It’s difficult to tell how the odds are stacked against Gov. Deval Patrick’s proposal to bring three casinos to Massachusetts, but his appeal to the legislature warrants full consideration of both the full benefits and costs of casino gambling in the Bay State. If carefully crafted, Patrick’s game plan may boost the economy while adequately mitigating casinos’ possible disadvantages.
With House leader Salvatore DiMasi standing firmly against the plan to add three casinos to the commonwealth in the next five years and Senate Speaker Therese Murray supporting the expansion of gaming into Massachusetts, citizens should expect to see a strong showdown in the State House, with facts, studies, sentiments and projections flooding legislative hearings. All the available information, some of it shaded by bias, should be considered by the residents and lawmakers. A rational analysis of disadvantages and revenue possibilities should be thoroughly made before legislators decide to license casino gaming.
With the right regulations and revenue structure, casinos may prove financially beneficial to the Bay State, and a demand proven by the number of Massachusetts residents that flocks to nearby Connecticut to gamble at the Mohegan Sun and Foxwoods casinos might be met.
The quantifiable effects of gambling on a community are negligible, according to a 2005 study from the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. Researchers found generally casinos brought more jobs to a region, but they also drew more people. The result: Employment rates remained about the same around casinos. The researchers also found communities with casinos saw increases in total criminal activity; however, the per-capita rate for criminal activity actually decreased around casinos.
Does this mean casinos deter crime? Hardly, but Massachusetts residents should be prepared to hear what casino advocates and critics have to say, take each testimony with a grain of salt and figure out what casino gaming actually means for the commonwealth.
The Harvard study was completed exclusively with information from Native American-run casinos. These gaming establishments do not follow local or state laws in the same way the casinos proposed by Patrick would have to. If crafted right, the legislature may be able to ensure Patrick’s proposed cut of casino revenues makes it back to the communities, which would be forced to required police and fire departments and transportation infrastructure to accommodate casinos. Patrick should also carry out his promise to set aside funds to study and prevent gambling addiction.
Patrick is planning to boost other parts of the economy in Massachusetts. However, grants for the life sciences and renewable-energy development are less likely to stir debate than gambling. Blue-collar jobs for casino and construction workers will come about from gaming. A faltering state economy necessitates permanent employment at all skill levels; Patrick estimates 20,000 permanent jobs could be created at three casinos.
The risks of gambling addiction are real, and while the governor should not brush aside those who may be susceptible to compulsive gambling and should be sure his proposals to prevent addiction are carried out, casinos are not the only outlet for gambling. The Internet facilitates gambling in Massachusetts, regardless of casinos’ presence. Given the ease of Internet gambling and making high-stakes bets online, state regulations no longer effectively keep casino games out of state.
For college students, the allure of gambling may bring entertainment seekers to casinos on the weekends. The shows, nightclubs, restaurants and bars that accompany the kind of resorts Patrick is seeking will be a draw for young people who are not yet financially secure. The state will need to make a special effort to raise awareness among its large student population that would gamble for the first time in Massachusetts to ensure the thrills of gaming do not endanger financial or emotional stability.
With the possibility of one of Patrick’s proposed casinos landing in East Boston or Revere, local residents and leaders may need to take a strong stance on gaming. From a casino planner’s standpoint, an ocean-front casino near the airport accessible by public transportation is ideal. The stakes for these depressed horse-track communities are high. With Patrick still opposed to slot-machine gaming at race tracks, it is possible that added employment from a casino may lift up these communities with glamorous gaming to replace the fading days of horse racing. If properly planned, casinos may be able to revitalize, rather than depress, East Boston.
All details of the governor’s plan to bring casinos to Massachusetts must be considered. Poorly planned casino gaming could drain the state and enable problem gambling. However, the right approach can ensure gambling pays off for the economy and its residents, both in revenue and entertainment value. With caution, the legislature should favorably consider introducing carefully regulated, risk-mitigated casino gaming in Massachusetts.
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
