| New House speaker gives gambling supporters hope |
When the chips have been on the table, proponents of expanded gambling have come away losers with the Legislature every time.
Like a biennial ritual, supporters of slot machines and casinos will come forward with new ideas and new proposals for each two-year session and cite the economy or change in legislative leadership for reasons to be optimistic.
This time, it is new House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi, D-Boston, who is giving gambling supporters hope, if only because he is seen as more gambling-friendly than his predecessor, Thomas M. Finneran.
But is it all just talk drummed up by gambling interests, or will the next legislative vote on gambling be any different?
State Rep. Daniel E. Bosley, D-North Adams, an opponent of expanded gambling, thinks there is reason to believe that DiMasi will be receptive to reopening the debate.
"I think every speaker likes to take a fresh look at everything, but that isn't meant to imply that slot machines are going to go into the racetracks," said Bosley, chairman of the Government Regulations Committee.
Bosley, who was a key advisor to Finneran on gambling issues, said he does not believe the conclusion will be any different than past debates.
Even supporters of legalizing more gambling are split over whether the House or Senate will change its tune.
"I think that the speaker will be apt to start from square one and take a look at it," said Rep. David M. Nangle, D-Lowell, an ally of DiMasi's. "I think he's going to look at what's best for the citizens of the entire commonwealth. I don't think it has anything to do with what the previous speaker's policies were."
Rep. Robert A. Hargraves, R-Groton, another proponent, had a less optimistic view. He cited the fact that the state's budget deficit has been reduced in scope from $3 billion two years ago to a projected $1 billion for this year.
"The financial picture in the state is a lot better than it was two years ago, and that may have an impact on the future of the gambling issue. My gut feeling is that it probably won't fly. I don't know how [DiMasi] feels about it. I don't have a read on him," Hargraves said.
In 2003, the House voted 81-65 against a proposal that would have authorized 1,000 Las Vegas-style slot machines at each of the state's four racetracks: Wonderland, Suffolk Downs, Plainridge and Raynham-Taunton. The House also voted to preclude further debate on the issue until January 2005.
DiMasi, who was then House majority leader, joined most of the House leadership in rejecting the plan. Since becoming speaker, he has not said publicly whether gambling is a non-issue next year, or whether the debate would be a priority.
Senate President Robert E. Travaglini, D-East Boston, whose district includes both Wonderland and Suffolk Downs, has been supportive of slot machines at the tracks, which some track operators say could more than triple their employment, mostly for restaurants.
Several representatives and senators have filed legislation for the next session which are similar to past proposal. Most focus on the "racino" model, which allows tracks to offer video lottery terminals in addition to pari-mutuel wagering. Other plans would legalize three casinos, two in southeastern Massachusetts and one in western Massachusetts.
Although the budget deficit has been shrunk, some state lawmakers said the state is still more than two years away from being on solid financial footing, and that the crisis is being downplayed.
Sen. Steven C. Panagiotakos, D-Lowell, one of the top budget-writers in the Senate, is one of the most vocal supporters of expanded gambling in the Legislature. He acknowledged an ebb in the debate over casinos and slot machines over the past year, but as pressure mounts to balance the state budget, he predicted interest will build.
"It will become a priority as pressure for revenues increase. It's certainly more palatable to many than a tax increase, and it should probably be our first avenue that we pursue before a tax increase," said Panagiotakos, who supports both full-scale casinos as well as slot machines at the state's racetracks.
State officials are bracing for a Supreme Judicial Court ruling that may order the state to spend hundreds of millions more dollars to improve low performing schools. At the same time, Massachusetts is at risk of losing $600 million in Medicaid dollars because the federal government is considering changing the way it allows states to reimburse hospitals.
Panagiotakos said pressure to balance the budget this year could be higher than ever and gambling must be an option.
Gov. Mitt Romney said he detects little interest in expanded gaming as a means of balancing the state budget. He added that he will not propose it in his budget for fiscal 2006, scheduled for release next month. When Romney first took office, he had proposed a plan for slot machine parlors as a source of revenue.
"There has not been a lot of legislative interest in pursuing that source of revenue," he said.
Sen. Michael W. Morrissey, D-Quincy, the Senate chairman of the Government Regulations Committee, told the Patriot Ledger that many lawmakers might choose expanded gambling over new taxes.
"There is a big mass of people who are indifferent, like me," Morrissey said. "But don't come to me and ask me to vote to raise taxes. Our need for cash is what will make this move."
Bosley said it is not possible to only allow slot machines at the racetracks and still preclude full-fledged casinos. His interpretation of the federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act is that once a state allows Vegas-style gambling such as video lottery terminals, it opens the door for a federally recognized tribe to open a casino.
Massachusetts only has one tribe recognized by the federal government, the Wampanoags of Aquinnah. But others, including both Nipmuc tribes in Sutton and Dudley, were denied federal recognition this year.
Bosley also believes it is a "fallacy" that slot machines can save the racing industry, but that the track owners will likely pocket the new revenue from the slot machines.
Supporters of expanded gambling were bolstered by a new study this month by the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth, which found that installing 1,000 slot machines at each of the state's four racetracks would generate at least $300 million.
Professor Clyde W. Barrow, who directed the study, said $100 million of that revenue would be captured from two Rhode Island slot parlors, Lincoln Park and Newport Grand.
The study, based on a gambling behavior survey of 1,100 randomly selected people, estimated that Massachusetts residents spend more than $1 billion per year in gambling venues in Connecticut and Rhode Island.
Barrow described slot machine players as a "drive-time-sensitive" group of people, who would likely be attracted to a slot machine parlor that was within 30 miles of their homes.
It is a different group, Barrow said, than the Massachusetts residents that go to the Foxwoods or Mohegan Sun casino resorts in Connecticut.
In fact, his study found that 89 percent of the people who go to the Connecticut casinos do not go to Lincoln Park.
"If all the state is looking to do is raise revenues quickly, then racinos will accomplish that," Barrow said. "Casinos require a minimum $500 million investment from the state. The day it opens, it doesn't have to be the size of Foxwoods, but it has to be comparable in terms of the range of gambling offered."
But Bosley questioned the depth of research into Barrow's study, and he insisted that racinos would have an impact on the state's $900 million lottery, and that they would not result in many new jobs or impact tourism.
Source: Pepperell Free Press
Friday, 31 December 2004
Copyright 2002-2008 © All rights reserved. • Casino Domain
|
|
|
