Gambling is Social Justice Issue

More Than a Vice, Gambling is Social Justice Issue

By: Russell MoorePosted: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 
Section: Columns on Church and Theology

Kentucky, the state where I live, is abuzz these days with discussion over expanded gambling. The governor wants it, and conservative Christian groups don't. This argument is hardly limited to Kentucky.

I lived through it in my ancestral home on the Mississippi Gulf Coast, as the casino industry promised an economic turnaround if voters would just give it the right to exist.

Almost every state is involved in some discussion of state-sponsored gambling.
I think there are bigger issues involved than how they are typically framed.

First of all, pro-gambling elected officials aren't evil villains (necessarily). Yes, some of them are personally corrupt and poised to profit from the industry they are enabling.
But many of these elected officials have good aims. They want to educate children, build infrastructure and so on without raising a tax burden.

I think gambling is an illusory way to do this, but, still, I acknowledge good intentions at the root of some of the cheerleaders for the industry.

But, unfortunately, I think both proponents and opponents of expanded gambling see this as merely a "values" issue.

Of course, conservative Christians don't support gambling because they see gambling as immoral, so they want it illegal.

These Christians also see drunkenness as immoral and so, if they could, the reasoning goes, they'd be right back at Prohibition.

But gambling isn't merely a "values" issue. Neither is it primarily a "moral" issue, at least not in terms of what we typically classify as "moral values" issues. Gambling isn't primarily a question of personal vice. If it were, we could simply ask our people to avoid the lottery tickets and horse-tracks, but leave it legal.

Gambling is a social justice issue that defines how it is that we love our neighbors and uphold the common good.

Gambling is a form of economic predation. Gambling grinds the faces of the poor into the ground.

It benefits multinational corporations while oppressing the lower classes with illusory promises of wealth, and with (typically) low-wage, transitory jobs that simultaneously destroy every other economic engine of a local community.

In the end, the casinos will leave. And they'll leave behind a burned-over district with no thriving agricultural, manufacturing or tourism economies.

In the meantime, they leave behind the wreckage of "check-to-cash" loan sharks, pawn shops, prostitution and 1-2-3 divorce courts.

Conservative Christians can't talk about gambling if we don't see the bigger picture.
First of all, most of the "market" for gambling comes from those in despair, seeking meaning and a future.

The most important thing a church can do to undercut the local casino is to preach the gospel. By that I don't just mean how to get saved (although that's certainly at the root of it).

I mean the awe-filled wonder in the face of the really good news that Jesus is crucified and resurrected, the old dragon is overthrown.

Second, we must understand that gambling is an issue of economic justice.

We can't really address the gambling issue if we ignore the larger issue of poverty.

Evangelicals who don't care (as does Jesus, the prophets and the apostles) about the poor can't speak adequately to the gambling issues.

By this I don't simply mean caring about individual poor people but about the way social and political and corporate structures contribute to the misery of the impoverished (James 5:1-6).

We will never get to the nub of the gambling issue if we don't get at a larger vision of poverty and the limits of commercial power.

This means asking the state not to use acquisitiveness and covetousness to separate people from their means of living.

It also means modeling a different kind of ethic in our churches. The power of gambling lies in a vision of the "good life," and that's a vision that is co-opted by the gambling industry, not created by it.

It is fueled by our fallen vision of limitless growth, of limitless acquisition.

Let's oppose state-empowered gambling, but let's do so while loving the poor the industry seeks to devour.

Let's work toward rebuilding families, honoring honest labor and encouraging the flourishing of communities in which the impoverished are not invisible.

Too many of our "opponents" see us as morally prissy Victorians who don't want people doing "naughty" things in our presence.

Let's demolish that pretense by being the gritty colony of the kingdom that sees the economically downtrodden among us as, when in Christ, "heirs of the kingdom" (James 2:5).

And let's hold out a vision, for all of us, of an inheritance that comes not through predation, and not through luck, but through sonship, through grace.

http://www.ethicsdaily.com/more-than-a-vice-gambling-is-social-justice-issue-cms-19290

No shots fired in war on gambling

During Senator Spilka's Casino Love Fest, it was made clear that the state becomes the largest shareholder in promoting addictive behaviors. Sort of like the gambling pimp for the Commonwealth.

.

Surely, some scoffed. Here's the experience from Down Under --

.

"Governments are involved in nearly every aspect of gambling. They act as suppliers, tax collectors and police." That makes state governments extremely conflicted when it comes to addressing problems attached to the way the gambling industry operates.
.

Of Government Addiction to Gambling Revenue and Those Ever Escalating Expenses --

.
The irony of state government dependence on gambling taxes is that while the money is valuable in the short term to budget bottom lines, in the long term the effects of problem gambling on the community are felt through increased government spending on welfare, health assistance and counselling services.

Impartial studies indicate that for every $1 in tax revenue generated, gambling costs $3.

Non-government organisations such as Mission Australia have estimated that those costs ultimately outweigh the tax take...

Of Regressive Taxation and Social Inequality --

Poker machines are mostly used by lower socioeconomic communities (confirmed by the Productivity Commission). It makes for highly regressive taxation; that is, taxation targeted at low-income earners, punishing the poor far more than the rich. A good Labor leader should philosophically support redistributive taxation policies ahead of regressive gambling revenue streams.

Of the flawed argument about freedom --

Liberal politicians are likelier to shy away from doing something to curb the growth of gambling for philosophical reasons. Anyone supportive of free-market economics and freedoms of choice may suggest the right to gamble is an individual right. This ignores research that shows problem gambling is an illness that, as with alcoholism, restricts free will.

Campaign contributions --

...the consequence has been that the gambling industry donates far more substantially to the Labor Party than to the Coalition.

If the states are not addicted to the taxation revenue from gambling, the Labor Party is surely addicted to the campaign donations the industry throws its way.

Of Gambling Addiction Contributing to Homelessness --

Figures show that as many as 100,000 Australians are classified as homeless.

If the MPs took the time to ask those at the [homeless] shelters what factors contributed to them being there, they would have heard tales of gambling addiction as a contributing factor.

This is worth reading in its entirety.

No shots fired in war on gambling


Peter van Onselen, Contributing editor October 24, 2009

IN September 2007, then prime ministerial aspirant Kevin Rudd pledged to do something about the rise of poker machines across the country, after an ABC investigation into the effect of problem gambling in NSW.

"I hate poker machines and I know something of their impact on families," he said. He promised to find a way to reduce the reliance of state governments on poker machine tax revenue, the nub of the problem.

We now know that Rudd hates poker machines so little that the only recommendation in the Productivity Commission's draft report into gambling (released this week) that his government has committed to act on is to lift restrictions on online gambling sites within Australia.

In other words, measures that will add to the gambling industry, not take away from it.

State government dependence on gambling revenues is staggering. In the nation's two largest states, NSW and Victoria, gambling receipts make up about 12 per cent to 15 per cent of taxes collected annually. With the exception of Western Australia, dependence on gambling revenues are similar in other states.

As far as the rest of the Productivity Commission report is concerned, the federal government will think seriously about which way to jump on the recommendations when the final report is handed down next year. In this all-important public policy area - one that substantially contributes to social disadvantage - the Labor government will have done nothing to curb problem gambling in its entire first term in office. Is it any wonder Rudd is at risk of becoming a prime minister who goes down in the history books as someone who promises a lot but delivers little?

The Productivity Commission points out: "Governments are involved in nearly every aspect of gambling. They act as suppliers, tax collectors and police." That makes state governments extremely conflicted when it comes to addressing problems attached to the way the gambling industry operates.

Good public policy dictates that poker machines should be restricted to casinos, not lined up in every pub and club on the continent.

It is also the reason federal action is required. States are too conflicted. The Productivity Commission, in its draft report, notes that universal action across state borders is the only coherent way to do something about the hundreds of thousands of Australians who have a problem with gambling. Given that Rudd likes to spruik a commitment to co-operative federalism, here's a chance.

If Rudd is to live up to his rhetoric on this subject it will be costly to taxpayers. The Productivity Commission notes: "The gap between commonwealth grants to the states and their fiscal needs have to be filled through the states' limited avenues for own-source revenue. These include gambling." This is vertical fiscal imbalance: the fact the federal government collects most of the tax revenue but the states, on the service delivery end of government, do most of the spending. Unless Rudd can find a way to substitute gambling tax revenue with adequate commonwealth assistance, state administrations can't cut gambling tax dependence (thereby curbing access to gambling options) without harming frontline services.

WA is the exception. It can afford not to depend on gambling revenues (and doesn't) because the mining-rich west secures a bumper allocation of mining royalties each year. Pubs and clubs in the west are not permitted to house poker machines.

The irony of state government dependence on gambling taxes is that while the money is valuable in the short term to budget bottom lines, in the long term the effects of problem gambling on the community are felt through increased government spending on welfare, health assistance and counselling services.

Non-government organisations such as Mission Australia have estimated that those costs ultimately outweigh the tax take, but only through time.

Electoral politics tends to dictate that governments want to appear fiscally prudent, which means they can't just clock up debt while waiting for the economic benefits of reform to trickle through the economy.

Poker machines are mostly used by lower socioeconomic communities (confirmed by the Productivity Commission). It makes for highly regressive taxation; that is, taxation targeted at low-income earners, punishing the poor far more than the rich. A good Labor leader should philosophically support redistributive taxation policies ahead of regressive gambling revenue streams.

Liberal politicians are likelier to shy away from doing something to curb the growth of gambling for philosophical reasons. Anyone supportive of free-market economics and freedoms of choice may suggest the right to gamble is an individual right. This ignores research that shows problem gambling is an illness that, as with alcoholism, restricts free will.

In any case, for Labor the concept of the nanny state is not a foreign one and Rudd has shown a willingness to philosophically support active state growth. So intervening to do something about gambling, as Rudd pledged to more than two years ago, should not take another year before we witness even a beginning of action.

It isn't a lack of public support that is holding back Rudd. No-pokies independent senator Nick Xenophon has shown how popular taking on the gambling industry can be.

So what could be holding back Rudd? The liberalisation of gambling across the nation largely occurred in the 1990s and, perhaps surprisingly, mostly was done by state Labor governments. Rudd knows a little about this. Despite his moral doubts about the influence of gambling on communities when he was trying to get elected as prime minister, as chief of staff to then Queensland premier Wayne Goss he oversaw the introduction of poker machines across the Sunshine State.

It may only have been coincidental that Labor was predominately in power at a state level at the time that poker machines in clubs and pubs proliferated. But the consequence has been that the gambling industry donates far more substantially to the Labor Party than to the Coalition.

If the states are not addicted to the taxation revenue from gambling, the Labor Party is surely addicted to the campaign donations the industry throws its way. It is not just the big end of town connected to gambling that donates to Labor campaigns. Labor clubs operating pokies provide the Labor Party with more than $1million in campaign donations every year. Perhaps pragmatic strategic reasons explain why Rudd's rhetoric on gambling reform doesn't match his preparedness to act.

Soon after he was elected Prime Minister, Rudd insisted his backbenchers each visit a homeless shelter. It was a stunt but a good one. It put his MPs on the frontline of how social disadvantage could manifest itself. Figures show that as many as 100,000 Australians are classified as homeless. If the MPs took the time to ask those at the shelters what factors contributed to them being there, they would have heard tales of gambling addiction as a contributing factor.

Ohio Gambling Opposition

Ohio - Voting "No" on Issue 3 - A Statement from the West Ohio Conference UMC

One of the remarkable strengths of the United Methodist Church is our concern for issues impacting our society in light of our Christian faith and witness. The West Ohio Conference of the United Methodist Church has an excellent informational page on Issue 3. Below is information taken from this website.


Let's do our best to be informed, discern our response to this issue facing citizens of Ohio, and vote in a way that best reflects John Wesley's three simple rules which are 1) Do no harm. 2) Do good. 3) Stay in love with God.


WEST OHIO CONFERENCE UMC STATEMENT REGARDING ISSUE 3:

Dr. Earl Grinols, a Distinguished Professor of Economics, has conducted many studies of gambling’s impact on society. The results? For every $1 gambling generates, it costs $3 in social costs. What are these costs?

CRIME
In counties with neighboring casinos, 8.6% of property crime and 12.6% of violent crimes are caused by casinos. In counties with casinos, the rates are much higher!

The Indiana legislature passed a special $52 million yearly appropriation to increase crime patrol around their casinos.

An estimated 40% of white collar crime has its roots in gambling.

JOBS
A study of Aurora, IL found that only 3% of businesses experienced an increase in revenues after the arrival of the riverboat casinos. The other 97% had experienced a decline resulting in loss of jobs.

In Atlantic City, 25% of small businesses closed 3 years after casinos opened. Prior to casinos, the unemployment rate in Atlantic City was 30% higher than the rest of the state. 10 years later, it is 50% higher than the rest of the state.

Professor Fredric H. Murphy of Temple University proved in his economic impact study of gambling in Philadelphia there would be a net loss of over 4000 jobs if gambling is expanded.

ADDICTION AND CARE OF FAMILIES
If gambling is within 50 miles, the chances of people in your community becoming addicted increase by 50% (75% if your community is poor).
60% of casino revenue comes from those making less than $25,000 per year.

Each time casino companies write an proposed amendment to the Ohio constitution, they include language that benefits them. What’s wrong with Issue 3?

TAXES
The amendment defines transactions to be taxed. Any money made by the casinos on cash games or slot machines would be exempt from the tax, because "cash" is not in the definition of what is taxable.

Penn National is saying that they intend to pay taxes on cash re-ceipts. It does not matter what they say. The language in our Constitution will determine any legal challenges. The only way to change this would be through another statewide ballot issue.

As a publically owned business, Penn National’s investors would be within their legal rights to sue Penn National for paying taxes they are not required by law to pay.
None of the money will go into the state’s General Fund.

AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION FOR A MONOPOLY
The State’s Constitution is the highest legal document. Amending the Constitution to allow for a monopoly is not the proper use of our constitution.

In 2008, Penn National spent millions of dollars to defeat the gambling issue before Ohio voters. One of their own points was that it would enshrine a monopoly in the state’s constitution. Now that it would benefit them, it is no longer a valid point of opposition.

DISTRIBUTION OF MONEY
Proceeds will go to all 88 Ohio Counties based on population. Counties suffering from high unemployment and high poverty will not be major beneficiaries of the money. Those who have will continue to receive more.