Most of the studies I’ve been reading conclude that casinos tend to result in (direct) net loss in state revenues, indicating that taxpayers wind up funding, to at least some small extent, the weekend getaways of our neighbors. It’s not crystal clear, since upticks in regional economic activity may have a counter-balancing effect, but in terms of the ratio of revenues derived via direct taxation vs. indirect expenses due govt oversight etc., a reasonable case can be made that casinos may not, over the long-term, result in increased prosperity across the Commonwealth, and may in fact eat up a larger share of each family’s tax burden. I’d run with that.

But it seems unwise to me to throw to throw everything along with the kitchen sink against casino development. While I’ve never bought a lottery ticket in my life and my sole experience with casinos meant racing through the ones on the AC boardwalk in order to get to the beach, I’m very uncomfortable with attacks on the so-called “working class mentality,” and I can’t presume to judge (publicly, anyway) the amusements indulged in by my fellow citizens. We all have our vices–even you and I–do we not?

I believe the anti-casino movement shoots itself in the foot when it adopts the moral high ground–it’s an easy way to alienate the many people who responsibly gamble–e.g., at my last place of business, nearly EVERYONE joined the ranks of those MA residents who dropped $12 billion in out-of-state casinos over the past 12 years. They weren’t destitute. They weren’t wildly irresponsible. They worked long, hard hours at seriously shitty jobs, and, yeah, rather than saving every last dime so that maybe, someday, they could afford solar voltaic cells, they’d head off with their spouses for a weekend vacation at Foxwoods or Mohegan Sun. Not because they believed for a moment they were make big a big score–but because they liked (for whatever reason) the ambiance and the thrill of the craps table. Not my idea of a good time, but I can hardly begrudge them that.

And I’m guessing that most folks who oppose casinos take the odd weekend and spend some money on pure, unadulterated fun–should the better-heeled be allowed their “wholesome” pleasures (which generally involve the same amounts of gasoline getting wherever and likely even greater associated expenses), while Wigan Pier needs to be told that they be should be investing in energy-efficient appliances?  

I’m politically engaged because I feel VERY strong about how our TAX dollars are spent (which is why I might lean against casino development) but a neo-puritanical stance (gambling bad, inebriation bad!), which insists in telling people how they should be disposing of their meager discretionary incomes is, I think, better left to the pulpit than the podium–damning them for squandering their money rather than upgrading their washing machines is only going to alienate most of the people I know.

There are certain pretty strictly-defined grounds upon which to oppose casinos, but taking on gambling in general–and, in a sense, “human nature,” which means, sure, that many of us often act against what MAY be our long-term best interests–isn’t a winner.

All that said, thanks for drawing attention to the evils of the lottery, especially as someone else pointed out that legalizing  casinos might cannibalize the lottery. Which is debatable at best: while Tim Cahill was predicting a 3-8 percent drop in lottery revenues, the 2005 Harvard-Kennedy School of Government study (see p. 11) suggested minimal substitution. But in any case, banning big bad casinos in part because they’d  cut into lottery revenues is a strange argument to be made, when state lotteries themselves have been shown to “induc[e] about one-quarter of the adult population who would not otherwise have done so to participate in commercial gambling,” and when “Dr. Lance Dodes, who runs Massachusetts’ largest outpatient treatment center for problem gamblers says that lottery players comprise 44% of his patients.” But I’m wondering … would you extend the logic around the socials ills of casinos to the state lottery and rescind it?)

All this, btw, from someone who abhors casinos (I’m not arguing your central proposition)–but also someone who enjoys putting a few bucks (when he has ’em) on the sports book, who is no stranger to inebriation, who isn’t looking to exchange renting for home ownership, who’d just as soon see his own kids learn to live on little and work with their hands … and who thereby does, I’m afraid, very much share that “working class mentality.”

Cyndi nailed it nicely. And so did these gentlemen.