build momentum in all four of those areas.”

“On the litigation side, for the first time in modern American history, there is a major case against casino interests that was filed in West Virginia, in Wheeling, in August 2014. It is currently pending in West Virginia federal court. The lead attorneys are Terry Noffsinger and James Bordas. The plaintiff is Stacy Stevens. She’s the widow of Scott Stevens. He was a successful CFO. He worked for a multimillion dollar family owned business in western Pennsylvania. He was very successful.”

“Then he went to Las Vegas to a conference, was introduced to slot machines. He started playing the slot machines locally at the casino in Wheeling. He started losing. He embezzled millions from his employer to feed his slot machine addiction. This isn’t like some Joe on the street. He was an incredibly successful family man, businessman — everything you would want in a person.”

“He got hooked on these slot machines. In August 2012, he drove to a soccer field in his hometown — a soccer field he helped raise money for — called the EMTs so they could pick up his body, and he shot himself in the park.”

“His wife is suing the casino owner and the slot machine maker — IGT. They are putting the slot machines on trial. It’s the best case that has been brought.”

“The litigation piece is happening,” Bernal said. “And we’ve launched the Predatory Gambling Liability Project. It’s chaired by a former Assistant U.S. Attorney out of St. Louis — Michael Fagan. We have more than 30 attorneys from across the U.S. including Richard Daynard, the legendary tobacco litigator. He heads the Public Health Advocacy Institute.”
What about direct action?

“People went into casinos, put money into the slot machines and the people just sat in the chairs,” Bernal relates. “We were technically playing the machines, but we weren’t playing them the way the casinos want us to play them. It was a protest that got some press.”
Bernal says that predatory gambling “extracts enormous amounts of wealth from everyday people.”

“And it’s not just the poor — middle class, low income families,” Bernal says. “It’s probably one of the biggest wealth extractors in our society. It destroys families. Unlike alcohol or drugs, you don’t know what is happening to this person until they are done with everything.

You don’t see it. People who are alcoholics will tell you — with alcohol, after ten beers, you stop. Your body cuts you off. But with gambling, you chase. People stand up six or seven days straight at these casinos — losing everything they have. Chasing means you go to the casino with $100. You go through that. Do you hit the casino ATM or go home? People who chase their losses go to the ATM. Mathematically, the machines are rigged against you. But if you show your propensity to chase, the casinos will come after you like no other business in America with exploitive tactics. And they get away with it because government is a part of it.”

Bernal says that people who have been victimized by predatory gambling are fighting back.

“In Illinois, Melynda Litchfield is our national victims advocate there,” Bernal says. “She was a talented, successful nursing supervisory for an intensive care unit for a major hospital outside of Chicago. She had been there for 27 years, happily married with three children. The state of Illinois located a casino near her house — about a twenty minute drive from where she lived. Over time, she became addicted to slot machines. She became so addicted to these machines that she embezzled hospital supplies from where she worked and sold them on eBay just to feed her gambling addiction. About three years ago, she got divorced. She was caught by the hospital. She almost took her own life twice. She lost her nursing license for a year. She has now made this issue her calling. She’s going out and standing up for the millions of Americans who are being exploited everyday. We refer to them as the expendable Americans.”

Bernal says that both the Republican and Democratic parties are bought off by the predatory gambling industry.

“A lot of establishment politicians say things like — I don’t like gambling, but it’s here,” Bernal says. “We have to do it. They will try to distance themselves from it. Yet they will take all of the campaign money. They will allow it to come into their state.”

“Deval Patrick in Massachusetts quarterbacked it in,” Bernal says. “Martin O’Malley in Maryland quarterbacked it in. Andrew Cuomo in New York. A lot of Democrats are pushing it.”

“This will be the first time we have big gambling candidates in the Presidential field. Chris Christie in New Jersey. Hillary Clinton had Jan Jones on her finance committee. Jan Jones is one of the key government affairs people for Caesars Casino.”
There are exceptions.

“Marco Rubio was a strong opponent of state run gambling in Florida,” Bernal says. “I would expect Bernie Sanders to speak out against it.”

“The new Massachusetts Attorney General, Maura Healey, won her 2014 primary largely on this issue,” Bernal says. “She was opposed to casinos. She has been publically strong against casinos.”

What about the labor unions?

“The labor unions have been advocates for predatory gambling in the United States,” Bernal says. “They see it as an organizing tool to get labor union members. The building trades want the casinos because they want to build them. Some of the unions, like SEIU, want to organize the workers. Never mind how the casinos make their money — they just want to add to their ranks.”

- See more at: http://www.corporatecrimereporter.com/news/200/predatory-gambling-in-the-crosshairs/#sthash.vZS0TMIJ.dpuf

Invitation to testify before Congress on internet gambling

Sorry to post this late!

Congress is holding a hearing next week on abolishing the recent practice by some state governments of sponsoring internet gambling. The House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security is hearing H.R. 707 the "Restoration of America's Wire Act" on Thursday, March 5 at 9:30am.

We have been asked to testify at the hearing and I want to invite you to please send along any arguments, evidence, stories or general advice that you believe we should consider emphasizing in our testimony. Our written testimony is due 48 hours before the hearing so if you want to send anything, please try to do so by this weekend when I'll be sitting down to write. My email is les@stoppredatorygambling.org.

Former Assistant U.S. Attorney (and current SPG National Board member) Mike Fagan, who teaches International Money Laundering, Corruption, and Terrorism at Washington University School of Law in St. Louis, was also invited to testify before the congressional committee. He is one of the nation's most knowlegeable experts about the relationship between internet gambling and crime. Because of the importance of his expertise to this issue and his membership in SPG, I ask you to please make a tax-deductible donation of $10 to help us cover Mike's airfare to the hearing. He will be traveling from St. Louis to Washington, DC and the plane ticket is approximately $400.

Thanks. We'll hit it as hard as we can next week.

Best,

Les

____________

Les Bernal

National Director, Stop Predatory Gambling

End government-sponsored gambling because it is dishonest, financially damaging to citizens and contributes to the rising unfairness and inequality in our country.

If you support our mission and work, please become a member of Stop Predatory Gambling today.

Quick Links An American Declaration on Government and Gambling Online Store SPG in the Media Take Action A Failed Government Policy Lies vs. Facts Background Reading Share Your Story Donate To The Mission

Stop Predatory Gambling Foundation ι 100 Maryland Avenue NE, Room 310 ι Washington, D.C. 20002 ι (202) 567-6996 ©2013 Stop Predatory Gambling Foundation. All rights reserved.

Corporate bookies controlling the game

There will be a major ad campaign on the risks of gambling, sponsored by those who run the show

Declan LynchTwitter

Published 18/01/2015 |

 

Cartoon by Jim Cogan

Next week, some of the biggest bookmaking chains in these islands, including Ladbrokes, William Hill, Paddy Power and Coral, will be launching the Senet Group, an "independent body" set up to promote "responsible gambling".

Before we go any further, let us pause for a moment's reflection on the genius of these people who, without missing a beat, can declare that a body set up by Ladbrokes, William Hill, Paddy Power and Coral is "independent".

Lesser men would simply say they are setting up a body, but the bookies, always looking for an edge, have to call it "independent".

In an attempt to see off any proposed legislation by the British government, there will be a major advertising campaign to highlight the potential risks of gambling - perhaps as a response to all the major advertising campaigns which have highlighted the potential risks of not gambling.

Not that they need to worry greatly about any legislation promised by parties running for election.

The corporate bookies are very much in tune with the spirit of the age, in which most governments, including the Irish one, are broadly in favour of anything which tends to facilitate large transfers of money from the weaker elements in society to the top people.

But the bookies are taking no chances anyway. They too are reading the papers in which, most weeks now, there's another story of personal catastrophe which has befallen some unfortunate punter who just lost his way in the labyrinth that is online gambling.

They too are noticing these Twitter accounts being set up all across the world with names like Re-Think Gambling, Stop Predatory Gambling, or just Compulsive Gambler, which are calling bullshit on the Byzantine PR campaign that is "responsible gambling".

So they are acutely aware of the need to control the situation, an awareness which was apparent in the days just after Christmas, when the papers ran a story about a man in Galway who had a €5 football accumulator that won him €421,000.

It was a great story indeed, a magnificent achievement by that man, and one that directed our attention away from the fact that the big Leopardstown meeting had turned into a kind of Armageddon for the punters, with several hot favourites down the glen.

A headline which honestly reflected the state of the betting world at that time would have read something like, "Hundreds of Men Annihilated in Scenes of Absolute Carnage."

Instead it went something like "One Man Dies And Goes to Heaven".

So the overall message which was conveyed by an acquiescent media was roughly the opposite of the truth - and there's a pattern here.

The corporate bookies, with their ruthless brilliance, tend not to be contented with the mere half-truth.

In Britain, for example, they seek to convey the impression that they are wholly committed to "responsible gambling", while in their offices they have machines with fixed-odds games such as roulette which are known not only to be monstrously addictive, but to take up to 100 quid a time.

Desperate men can be seen losing thousands in a few minutes, and yet the bookies have resisted obviously responsible suggestions that these machines should not be taking 100 quid every 20 seconds, they should be taking a maximum of maybe two quid.

This would work, even on those obviously rare occasions when the antennae of the staff somehow fail to pick up the signs that they may be in the presence of an addicted gambler - the companies acknowledge that some clients may have a problem, but they say it is only a small minority.

Therefore the vast majority of the punters pumping a hundred quid a time into those machines do not have a problem, they are just having a laugh.

Sometimes the disappointed players can be seen physically attacking these machines, demented with anguish, an image to keep in your mind as you watch various well-spoken industry leaders making apparently constructive suggestions that they will no longer be advertising "free-bet" or even "free money" offers on TV before 9 o'clock, so "responsible" are they.

As for the accusation that certain clients might be using those roulette machines or fixed-odds betting terminals for the grand old custom of laundering money through the bookies, well, that would be - and there is no other word for it - irresponsible.

The strategic purpose of this "responsible gambling" shtick was examined recently in a piece in The Guardian by Matt Zarb-Cousin, himself a recovering addicted gambler who wrote that "like other addictions, gambling addiction is the consequence of a complex interplay between an individual and a product. But while the betting industry would claim it would like to encourage responsible gambling, these semantics imply that those who become addicted to their products are entirely to blame, and that their products are not. The narrative... is one that seeks to absolve the industry of blame... this shifts the focus away from whether operators are behaving responsibly with the products they offer."

And the best of all narratives is that of the online punter in Swindon last Saturday who turned £20 into £16.5k in just over 20 minutes with a £10 each way fourfold on the Saturday racing.

He got it done "in the time it takes to throw together some oven chips and a couple of fish fingers".

Oh lucky man!

Sunday Independent

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/declan-lynch/corporate-bookies-controlling-the-game-30916051.html

 

 

The highly-addictive gambling machines allow bets of £100 every 20 seconds

Gambling with lives: Fury as amusement arcades demand fixed odds terminals

Aug 08, 2014 09:22

By Martin Bagot

The highly-addictive gambling machines allow bets of £100 every 20 seconds

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/gambling-lives-fury-amusement-arcades-4023238#ixzz39zD5hwph
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook





Highly-addictive gambling machines that allow bets of £100 every 20 seconds could spread to motorway services and amusement arcades.

That is the warning from outraged campaigners about fixed odds betting terminals.

Currently only allowed in betting shops, the machines are raking in cash at an alarming rate.

They have been linked to gambling addiction, misery and antisocial behaviour.

But in a dramatic U-turn, BACTA - the trade body representing parts of the gambling industry - is demanding that its members be allowed to operate the touch-screen roulette machines.

Adrian Parkinson, of the Campaign for Fairer Gambling, said: "The addictive nature of FOBTs is what has made them so lucrative for betting shops. Now everyone else wants them.

"If the Government agrees to these demands we will see more FOBTs on high streets.

"Even more worryingly, they could be in unmanned gaming at arcades on motorway service stations, so they would be easily accessible to children."

The Mirror understands BACTA has written to MPs demanding that its adult-only gaming centres - including amusement arcades and bingo halls - are allowed to feature the fixed odds terminals, dubbed the crack cocaine of gambling.

It is estimated that this would result in an extra 6,300 of the machines in Britain.

Campaigners warn that pubs will soon be calling for the right to have the terminals.

Up until now, BACTA had fought against the growth of the FOBTs. Mr Parkinson said the group's U-turn can be blamed on the Government's failure to deal with the problem.

An internal BACTA memo seen by the Mirror says "it is fair and reasonable" that the machines should be available to play in many more places. But the group declined to comment yesterday.

A spokesman for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport said: "The rules around where FOBTs can be based are very clear.

"And they will not be moving into other areas."

No one else wanted Steve Wynn!

Push yourselves back from the issue with both arms and look at it dispassionately.

Steve Wynn, the aging Nip 'N Tuck King,  has been tossed out of every single community he previously salivated to invade for numerous reasons.

Even Steve Wynn's slick salespitch and blond trophy wife didn't convince Foxborough. [Read a little about what they had to say.]



Wynn, after being tossed by South Boston and Foxborough because he's tone deaf, finds a friend in Everett and begins to dictate policy....'the state should do....' ???



Steve Wynn was rejected by Connecticut, Pennsylvania [couldn't stand the criticism], New York [because of his anti-union stand], squeezed out of Florida.

And now this screwiest deal ever?

REPEAL THE CASINO DEAL is the only sensible solution!

Evmorphia Stratis

April 16  Everett, MA

 

Mayor Carlo DeMaria of Everett wants the city to acquire the property where Steve Wynn has proposed building a $1.6 billion casino, and then resell it to the Las Vegas mogul, using the city’s power of eminent domain to remove a roadblock that has threatened to kill Wynn’s chances of getting a casino license.

Under DeMaria’s plan, Everett would buy the casino site and seven other nearby properties for approximately $41 million and then resell them at the same price to Wynn Resorts. City officials said that their urban renewal proposal for the long-depressed area along the Mystic River was under development before Wynn proposed a casino and is not solely for his benefit.

“This area, as you are well aware, is critical to the future success of the entire city and will serve as a gateway to the entire region,” DeMaria said in a letter to Everett city councilors dated April 10. “My administration is committed to realizing the extraordinary potential of this area and the city as a whole.”

But City Council president Michael Marchese said he views DeMaria’s proposed “Lower Broadway Urban Renewal Plan” as a favor to Wynn.

Wynn Resorts has previously offered to buy the former industrial land for $35 million if regulators approve his casino, but Massachusetts Gaming Commission investigators found that the current owners were being dishonest about the involvement of convicted felon Charles Lightbody, one of their original partners.

One co-owner of the proposed casino site, Anthony Gattineri, has refused to sign a pledge that there are no secret partners in the deal, rekindling speculation that Lightbody is still involved, even though he insists he sold his interest in the 30-acre parcel long ago. The commission has required the sworn statements as a condition for approving Wynn’s license.

“We assumed this is Wynn’s deal,” Marchese, the City Council president, said in an interview. “They’re trying to bypass Gattineri. To avoid it, they’ll have someone else buy it.”

Marchese said Assistant City Solicitor David Rodrigues told him that the city’s land purchase, called a taking in legal terms, would go forward even if Wynn does not win a casino license, suggesting that other developers would want to build on the land. It is a former Monsanto Co. site that has been unused for decades.

“We haven’t had a developer here in over 20 years,” Marchese said in an interview. “We only know what we hear, and what we hear we don’t trust.”

The 54.8 acres the city wants to acquire is part of a larger urban renewal area that covers 128 acres that DeMaria argues is ripe for redevelopment, noting that it is dotted with abandoned oil tanks, dilapidated buildings, and contaminated land. The city plans to spend tens of millions upgrading the area in addition to the land taking.

The question of whether Everett’s urban renewal plan benefits the city or mainly Wynn could loom large, because, under state law, government taking of private land has to serve a public purpose — in this case, redeveloping a blighted section of the city — and not just for the benefit of a private party.
Everett voters overwhelmingly approved a referendum on the casino proposal last year, largely on the promise that a casino could bring in thousands of jobs.

However, this is the first time that Everett voters are being asked to put up tax dollars to support the casino. Although DeMaria’s plan calls for Wynn to reimburse the city for the land, the broader urban renewal effort also calls for more than $30 million in other improvements in the areas, some of them paid for with city funds or bonds. Marchese is skeptical residents would support it if they think the deal is primarily for Wynn’s benefit.

The land-taking would be a substantial boost to Wynn Resorts, acquiring not only the casino site, but several nearby properties that Wynn also had planned to purchase. Once Everett controls the property, the law does not require the newly created Everett Redevelopment Authority to go through public bidding procedures, allowing it to resell directly to Wynn.

Michael Weaver, a spokesman for Wynn Resorts, declined to comment on DeMaria’s proposal, saying, “Because this is a city of Everett action, we really don’t have any comment.”

DeMaria’s land-taking plan is the latest twist in a high-stakes battle between two blue-collar cities, Everett and Revere, for the Boston area’s only casino license . Wynn’s proposal appeared to gain the upper hand last year when Everett voters approved his plan, while East Boston rejected a proposal that would have straddled the Boston-Revere line, forcing the developers to revise their plan so that no part of the casino was in Boston.

Then Wynn ran into problems with the owners of the proposed casino site, FBT Everett Realty.
Lightbody, who has served prison time for assault with a dangerous weapon and has pleaded guilty in a massive identity theft ring in New York, was one of the original partners of the site, but he has claimed he sold his interest long before Wynn came along. However, gambling commission investigators said Lightbody and his partners may be hiding his continued stake in the company even after Wynn attempted to renegotiate the land deal last year to squeeze Lightbody out.

The Globe reported this month that ownership of the casino site is under state and federal investigation.

Hoping to avoid the taint of criminal investigation, state gambling commissioners ordered all three owners of FBT Realty to sign a pledge that there are no other secret partners. Two did, but Gattineri refused on the advice of his criminal attorney.

DeMaria’s urban renewal plan, presented to the City Council Monday night, appears to be on a fast track, and the mayor has asked for a public hearing on April 28. If the council approves the urban renewal plan, it will go to state community development officials for review before the Everett Redevelopment Authority can begin taking the land.

In addition, the gambling commission would need to review Everett’s proposal, said spokeswoman Elaine Driscoll.

City officials say the entire process could be completed in months, in time for Wynn to begin constructing his casino. Under state law, if Wynn gets Boston’s only casino license, he must have control of the proposed site within 60 days.

However, many questions remain, including how much the eminent domain acquisitions would actually cost. DeMaria’s proposal estimates the total price to the city will be $41 million, but that is based on rough estimates, rather than appraisals, city officials concede, and at least one land owner said the estimated purchase price for his land was very low.

Gerry Berberian, owner of an office building at 3 Charlton St., said that he paid $3 million for the property in 2007 and that Wynn had previously offered to pay significantly more. But DeMaria’s proposal estimates the cost of acquiring 3 Charlton St. at $1.2 million.

“That price is too low; I want a fair price,” said Berberian, who added that he had not previously heard about the proposed acquisitions.

The urban renewal plan also includes a number of favorable assumptions that may or may not come true. For instance, DeMaria’s proposal plans to use tens of millions in state and federal grant money to pay for improvements in the urban renewal area, but the city has not applied for them yet, state officials say.

Likewise, the plan calls for the city to acquire a sliver of land from the MBTA, which, as a government agency, cannot be the target of an eminent domain action, state officials say. MBTA officials have stated they will not sell the land without a competitive process.

Finally, it is unclear if DeMaria’s plan would prevent Lightbody or other criminals from profiting from a Wynn casino. In a taped conversation with a state prison inmate last June, Lightbody boasted he had the strip club near the casino site “locked up tight as a drum,” according to a transcript provided by the gambling commission.

Under DeMaria’s plan, King Arthur’s Lounge, less than a mile from the casino site, would remain in private hands, and two Lightbody associates have announced plans to redevelop the strip club if Wynn’s casino is approved.

DeMaria said there is more at stake in his plan than Wynn’s casino or people seeking to profit from it.

“This entire process represents the reclaiming of Everett’s future from decades of underutilization and contamination,” DeMaria said in a statement. “We will continue to ensure that this process proceeds for the benefit of every resident and business in that area and in the entire city of Everett.”
But Marchese said councilors need to know a lot more before they can approve the plan.

“This is the first time anything like this ever happened in the city of Everett,” he said.

Mark Arsenault of the Globe staff contributed. Andrea Estes can be reached at andrea.estes@globe.com; Sean P. Murphy at sean.murphy@globe.com.





Evmorphia Stratis This is unbelievable. Wake up America!! Your government can take property by eminent domain and do what they want with it. It is supposed to be for public use....the house I live in is the house my parents bought in 1957. no sooner did we move in , the city of everett wanted to make a parking lot and tear our house down, a historical one built in 1822 with an even older barn in the back yard. My father,a Marine in WWII, and my mother, fought to keep their home. They succeeded with much work. But the city tore down 3 homes in the now public lot. My father passed away in 2001. He would be so disgusted to see what is going on in Everett. I live with my mother in the family home and we are still fighting for our right to a quality of life. We are two of 800 Everett residents who don't want a casino in our back yard. 6000 residents voted yes for a casino. Steve Wynn funded 'everett united' to the tuune of hundreds of thousand s of dollars. I did outreach to Charlestown before we voted, but I didn't get the help. Now Charlestown is actively involved in the process, they want a say in the infrastructure of a casino, and the negative impact it WILL have in their community. Well, we are one big community in all of greater Boston, all of Massachusetts, this whole country. We are all part of a bigger picture. This casino 'crawl' in America is extremely detrimental to our economy, health and well being. We do NOT need casinos for jobs! We do not need more drug problems, more human trafficking, more gambling addicts. We can create jobs in Massachusetts in far better ways then casinos. Please read the Bosotn Globe article. It is shocking. I am actively looking into this deal Everett wants to make.

 

Polling: Hippity Hoppin' Down the Bunny Trail!

OK.....now who's gonna tell these folks when they're polled that the revenue projections and job creation projections are so GROSSLY OVERSTATED with Spectrum Gaming leading the pack at a cost to Massachusetts taxpayers of ...was it $189,000?.... 

that the only 'solution' for the inexplicable shortfalls will be FURTHER EXPANSION ...like maybe SLOT MACHINES in convenience stores, SLOT BARNS in their communities....Fa La La La!  

 

Just like every other state.



Monday, April 14, 2014

Survey: Mass. Voters Support Casinos Outside Of Their Communities

Casinos remain popular as a concept in Massachusetts, just so long as they are located in someone else's community, according to the latest telephone survey from the Western New England University Polling Institute.

The statewide survey of 477 adults, conducted March 31 through April 7, found that 59 percent of adults said they support establishing casinos in Massachusetts, while 34 percent were opposed and seven percent were either undecided or declined to answer the question. The margin of sampling error for the survey was plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.

Still, a many respondents took a "not in my backyard" approach to the issue, with 55 percent saying they were opposed to having a casino in their community and 42 percent saying they supported having a casino in their community. Three percent were undecided or declined to answer the question.

After cross-tabulating responses to the two questions - whether to support casinos and whether to support one in the local community - the Polling Institute found that 41 percent of adults support both establishing casinos and having one in their community; 34 percent oppose allowing casinos in the state and also oppose locating one in their town; 18 percent endorse having casinos in Massachusetts, but do not want one in their community. Another three percent said they do not know or declined to give an answer regarding casinos in the state, but they said they do not want to have a casino near where they live.

The results were almost identical to the institute's previous survey on the issue, conducted in November 2013. In that survey of 517 adults, 61 percent supported establishing casinos in the state, while 33 percent were opposed. When asked whether they support or oppose having a casino in their community, 55 percent of adults in the November 2013 survey said they oppose the idea, while 42 percent said they support a casino in their community.

Tim Vercellotti, director of the Polling Institute and a professor of political science at Western New England University, noted that the latest results are roughly consistent with Polling Institute findings from surveys dating to 2009.

Under a state law adopted in 2011, the state will license up to three resort casinos, with one in each of three regions in the state, and one slots parlor. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission recently approved a license for a slots parlor at the Plainridge Racecourse in Plainville, and the commission has said it expects to award licenses for casinos in two of the three regions later this year. In the last 12 months, communities have voted to pass casino proposals in Everett, Springfield and Revere. Proposals have been defeated in East Boston, Milford, Palmer and West Springfield.

The survey also asked respondents how important the issue of casinos was to them personally.

Eighteen percent of adults said very important, 41 percent said somewhat important, 30 percent said not very important and 11 percent said not at all important. Among registered voters, 20 percent said the issue was very important, 42 percent said somewhat important, 30 percent said not very important, and eight percent said not at all important.

Among registered voters who said the issue was very important, 57 percent opposed establishing casinos in the state, and only 40 percent supported the idea. Among those same voters, 62 percent opposed having a casino in their community, and only 37 percent supported the idea, compared with 54 percent and 42 percent respectively for the entire sample of registered voters.

For the entire sample, attitudes regarding casinos varied along the lines of partisanship, gender, age, education and income. Sixty-seven percent of Republican voters said they support establishing casinos in the state, compared with 63 percent of unenrolled voters and 52 percent of Democrats.

Men were more likely than women to support casinos by a margin of 64 percent to 54 percent.

Support was highest among respondents ages 18 to 39 at 63 percent, falling to 51 percent among those ages 65 and older. Sixty-eight percent of individuals with a high school diploma or less backed casinos, compared with 51 percent of college graduates. Fifty-five percent of respondents with annual household incomes of less than $35,000 supported casinos, while support in higher income categories ranged from 60 percent to 64 percent.

- See more at: http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/news159160.html#sthash.Z07c3MNr.6Pfbxo13.dpuf

Lets get our grassroots message out!

Please join with other acivists to protect ALL Massachusetts Communities!




Published on Apr 10, 2014

Citizen volunteers oppose casinos based on impacts and negative long-term economic drain of host regions. November 2014 ballot question to Repeal Casinos in Mass. www.repealthecasinodeal.org


Repeal Special Interest-Political Casinos in Mass





Published on Apr 10, 2014

PILOT - and we're not talking airplanes!
PILOT - Payment in Lieu of Taxes is a special tax classification for essential services like water, sewer, utilities and non-profit organizations such as faith-based groups. Multi-billion dollar casino monopolies want special tax breaks not allowed for regular businesses. We say casiNO way! www.repealthecasinodeal.org

Please support our efforts by donating what you can!

 

The people are entitled to vote --We Need you

Message from Former Attorney General Scott Harshbarger:

Friends and Colleagues – I am grateful for the contributions many of you have made to our effort to REPEAL the CASINO DEAL. As you may have read, we filed our Brief Friday, March 21, in the SJC. (See our website below.)

With the recent polls trending in our direction, the quality of our legal team, and the statewide citizen-led grass roots effort, we feel very good about the upcoming challenges, but we need your continued support -- and that of all those you can contact on our behalf -- now more than ever. (Here is link to our website –for information and for donations.)

Thank you, my friends.

Scott Harshbarger

 

 

 

REPEAL THE CASINO DEAL! Donate Volunteer The Details

REPEAL THE CASINO DEAL! BAD FOR COMMUNITIES, BAD FOR THE COMMONWEALTH
“We respect the Attorney General but, respectfully, she got this wrong.”                   The Repeal the Casino Deal campaign is seeking a ruling from the state's highest court to allow Massachusetts voters to decide whether to roll back the state casino law, despite an opinion from state Attorney General Martha Coakley that the repeal question is unconstitutional. Casino foes file court papers aimed at repeal To view the brief in it's entirety click here RTCD legal brief Former AG Scott Harshargar stated, “The hurdle is rightly high to deny the people a right to vote. In this case, the proposed question is reasonable, it is well drafted, timely filed and constitutional. Beyond that, we have secured enough signatures and, now, the public is clearly starting to lean against the industry. It’s time to right the balance and let democracy win out.” “The public is clearly moving toward support for a full repeal of this casino law and the industry is rightly getting nervous that our grassroots effort is taking flight and the industry’s promises are proving to be empty, as we predicted,” said John Ribeiro, chairman of the casino repeal campaign. “We always knew the AG was wrong to deny this question – now we know we have the legal arguments to prove it.” Support sustaining the effort to repeal the casino deal by donating now Donate Onward, Paul, John, Kathleen, Steve, Kris and the RTCD team Please like our Facebook page Repeal the Casino Deal
Repeal The Casino Deal Committee ι (617) 701-7823

Recovering gambling addict speaks out in campaign

Recovering gambling addict speaks out in campaign to tackle bookies’ betting games

Owen Baily

Published on the 31 January
2014

For Owen Baily, gambling was an exciting escapist adventure which offered him fast cash and a road to riches.
But it soon became a crippling addiction which saw him spend much of the last decade living on the streets and battling alcohol abuse.

“At my lowest point I was resorting to looking in phone boxes, trying to get enough money together for a tin of baked beans and some bread so I had something to eat,” Owen admits openly.

“With gambling, your money ebbs and flows. Sometimes I was stable and other times I had nothing.

“But I would only really feel comfortable when I was gambling.

“It made me neglect my rent and food, I was destructive and neglectful. It brought me to my knees.”
Owen got his first tastes of gambling while growing up in Boston, and then Sibsey, seeing it as a chance to better himself and win enough cash to live the lifestyle he desired.

“We didn’t have a lot of money when I was young,” he said.

“I saw gambling as the chance to make lots of money quickly and to get the money to buy the things I always wanted.”

Eye-opening adverts for books on ‘how to beat the fruit machines’ in the back of magazines, and playing the two-penny shuffle games on days out in Skegness first switched him onto the ways of gaining money for nothing.

But it wasn’t until he turned 18 and began visiting the arcades and bookies in Boston that Owen started taking gambling seriously.

When family circumstances saw him move to Leamington, Owen’s quest for the high life became magnified when he discovered casinos.

He won big and he lost big, once leaving with £5,000 in his pocket and, on another occasion, seeing £2,000 slip through his grasp in one sitting.

And as the big wins were celebrated and the heavy losses comiserated, Owen found himself turning more to drink to emphasise those highs and mask the lows.

But his life took its greatest turn for the worse when he discovered ‘FOBT machines’.

The Fixed Odds Betting Terminals, to give them their full names, are essentially touch-screen games – such as roulette and virtual horse racing – which you can play on machines in a bookmaker’s shop.

“From my personal experience I find them very addictive,” Owen added.

“Roulette itself is a hard form of gambling. Before the FOBT machines, it was only available in casinos.

“You have to get suited and booted, travel to the casino and also register at the casino. They used to be almost inaccessible. It’s the total opposite now.

“The problem is that you can put money into the machine every 20 seconds.”

Indeed, it is widely recognised that punters can wager up to £100 every 20 seconds on these machines, meaning huge amounts of cash can be lost within minutes.

It was this addiction to the brightly lit and easily accessible machines you see in the bookies in every town that saw Owen become trapped in a vicious downwards spiral.

For a 10-year period, Owen, 31, spent around 90 per cent of his money on gambling.

In doing so, he found himself swiftly flitting between rented accommodation, sleeping rough and hostels, depending on whether the chips were down or not.

As he drifted through life he also drifted across the country, laying his head in Leamington, Canterbury and then on to Oxford.

He explained: “The FOBTs brought the casinos to the high street and made it very accessible.

“The machines give you an illusion of control, whereas casinos can often be busy and you don’t always get the time and space to do what you want at the table.

“In the early days I had a few wins. I could take £10 into the bookies and come out with £500 or £700 in my pocket.

“But whatever I won would end up going back into the machines. I never really won.”

After finally deciding enough was enough, he began seeking help. And here’s where, fortunately, Owen’s story took a turn for the better.

After stays at a residential rehab in Oxford and work with a gambling clinic in London, Owen believes he is now in control of his urges.

Like most addictions, there is often a sense of denial surrounding those trapped in a downward spiral.

But after spending almost a year without placing a bet or having a drink, Owen is ready to share his story.

And the reason he wants to highlight the horrors of frittering away what he coyly describes as thousands of pounds, is because he is a man on a mission.

Instead of channeling his energies on destructive passtimes, he is now fighting to raise awareness of the dangers he believes these machines hold – helping a campaign that wants to limit the amounts that can be gambled on FOBTs and ultimately ban them,

Owen hopes the errors which have plagued his life throughout his 20s can act as a deterrent to the many people who could find themselves following the path he began taking as a youngster in Boston.

“The demographic of people who use these machines are often young people on benefits,” he continued.

“And you can quite quickly lose all your dole money on them - they’re very seductive.

“At first I felt they offered me hope, but really they destroyed me.”

And does Owen - who currently lives and works in Oxford - see himself ever slipping back into his old life?

“I never want to go back to that,” he said firmly.

“The buzz I get from living my life now is far greater than the buzz I ever got from gambling.”

Follow Owen on Twitter at @galiberation or learn more about how to combat gambling addiction by visiting www.stopthefobts.org

http://www.bostonstandard.co.uk/news/business/business-news/recovering-gambling-addict-speaks-out-in-campaign-to-tackle-bookies-betting-games-1-5846994

 

Defeating Goliath! Congratulations Palmer!

We should all be proud of what the hard work of activists accomplished!

They were outmanned, outspent and the media coverage grossly lopsided, yet they got their message out.

Pity Mohegan Sun couldn't behave like adults in the face of their unexpected loss.


FROM EMMALADD SHEPHERD:

There's no way that I can list all the people who worked so hard to defeat Mohegan Sun. If I started listing them, I know I'd forget some!!

For all of you, thank you so very much for all your hard work. As we found out last night, it paid off. And our little David did defeat Goliath!!!

Emy

Casino

November 6, 2013

Our hard work paid off – our little grassroots organization defeated the huge casino giant and their millions of dollars.

A couple, who own lots of buildings in downtown Palmer, in September, offered us the use of a storefront for our headquarters. Several people volunteered to staff it so that it could be open to the public about 20+ hours per week. We were able to hand out lawn signs (which got stolen, but that’s another story), assign people to standouts, sign up people to do door-to-door canvassing and generally give people a place to visit.

I am convinced that this was the turning point of opposition. As time went on, we discovered that many, many people were opposed, but were afraid to come out. The Mohegan people were intimidating.

I took part in a couple of standouts, but then I got trashed on the “yes” facebook page. “EmmaLadd Shepherd should to back to Monson where she belongs and mind her own business,” was the mildest one. So I decided that I was hurting the campaign by being so out there. I staffed the headquarters so that Palmer people could go out publicly.

Yesterday, during the election, I stayed in the office so that the Palmer people could stand outside the polls.

Nelson and Beverly Pease, the landlord, brought in a TV and food for our post-election party. Which was, of course a victory party!

Pandemonium broke out, 5 minutes after the polls closed and the final vote was announced on Ch 22. Shouting, crying, hugging, jumping up and down, Champagne was broken out! The voter turnout was unprecedented – 66%

I’m still in a daze.

When I left our headquarters last night, I swung around where the Mohegan had their headquarters. They’d basically folded their tents and left. The storefront was dark.

Of course they’re going to ask for a recount. The vote was close – only 93 votes – but I don’t believe they can find that many votes.

Anyway, I’m still in a daze. Ch.22 was at our headquarters when the vote was announced. The reporter tried to interview me – I think I just babbled at her.

");