The pretense that $$$ will magically fall from the heavens to fund the continued expansion of Predatory Gambling is clearly displayed in Maryland.
Gambling Market Saturation will lead to tax breaks and taxpayer funded bailouts, as history repeats itself, much as in Massachusetts.
In a world where political ads have taken over
Question 7 brings Maryland a taste of election year air wars
With about a month to go before Election Day, I know it won't be long before
the commercials get even more ominous. Any day now, I'm sure I'll see one that
starts, in that scary-movie-trailer voice, "In a world in which …"
I can even provide the rest of the ad copy:
For the vote-yes-on-Question-7 set: "In a world in which gambling isn't
expanded in Maryland, unemployment will rise to new heights and those out of
work will sink to new lows. They will be so desperate to feed their families,
there isn't anything they won't do …"
For the anti- side: "In a world in which gambling interests run wild from
Rocky Gap to
Ocean City, or at least from National Harbor to
Rosecroft, there will still be no money for education. Children will go to
schools that have no books, teachers will beg from street corners …"
As The Baltimore Sun has been reporting, supporters and opponents of
expanding gambling in Maryland are expected to spend close to $20 million in a
war of persuasion over Question 7 on the November ballot — more than over the
last gubernatorial race, in fact.
Much of that is for the ads that already seem to be running nonstop — except
for the occasional relief of a Rob Sobhani spot — on why you should or shouldn't
vote for a sixth casino and table games for all.
I guess this is what it's like to live in a swing state, or somewhere that
the super PACs can spend any amount they want to call their opponents kitten
torturers or salsa double-dippers or whatever. I didn't realize until this year
that in Maryland, there's no limit to the amount that can be spent on issue
campaigns.
Which means that we have our own air war over Question 7, courtesy of the
seemingly bottomless pockets of casino interests that are lining up — on both
sides of the issue.
Does that surprise you? Did you think the question was new casino or no new
casino? Poker or no poker?
No, the real question is: MGM Resorts or Penn National Gaming? It's become
their fight more than ours.
In our long-running and never-ending agita over gambling, we're at the point
where the fight is basically which company gets to rake it in. Whatever battle
we were fighting over gambling is over; the casinos are just fighting over the
spoils.
So this time around, we have
MGM wanting to open a casino at the National
Harbor complex in Prince George's County. And on the other, we have
Penn National, which has a slots parlor in Perryville and a big casino in nearby
Charles Town, W.Va. — and dreams of a casino in its Rosecroft Raceway in Prince
George's.
They're not the only gambling interests with skin in the game —
Caesars
Entertainment, which has an affiliate that has the license for the still-unbuilt
Baltimore City slots parlor, has also kicked in more than $1 million in support
of the gambling expansion because they wouldn't mind some table game action as
well. Throw in a bit from developers and unions who stand to benefit from
expanded gambling, and you're talking some
real money, to influence legislators
who met in special session to put the issue up for referendum as well as the
current ad war.
The ads, of course, play out civic- rather than business-minded. There's
concern over jobs and education funding, or
outrage over secret meetings and tax
breaks. Pay no attention to the scuffling behind the curtain of a bunch of
gambling companies fighting among themselves.
There are no doubt some real issues that should concern real voters in the
matter of Question 7. But somehow, this seems like a fight I'm watching from the
sidelines. Or rather, on TV.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bs-md-marbella-gambling-ads-20120922,0,4301301.story
Maryland casino ad war fueled by more than $20.5 million from gambling companies
By John Wagner
Published: September 22
The Washington Post
In barely a month, companies with competing stakes in the future of casino gambling in
Maryland
have
already poured more than $20.5 million into the November referendum effort, nearly as much as the candidates spent over the course of the state’s last governor’s race.
The eye-popping sums — which are expected to escalate in coming weeks as the vote draws closer — are being used to fund a seemingly nonstop ad war on television and radio. Some spots tout the jobs and education dollars that would flow from the gambling expansion plan on the ballot; others warn viewers not to get “played” by such promises.
The money has rushed in at a rate of more than $660,000 a day, and on Friday,
a group led by Caesars Entertainment reported ponying up an additional $1.2
million for the pro-expansion cause.
Among proponents, the biggest spender has been MGM Resorts, the gambling
behemoth that owns several casinos on the Las Vegas strip and is angling to
build a new casino in Prince George’s County. So far it has spent
$8.4 million.
There is only one funding source so far on the other side, but it is also a
huge gambling company willing to lay down millions. Penn National Gaming — whose
casino in Charles Town, W.Va., stands to lose from an expansion in Maryland —
has
kicked in $9.5 million to the effort to defeat the ballot
question, which would also allow table games at Maryland’s five previously
authorized slots sites.
The casino that MGM wants to build at National Harbor, the mini-city on the
Potomac River, would literally transform the region’s landscape, becoming one of
the first landmarks motorists see as they cross the Woodrow Wilson Bridge into
Maryland.
It also has the potential to be one of the most lucrative on the East Coast,
drawing residents from the District and Virginia, where casino-style gambling
remains illegal, as well as tourists and other visitors to the Washington area
from around the globe.
The
developer of National Harbor and
the owners of a planned casino in Baltimore have also made
smaller contributions to the pro-expansion campaign.
Penn has two properties in Maryland that arguably could benefit from the
plan: a slots venue in Cecil County, which could draw more patrons with table
games; and
a racetrack in Prince George’s, where Penn could bid to
build a full-fledged casino.
But most analysts say it is more important for Penn to protect the larger
casino it operates in Charles Town, which has been
a favorite of Maryland gamblers, particularly those from
Montgomery County.
That facility stands to take another hit if another
large-scale Maryland casino opens about 70 miles away at National Harbor in
2016, as projected.
What’s unfolding in Maryland “is very much like a high-stakes poker game,”
similar to what has played out in several other states when lucrative casino
licenses are at stake, said William Eadington, an economist at the University of
Nevada at Reno.
“There’s always a gamble you’re not going to prevail,” he said. “But
if you
can spend $30 million to $40 million to win or protect something worth hundreds
of millions, it’s not a bad bet.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/maryland-casino-ad-war-fueled-by-more-than-205-million-from-gambling-companies/2012/09/22/55ac017c-03e4-11e2-91e7-2962c74e7738_story.html
Posts
