« Councilors: A divided council? No way! | Main | Backtalk 09/18/2007 »
September 18, 2007
Casinos 'fun' or 'one big mess'?
By Rita Savard, rsavard@lowellsun.com
Article Launched: 09/18/2007 11:37:36 AM EDT
Stemn
Thinking about it makes Dot LaPlante's fingers twitch.
The whir and ringing of slot machines. The occasional Elvis impersonator. And just a 40-minute drive from home?
"It's so much fun," quips the 62-year-old Billerica resident. "I could sit in front of a slot machine for hours."
If legislators are ready to roll with Gov. Deval Patrick's plan, LaPlante can count herself lucky with not one, but three resort-style casinos going up in different parts of the state -- in the western, southeastern and metropolitan Boston areas. Patrick is betting on the casinos to create thousands of jobs and pump millions in revenue back into the state's cash-strapped communities.
But the plan is already drawing a mixed bag of responses,
Badessa
with opponents fearing that gambling for state funds means selling out on morals.
"It's setting the state up for one big mess," said Lowell resident Gregory Stemn. "Casinos will open more doors for addiction and crime. Casinos will bring a whole lot of unwanted elements to the areas they're in, Fadel they will encourage young people to throw their money away, and the crime rate will go up."
"Who will benefit from this?" asks Stanislav Nekrash of Lowell. "Not the people who are already poor. No. It will make things much worse for them. Human beings will always try to reach prosperity in the easiest way. The poorest will gravitate toward them. ... The poorest lose more money, and the richer benefit from it."
Sipping an iced coffee outside a convenience store in Chelmsford Center,
Miller
Dick Johnson points to the storefront.
"See that?" he says. "Right there. That's a casino. It's naive for people to think that scratch tickets aren't more harmful to the poorest people than casinos. You need more money than a few dollars to go to a casino."
Blackjack. Roulette. Craps.
Let it roll, says Chris Badessa, adding that Massachusetts has been losing "hundreds of millions" in tax dollars to Connecticut and Rhode Island for years.
"Everybody I know is already going
Fernandez
down to Connecticut to gamble," Badessa says. "It's fun, and it will definitely bring in a lot of money for Massachusetts."
Mary Fadel believes there must be some other way to help cash-strapped towns than "destroying the state's image."
"It's a way of making money, but it preys on people's weaknesses," Fadel says. "I don't think it's how we should fund the things we need."
"There are enough casinos already," said Heidi Miller of Groton. "I'd rather see other things built to bring in money, like shopping centers."
Andrew Fernandez of Pepperell says the casinos will lure more businesses and tourists into Massachusetts.
While some believe casinos will turn people into compulsive gamblers, Shayna Ross of Charlestown says that's not the casinos' fault. "If you're a compulsive gambler, you're going to go anywhere you can to spend your money anyway. I guess people just need more self-control."
Whichever way the chips fall on Patrick's proposal, LaPlante says she's not giving up her lifestyle for anybody -- whether it means driving to Boston, Connecticut or Canada.
"The slot machines keep my arms in shape," she laughs.
Tell us what you think of Casinos in MA?
Posted by Admin at September 18, 2007 3:50 PM
Comments
In September 19th edition of The Lowell Sun, in an editorial titled, “Economic benefit of casinos” Governor Deval Patrick writes of his responsible approach and economic benefits to putting three casinos in Massachusetts. The three proposed locations or regions include Revere, Middleboro, and Palmer Massachusetts.
With regards to the locations and distance of these three casinos from The Merrimack Valley, are you as Merrimack Valley residents more or less likely to continue to travel to Connecticut to gamble?
Simply put, are these proposed casinos just too far away for Merrimack Valley residents and Northeast Massachusetts residents to travel to and enjoy?
If it takes an estimated hour and 30 minutes to get to the luxurious Foxwoods resort, why would I bother?
Why would I bother going to Massachusetts casinos, when I can just stay on the road for a little while more and go to the largest casino in North America, or even better just travel North and go play Poker, Roulette, and Craps in New Hampshire for charity.
If the Governor was wise he would consider building a casino(s) in Central Massachusetts where all residents from Massachusetts would have to travel an equal distance to gamble. This way with the estimated $500 million dollars raised from tax revenue can be used on a centralized upgrading of all Massachusetts Highway systems.
Cause truthfully, do you think the taxpayers of Massachusetts are going to see huge property tax credits or any difference on the crappy highways we already travel.
I don’t think so, Legislators will still look for a way to raise toll prices, and the roads we travel will still be worse than the highways in Connecticut.
I know where I'm taking my money, meet me at Foxwoods!
Posted by: Black Bart at September 18, 2007 3:58 PM
A good start
The Lowell Sun
Article Last Updated: 09/18/2007 11:55:47 AM EDT
We applaud Gov. Deval Patrick's proposal to license three resort casinos in Massachusetts, which -- if they come to fruition -- are expected to bring in $400 million to $450 million in much-needed annual tax revenue.
In explaining his plan, Patrick said "casino gambling is neither a cure-all nor the end of civilization."
He's right.
Casinos will not be a panacea for the state's financial woes, but the extra revenue will certainly help to lighten the burden. Massachusetts is losing hundreds of millions of dollars to nearby states, money that could be used to help fund education, health care and senior services if casino gambling were legal here.
We are concerned, however, that the governor's plan does not include gaming devices at racetracks. Because of his decision to exclude slots, we feel his proposal is a good start, but is not quite as good as it could be.
There's little doubt that installing gaming devices at Massachusetts horse and dog tracks would serve to revive that faltering industry, keeping thousands of workers employed and contributing to the state's economy.
A good compromise may be for racetrack owners to submit competitive bids that would combine a resort casino with their current operations. That could allow both businesses to thrive.
Opponents of legalized gambling argue that the state lottery system will lose money and that the cost of increased social ills will seriously cut into revenues.
We consider that to be a specious argument.
Why keep casinos out of Massachusetts when Bay State residents cross the border by the thousands to spend their money at gambling facilities -- as well as shops, restaurants and other businesses? That's cash that could be put to good use here.
The reality is that people who want to gamble are going to gamble -- if not here, then elsewhere. Other states have succeeded with similar enterprises and are reaping the benefits.
Patrick said casinos would generate more than $2 billion a year in economic activity and create "new jobs at good wages." In addition to the casino and other retail jobs, there would be thousands of construction jobs while the facilities are being built.
Massachusetts leaders would be making a costly mistake if they don't support legalized gambling here.
Posted by: The Lowell Sun at September 19, 2007 2:38 PM
