Speaker's predatory gambling proposals fail, "sniff test"

Speaker’s predatory gambling proposals fail “sniff test”

(Boston) – In a rare address to members of the House, Speaker DeLeo reaffirmed his support of governing by gimmicks versus real reform and economic development. Less than a year after being a chief architect of the 25% sales tax increase he stated that he does not support more taxes; he continued by endorsing special interests in his district and proposing state sponsored expanded predatory gambling revenue, slots/casinos, often called “a tax on the poor”.

Sound public and fiscal policy promote the public good, do no harm, increase opportunity and are sustainable. Speaker DeLeo does not seem to be aware that all legislation needs to be measured against philosophical and prudent benchmarks. His remarks reveal that his governing criteria do not include the basic tenants of legislative leadership by stating that his proposals to expand predatory gambling are “not philosophical”.

While bi-partisan and non-partisan leaders across the state including Governor Patrick, Attorney General Martha Coakley, the Mass Chiefs of Police Association, United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts (USS Mass), League of Women Voters, Mass Council of Churches, National Association of Social Workers MA-chapter, Mass Family Institute, numerous statewide organizations and individuals are calling for a fresh independent cost-benefit, data-driven analysis of expanded gambling before legalizing slots or any additional form of predatory gambling, the Speaker has rejected this necessary quantitative and qualitative approach.

AG Coakley stated at legislative hearings in 2009, “Before the legislative debate on gaming even begins, the Commonwealth must have the law enforcement tools necessary to combat potential illegal influences both during the legislative debate and after proposed legislation becomes law in the Commonwealth.” When asked how much that would cost, she replied, “expensive”.

Recent focus on the concentration of political power, ethical and legal problems associated with Legislators in the Commonwealth and the long history of corruption associated with the gambling industry requires elected officials to step-back and re-evaluate the proposals to legalize predatory gambling, slots/casinos.

Voters repeatedly state that politicians are not listening to their concerns including the negative fiscal impacts slots/casinos have upon entire regions, small businesses and local economies. The Globe released a poll (January 2010) that showed the majority of respondents (38%) oppose any form of expanded gambling, (30%) support casinos and (3%) support racinos/slot parlors.

Citing the long term economic drain, negative regional fiscal impacts, social and legal costs associated with predatory gambling slots/casinos, Kathleen Conley Norbut, president, USS Mass stated, “Mr. Speaker back-door taxes and gimmicks are not the way to gain the people’s trust.”

No back-room deals for slots and predatory gambling!

January 26, 2010


Dear Honorable Legislator:

Attorney General Martha Coakley has joined Governor Patrick, the Mass Chiefs of Police Association, United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts (USS Mass), League of Women Voters, Mass Council of Churches and numerous statewide organizations and individuals calling for an independent cost-benefit, data-driven analysis of expanded gambling before legalizing slots or any additional form of predatory gambling. AG Coakley stated at legislative hearings, “Before the legislative debate on gaming even begins, the Commonwealth must have the law enforcement tools necessary to combat potential illegal influences both during the legislative debate and after proposed legislation becomes law in the Commonwealth.” When asked how much that would cost, she replied, “expensive”.

Recent focus on the concentration of political power, ethical and legal problems associated with legislators in the Commonwealth and the long history of corruption associated with the gambling industry requires elected officials to step-back and re-evaluate the proposals to legalize predatory gambling, slots/casinos.

The people voiced their ire with “business as usual” in Massachusetts politics in the recent US Senate election. Voters repeatedly state that politicians are not listening to their concerns including the negative fiscal impacts slots/casinos have upon entire regions, small businesses and local economies. The Globe released a poll (January 2010) that showed the majority of respondents (38%) oppose any form of expanded gambling, (30%) support casinos and (3%) support racinos/slot parlors.

The Western MA Casino Task Force is joined by municipal officials across the state with the following recommendations:

Comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of slot parlors and mega-casinos.
The legislature will perform a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis and develop data-driven budgets by region that account for fiscal revenues and both operating and capital investment expenses. Benefits/revenues will result from income and property taxes, license fees, job creation, reduction of welfare rolls, and ancillary economic development for regional businesses. Costs/expenses will result from capital investment projects, infrastructure expansion and maintenance thereof; mitigation compensation to affected regional communities for issues defined in the paragraphs below; and state and regional oversight and administration expenses.

The cost-benefit analysis will address but not be limited to costs such as the expansion of the Attorney General’s office for regulation, enforcement, investigation, prosecution, auditing; Gaming Commission personnel, equipment, operating budget, software and all consultants; gambling addiction services; state and local police and overtime; domestic violence advocates at district courts serving the regions impacted by proposed expanded gambling; expanded prison and corrections services; financial counseling; subsidized health care costs for transient workers and workers not covered by proposed expanded gambling health insurance.

USS Mass represents the people of the Commonwealth, not lobbyists or corporations. The people are sending you a message, no back-room deals for slots and predatory gambling.

Sincerely,


Kathleen Conley Norbut, M.Ed., LMHC
United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts
USS Mass
PO Box 376
Palmer, MA 01069
www.uss-mass.org

Gambling Support Declines

Gambling Support Declines

(Boston) – United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts (USS Mass) a non-partisan statewide coalition has provided education to legislators, citizens, organization and the Administration on the net costs of legalizing expanded gambling. The long term economic drain and saturation of the market has citizens re-thinking expanding gambling, especially as the costs to taxpayers emerge in other states.

“Statewide leaders including Governor Patrick and the Mass Chiefs of Police Association are joining the USS Mass coalition in the call for an independent comprehensive cost-benefit analysis before legalizing predatory gambling, slots and casinos,” stated USS Mass president, Kathleen Conley Norbut. “It is time for citizens in the Commonwealth to be told the whole story of the costs and impacts of slot parlors, racinos and slot casinos.”

Today’s Globe released a recent poll with evidence of the waning support for expanding gambling in the Commonwealth.

As for expanded gambling, which Patrick and lawmakers are currently negotiating, 33 percent said they support creating resort casinos, while only 3 percent supported adding slot parlors at the state’s race trace track; 16 percent said they had no preference, and 38 percent said they don’t want expanded gambling in the state.

For more information on the comprehensive costs and impacts of slot parlors, racinos and slot casino, please do not hesitate to contact USS Mass.

Massachusetts Sends First Woman to the US Senate

Headlines - January 20, 2010. "Massachusetts Sends First Woman to the US Senate" After centuries, decades, years, weeks and long days of women working for campaigns to elect men in the Commonwealth, do we think it's time for the most qualified candidate, who is a woman, to get elected to the US Senate?