The Central Statistic of Casino Profits

The_Goose_That_Laid_the_Golden_Eggs_-_Project_Gutenberg_etext_19994.jpg  from Wiki

The_Goose_That_Laid_the_Golden_Eggs_-_Project_Gutenberg_etext_19994.jpg from Wiki

When Governor Cuomo in 2012  proposed  new commercial casinos he said they would need regulation.  Casino promoters can’t dismiss the concept,  which  has several aims.  One specific to casinos is to mitigate gambling addiction and problem gambling.*  Promoters don’t deny these  can be outcomes of   “gaming.”  Another goal of regulation, applied also to the banking or securities industries, is to protect investors and tax-collecting entities against in-house predatory practices, organized crime and tax dodges.

Casino owners want regulation of how they handle consumers and accounting about as much as do big banks or brokerages: the least possible.   In any business, regulation hurts profits by constraining practices (say, payday loans) and limiting externalities.  For example, a company no longer free to discharge waste into a waterway faces new costs; raising prices may lose it business if competitors don’t raise theirs too.   Casinos are uniquely  intent on profit for its own sake. For them, that’s the be-all and the end-all.   Typical  industries, even those as controversial as “Big Pharma” or “Big Oil” make a product of real use to someone.  The casino business has only one tangible product,  in which it cannot take pride:  addicted and problem gamblers.  That product fuels it.

The central  statistic  of  casinos:  a  large proportion  (Grinols and Omorow** estimated 35-50%)  of  the  gross returns after winnings are paid out comes from compulsive and  problem gamblers — about 4% of the adult population — who comprise maybe 12.5%  of casino users.  Most of that 35-50% is from addicted gamblers.   From this statistic comes

The central dilemma :  if  casino owners  acted effectively to steer  into lasting recovery all pathological and problem gamblers in their sphere and  to prevent the creation of new ones,  profits would  drop by at least 35%.  How would that play on the bottom line?  Not well at all.

Resolution: publicly express concern on problem gambling but make it go on  under a façade of “prevention”  methods structured to fail.   Accede to customized and toothless “regulation” that won’t interfere with the real business.

Recall the goose that laid the golden eggs.  Casinos do not lay the golden eggs their promoters claim; they are gilded base metal.  Whether the bird’s owner knows this or not,  whether  he stores or markets the eggs,  the owner (assuming  he has more common sense than the yokel in the story, who killed it) will cosset the bird.  He won’t let  anyone  change her diet or re-house her.  To an owner eager for  eggs that look golden, regulation threatens the health of  the goose,  jeopardizing  her output.

Legislators weighing the proposed amendment in New York State to legalize new casinos must ask three questions. “Would those casinos knock themselves out  to profit 35%-50% less than many others do?” That’s obvious: No

“Do I really believe NYS can and will properly regulate casinos if they don’t want it?”    Someone very credulous might say so.  No one else will.

“Is it fair to NYS residents to commend to them, by an “Aye” on second passage,  a sham I don’t believe in.”  The response to that should be a third NO.

*These two categories of  “disordered gambling behavior”  are distinct.  About 1% of North American adults are past-year pathological (addicted)  gamblers, another 3% or so past-year problem gamblers. Sometimes for brevity (not clarity) the two categories are lumped into “Problem Gambling.”

** Grinols, Earl L. and J.D. Omorow (1997) “Development or Dreamfield Delusions? Assessing Casino Gambling’s Costs and Benefits.”   Journal of Law and Commerce 16, 1, 49-87.

The opinions are those of the writer, Stephen Q. Shafer and do not necessarily reflect those of all members of Coalition Against Gambling in New York.  Permission is granted to quote from this post at any length or to reproduce the entire post as long as the source is cited using the permalink above.

 

 

 

.

Under New Management: Business as Usual

Melencolia (A. Durer 1514) file from Wikipedia

Melencolia (A. Durer 1514) file from Wikipedia

A press release dated 20 Feb 2013 announces the formation of  “The Responsible Play Partnership”  to bring together the newly formed NYS Gaming Commission, OASAS (Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services) and NYS Council on Problem Gambling.   The full text may be seen at  http://www.gaming.ny.gov/pdf/press_022013.pdf    I have excerpted one  line and five paragraphs from it, making no changes within the excerpts, which  are in italics.  I have added commentary at the top,  among the paragraphs and at the bottom.

None of the proposed actions is itself a bad idea.  The total package, however,  is wholly inadequate to deal with compulsive and problem gambling in the state now.   Moreover, it takes no account of  new gamblers moving into these two categories  if, as the Governor wants,  seven new casinos are eventually licensed.  Casinos are hardly mentioned.

 … The Responsible Play Partnership will include the following components:

 Swift enforcement of age restriction laws: New York law prohibits gambling under the age of 18 at all OTBs, horse racing facilities and casinos. The current legal purchase age for Lottery tickets is 18 and 21 in establishments that sell alcoholic beverages. Similar to state enforcement efforts that prevent alcoholic beverage sales to underage buyers, the Responsible Play Partnership will help to enforce the age restriction laws for gambling:

  • The Council on Problem Gambling is coordinating with various alcohol and substance abuse councils across the State to carry out underage compliance checks at various locales, with Gaming Commission staff accompanying them. Underage volunteers will attempt to place bets, purchase tickets and/or engage in gambling activities at lottery retailers, Quick Draw locales, off-track betting and E-Z Bet locations, race tracks and video lottery terminal facilities across the state.
  • When violations occur and where possible, Gaming Commission personnel on-hand will issue an immediate notice to the venue outlining the violation and any applicable disciplinary action.
  • Violations could result in fines, suspensions or revocation of an entity’s license to participate or provide such services in New York.

 Comments: 

  • Stiff  barriers  to underage gambling are good.  There is no mention, however,  of  how intensive or extensive  the micro-sting operations will be.  Penalties do not seem stiff —  violations “could”   result in  fines  etc.  
  • I expect the  RPP has no authority over  tribal casinos; thus, no mention here of  including   them.   If  non-tribal casinos are introduced, would the RPP be sending its underage undercover agents into those?
  • Is the RPP going to say anything now about the proposal mentioned in New York Times (21 Feb 2013 pp A19 and A22)  to allow  persons under 21 to play Quick Draw in bars?   If  truly responsible, the RPP should not merely accede to checking on compliance with changes in law that deliberately  increase exposure to gambling.  It should contest such changes.

 Proper resources at facilities to identify and address problem gambling: The Gaming Commission will mandate that VLT locations, off-track betting facilities and race tracks in the State  submit a report indicating how they currently handle individuals showing signs of  being problem gamblers. The Commission will evaluate these measures with OASAS, the Council on Problem Gambling and future partners to issue improved consistent policies to all facility operators.

 Comment:  This empty rule will probably get some token compliance hardly worth the paper it’s written on.   It is impossible  that  any of the listed types of facility will look in good faith for  “signs of being problem gamblers.”  For one thing, they don’t have the staff  in settings (e.g. racinos)  which  improve profit margin by mechanization and depersonalization.  Moreover, they have a fiscal reason to be blind to problems unless they anticipate  frequent  inspection and a harsh penalty for failure.   This brings us  to the central statistic  of predatory gambling:  a large proportion of  the  gross returns after winnings are paid out  comes from the small proportion of the gamblers who are compulsive or problem gamblers.  Grinols and Omorow* estimated 35-50% at the average casino, from about 4% of the adult population.   No  sensible gambling  locale will risk offending its best customers and driving them to a competitor by confronting them with the always-denied suggestion that there might be a problem.    No floor manager wants to be fired for remonstrating, even gently,  with  a  longtime customer  who is sure to deny what is felt as an accusation.

Casinos know a great deal about customers, but can always claim that if someone has left $40,000 on their tables in the last year they have no responsibility to know where that money came from.  Is it chump change to a wealthy heir or is it a spouse’s I.R.A.?   Casinos are off-limits to state regulators now in NYS (as NY casinos are all tribal)  but if non-tribal ones are legalized as the Governor wants,  they would theoretically be very important  in identifying problem gamblers.   A major part of the Governor’s idea for new commercial casinos was to regulate (as well as tax) them in a way that tribal casinos are not regulated or taxed.  It is odd  that the RPP omits casinos in their announcement.

 For that matter, lottery ticket sellers and Quick Draw locales (admittedly thousands of times more numerous than the other settings and harder to monitor) are also exempted from  watching for “signs.”  A small-town convenience store is probably better able to know which neighbor-customer  has a gambling problem than a busy racino, but certainly disinclined to report a worry.  The ticket-seller can always hope that tonight’s pick will at last be the lucky one.

The only persons really motivated to confront and point towards recovery an addicted or problem gambler are those around the gambler who are being exploited and hurt by him or her AND KNOW IT.   All too often these people have been deceived outright or bamboozled by co-dependency and fear into doing nothing effective.  One measure that could help those who are actually deceived by a casino-gambler (as opposed to paralyzed)  is that a monthly statement of wins and losses be mailed to each customer’s home address.  Such laws have been proposed in states with non-tribal casinos, but  never pass.  If  New York gets non-tribal casinos our state should have such a law.

Continue reading

Forgotten collateral damage from government-in-gambling

from Flickr CC

from Flickr CC

What do the fourteen vignettes below have in common?  Can you guess  without the links?

1)      A 42 year old man in Michigan came home, fatally shot his pregnant wife and  their  three  children, then  himself.  http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=94936&page=1

2)      A father of two in VA gunned  down wife and son, shot his 11 year old daughter in the head, then killed himself .   Daughter described events (“bad dream” ),  died 3 days later .  http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-671609.html from Washington Post

3)      Father  in NV  left  7 year old daughter  in arcade under eye of her 14 year old brother.  She was raped and strangled in a bathroom by an 18 year old male. http://articles.latimes.com/2000/jul/07/local/me-48999

4)      An Iowa man just-divorced stabbed to death his ex-wife,  an executive at Arthur Anderson in Chicago.  He then drove off  with  their 7 year old daughter (seat-belted), swerved into oncoming truck.  Both were killed.  http://preview.tinyurl.com/bah4e8r

5)      In St Louis, a woman in her  late 20s was not at home when her 11 children died in a house fire.  http://preview.tinyurl.com/afjjftg

6)      Illinois woman reported death of 7-week old daughter due to SIDS, claimed $200,000 life insurance she had taken out on baby.  Fifteen months earlier another daughter had died at age 17 days.   Mother  had stated  SIDS.   http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1998-03-07/news/9803070058_1_insurance-fraud-dina-abdelhaq-sids

7)      Middle-aged Mississippi woman in good neighborhood shot to death husband and her mother while they slept.   http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2002-04-07/business/0204070020_1_neighbors-home-murder

8)      A  natural gas explosion in a house in Indiana when its occupants were out of town killed the couple next door and blew up five houses. tinyurl.com/cztdo5u

9)      A Rochester NY man strangled his fiancée when they quarreled the day before her bridal shower.   http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-157155335.html

10)   A 7 year old boy drowned in backyard  swimming pool at a day care facility.  The operator was off  the premises. http://articles.philly.com/2013-02-15/news/37102173_1_day-care-center-day-care-staff-members-day-care-office

11)   A Philadelphia grandmother was fatally stabbed and her 10-month old grand-daughter smothered by a 26 year old computer whiz who lived in same apt building.  http://articles.philly.com/2012-11-01/news/34838466_1_ransom-note-indian-expats-ransom-payment

12) A 28 year old man in CA was convicted in 2011 of having bludgeoned his parents to death with a bat in 2008 http://preview.tinyurl.com/bfnxy54

13) 92 year old woman in PA stabbed to death in 2011 by neighbor who had probably burgled her house several times before. http://preview.tinyurl.com/b6p4f3r 

14) added October 10 2014.  A 14 year old boy was left to baby-sit his 6-year sister while father went out with his lady friend,  came home much later  to find both unconscious from CO poisoning.  Little girl died in hospital, brother recovering.

The common threads  are gambling addiction and its  peri-gambler victims.  Gambling addiction and  peri-gambler victims are a predictable outcome, not a side effect,  of governmental policy described with much restraint by one notable critic as “failed.”  He might say “ rapacious and uncaring.”  This policy makes gambling legal not primarily to protect people by strict regulation from something harmful,  but to get government a piece of the action,  then grow the action “to support education.”  Thousands of   lives are hurt and dozens lost in this country each year under this policy. The gambling establishment and  compliant governments get away with it by misrepresenting the econometric costs and benefits and at the same time hiding the toll of unquantifiable human misery that is the direct consequence of this policy.

A frequent gambit by supporters of  government-sanctioned gambling is to say that revenue government gets from its sponsorship or “regulation” of gambling is a “sin tax,”  like  revenue from tax on tobacco or on liquor.   Some persons less moralistic, if more arrogant,  call it a “stupidity tax” or a “tax on ignorance.”  Two huge errors in this argument:

First, taxes on tobacco and alcohol are pigovian, meant as much to dampen consumption as to provide revenue.  The government actually spends money to discourage smoking.  It does not advertise that adults should drink more alcohol to get a shot at a better life and “fund education.”   Contrast this with the approach the NYS Lottery has taken in its nine-figure  advertising outlay of recent years.  Contrast it with Gov, Cuomo’s putting  up-front payments from three (?) new casinos in the proposed budget for 2016  before they  have been made legal.  Governments pretend legalized gambling is overall a beneficent enterprise.  They don’t want to impose tough restrictions or regulations ; those would decrease the flow or kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

Second,  revenues to government from the sale of cigarettes and alcohol are not extracted from the bank accounts and home furnishings of  the  heavy smoker’s or the alcoholic’s family and friends.  Revenues from gambling are.  Smoking and drinking cause dreadful harm in many ways to non-smokers and non-drinkers.  An alcohol abuser can certainly make bad decisions resulting in injury, death  or  financial loss to someone else.  One cannot say, however, that the government set the stage for  the alcohol abuse, nor that government will get revenue if  an alcoholic in a fog sells his house for half its worth.  Another contrast here:   for most addicted and problem gamblers in the USA,  their loss is the direct gain of   the gambling exchange,  which passes a share to government.  The more they drop, the more the government gets.

Someone may still think of the problem gambler or pathological gambler as stupid or ignorant or sinful, deserving to pay a penalty for those defects.  No one with a heart, however, can think of the gambler’s young children or non-gambling spouse or unsuspecting   business partner  as deserving a penalty.  Yet these others are made to pay it, forward, backward and sideways.  It is paid in dollars, in anguish, and sometimes in death.  It is levied on six eight or ten persons for every problem gambler or addicted gambler.  They are forgotten, made expendable.

Who are the victims of predatory gambling?  Some observers see addicted and problem gamblers as victims themselves; others, as undeserving of pity. I consider problem gamblers victims and sufferers, but focus this essay on the peri-gambler victims.   They are always forgotten by legislative analysts.    Much more numerous than addicted and problem gamblers, they suffer more in the aggregate than the latter.

The  lurid stories above, all involving murder or negligence leading to death,  are among the most horrifying from the United States.  Click on the links it you are strong.  For each one like this, however, there are hundreds more that encompass other types of victimization related to the gambling market driven by government calls for more revenue (invariably “for education”) with “no new taxes.”  For example:

Not everyone who kills himself over gambling met the definition of       current  problem  gambler the day before the act. In the story here, from India in 2009, a 24 year old neophyte gambler  lost the meager savings he had set aside for his wife’s next childbirth http://preview.tinyurl.com/d92wfnt .  A near- suicide is  http://readingeagle.com/article.aspx?id=230336.  The gambler used his mother’s credit card to lose $10,000 on-line.  He was 9.

 

In short, government policy to make legalized gambling an ever-growing fount of revenues to itself exploits not only the gamblers, for whom not everyone has much sympathy, but also, in far greater numbers, many people around them for whom everyone must feel compassion.  Sympathy won’t come,  however, until their existence is acknowledged.  The gambling establishment and its supporters in government want to keep it a secret. Groups  like CAGNY and Stop Predatory Gambling have the challenge to shout about it.

“Mercy has a human heart and Pity a human face”   William  Blake, Songs of Innocence

The opinions in this essay are those of the writer, Stephen Q. Shafer MD MPH and do not necessarily reflect those of other members of CAGNY.  This post may be reproduced in part or in its entirety.  Please acknowledge the source using the permalink.

http://cagnyinf.org/wp/2013feb18_forg…nt-in-gambling/

Albany and Art of Deception

Albany and Art of Deception: From the Land Where No Means Yes

by David Colavito

"Peering over the edge" Flickr CC

“Peering over the edge” Flickr CC

Question:  When can state government promote responsible policies without leveling with voters?

Answer:  It can’t.

Question:  Has Governor Cuomo leveled with New Yorkers about his proposal to amend the state constitution to permit casino gaming?

Answer: No

Beyond special interests and hidden agendas, it’s simple.  Public policy initiatives designed to mislead the public aren’t responsible, and when they’re promoted, hang on to your wallet, because you can be sure that same public will eventually be picking up the tab.

In his 2012 state of the state address, Governor Cuomo rolled out his economic development plan that featured, among other things, his proposal to amend the New York State constitution to permit casino gaming.  He implied that those who question whether we should be in the gaming business are the equivalent of delusional because, as he put it, New York is already in the gaming business.  He referred to horse racing and video lottery terminal locations throughout the state as bedrock justification for his assertion.  He waxed, perhaps not eloquently, about the benefits casino gaming would bring to the Empire state.  And he cited, as common-sense, the need to rethink how our state manages gaming, if it’s to stem losses of potential revenue flowing like water out of New York into neighboring casino-permissive states in what might be thought of as a casino siphon.  The Governor came as close to saying as one could without actually saying it: New Yorkers are fools if they don’t get with his program to legalize casino gaming in the Empire State.

And so it was that Mr. Cuomo chose to bury the lead, raising the same tired red flags proponents of similar proposals hope go unnoticed.  It was deeply disappointing for people who took seriously the commitments to transparency and disclosure he’d laid claim to throughout much of his political career.

 Casino gaming is fiction, because casino gambling isn’t a game.  It’s the antithesis of a game, because games aren’t reliant upon participants incurring personal and economic hardships, an immutable aspect of betting against the house.  Medical and law enforcement professionals have long acknowledged that gambling disorders are real and incur substantial costs for society, just as substance abuse and tobacco related diseases do, though you’d never know it from Mr. Cuomo.  And although federal and state governments have for decades derived substantial revenue through taxation on tobacco and alcohol products, they aren’t in the business of promoting either.  But this isn’t about ideological purity; it’s about Mr. Cuomo playing it straight with New York voters, the same ones he needs to ratify changes to the state constitution in order to have his way.  So it’s also about what paths he’ll travel to get his way.

Casino gambling epitomizes wagering against the house, where the house’s odds of winning ensure everyone else must eventually lose, and as every casino owner knows, that’s a very different paradigm than Saturday night card games among friends.   All this isn’t to suggest everyone entering a casino becomes addicted to gambling, anymore than it’s to suggest everyone consuming alcohol becomes an alcoholic.  What it’s saying and not just suggesting is trained professionals tell us gambling disorders are real, and they come with hefty costs to our communities that can greatly exceed benefits.  And if this was intended to be a scholarly work it would also cite documentation of the disproportionately high level of casino revenues obtained from people with serious gambling disorders, sick people in need of help not exploitation from state government.  It’s a predatory business model, because in a variety of ways it arguably cultivates those disorders to facilitate preying upon those so afflicted.  Sound familiar?  It should, at least for those of sufficient age to recall the earlier days of lawsuits against cigarette manufacturers, but with one important twist: the government was party to some of those smoking related lawsuits.   

So appreciating the first red flag raised by the governor is to appreciate gaming for what it is, his euphemism of choice intended to inoculate voters against making an informed decision.

Continue reading

What We Didn’t See Is What We Got

                                          What We Didn’t See Is What We Got

 

8410159320_9203082701I recently posted on  how the NYS Lottery has made itself a role in balancing the State budget. The role is supporter of “education.”   The Governor thinks a like role will make acceptable to the voters the  new casinos he wants as one of his legacies to the State.  Voters know more about the downside of casinos in 2013 than we did about the future of State Lottery in 1966.  That makes for a harder sell. The magic words “for education” could still charm it through.  This 700-word essay has two parts:  (1) a history of  amendments in Article I § 9  starting with the one in 1966 that launched NYS Lottery (2) figures on  NYSL  as of  FY 2012.

             Between 1967 and 1993 there were 485 bills introduced to the legislature to amend Article I, an average of 18/year.  This made Article I one of the most targeted articles. Almost half the proposed changes were to do with gambling, which is in §9 but is not the entirety of that section.   Only two proposals in those 18 years to amend Article I passed both chambers in two legislatures.   Both concerned “charitable” gambling; both were approved by referendum.  In that same era, a total of 61 (1.4%) proposed amendments on all topics passed both chambers in two successively-elected legislatures .  Forty-one (67%) of these 61 passed in a referendum.  

Benjamin and Cusa* mention a total of six amendments to Section 9 between 1939 and 2001.  I reviewed those between 1966 and 2001 in McKinney’s.

1939 pari-mutuel (OTB legalized 1970)

1957 charitable gambling with many restrictions

  • 1966 State Lottery “implementing language” followed
  • 1975 amendment of wording on charitable gambling
  • 1984 further rewrites about wording on charitable gambling
  • 2001 small change in § 9 “fireman” to” firefighter.”  Many such small changes throughout entire Constitution, most of which were to replace gender specifying pronouns or titles.

 

*An excellent article on the amendment process for the years 1967-1993 is by Gerald Benjamin and Melissa Cusa  “Amending the New York State Constitution Through  the Legislature” pp 55-73 at the following web site:

http://www.rockinst.org/pdf/government_reform/1994-nys_constitution_a_briefing_book.pdf    

         As of now, the NYS Lottery operates about 13,000 virtual slot machines at nine racinos (Hamburg, Aqueduct, Monticello, Saratoga, Yonkers, Finger Lakes, Vernon Downs, Batavia and Tioga).  Chapter 383 of the Laws of October 2001 allowed the State Lottery to join with Mega Millions (2002).  In 2010 Powerball, another multistate lottery with stupendous prizes, was allowed.  Both these events have very frequent drawings, not daily, with the jackpot rising when there is no winner yet.  Two  other Jackpot “Games” wholly under State Lottery are Lotto (draws not daily, prize rises until winner known) and Sweet Million (draws not daily,  fixed prize $1M). There are four Daily “games”  Take 5, Numbers, Win 4 and Pick 10.  There are at least 8000 Quick Draw settings, with a result every 4 minutes,  23.5 hours a day.  There are scratchoff   instant games for bets ranging from one dollar to thirty dollars.  Here are the returns for FY 2012 (thru March 31) for each category. Column 2 and 3 in $millions.

Category                                Intake               “To Education”          % “To Education”

Jackpot 923 395   43
Daily 2010 808   40
Instant 3579 816   23
Social (Quick Draw) 502 156   31
“Casinos” (Video Gaming) 1426 696   48

 

      The first four rows, inexplicably referred to as  “Traditional,”  returned to the Lottery 7.01 billion   before prize payouts.   Most of the return went to prizes.  “To Education” went 2.10 billion, or 31% .  The racinos (AKA “Video Gaming Casinos”) saw a total amount bet of 19.48 billion, with a net of  1.426 billion after payouts to  bettors.   “To Education”   went 696 million (48%). Because these establishments must by law contribute to horse racing and to the support of the privately-owned tracks at which they are situated,  slightly less than half their net passed “to Education.”   In summary, Lottery as a whole sent “to Education” 2.89 billion in FY 2012.  This figure will likely be more in FY 2013, with Aqueduct’s share up and that of Yonkers,  down.

 http://nylottery.ny.gov/wps/wcm/connect/2aaf628044bec0b08c5d8c3b1ada7a32/YearEndReport12.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&Annual%20Report

Opinions are my own, do not necessarily relect those of other members of CAGNY.   Photo from flickrCC “scratchoff cards”

Letter to Legislators about Proposed Amendment

DSC00439

 

The letter below was written to be distributed to all NYS legislators on the morning before the Governor’s State of the State Message.  The three casinos “upstate”  he projected in the SOSM   we can see would create fewer gambling addicts than (say) five in the Metropolitan area.  This “phase I ” scenario, however, does not rule out a second phase with  four casinos south of “upstate.”   to compete with casinos in neighboring states.  Nothing is off the table.  The Governor’s discussion of the amendment  was a trial balloon..  The amendment is a terrible idea, but if it is to go  to referendum the Governor and his appointees should not be calling the shots.

 Dear Legislator:                                                                                                          

Even if new to the Legislature, you don’t need an alert or reminder to know that soon you will consider in committee or on the floor “second passage” of S06734.  Enacted on March 14, 2012, this was a proposal to amend Article 1, Sec. 9 of the NYS Constitution to allow “no more than seven” casinos to be built “as prescribed by the Legislature.”  If a like bill is passed by both chambers in 2013, the proposal to amend will be put to public referendum.

 Coalition Against Gambling in New York (CAGNY) believes this amendment would create tens of thousands of new addicted gamblers and problem gamblers.  The figures for this forecast can be seen and downloaded at    http://tinyurl.com/aas2tew The harm to each person so affected would be multiplied by eight or ten times as family, friends, and associates are inextricably caught up in the misery…. or have to flee it!

CAGNY observes  that the Governor, who urged this amendment early in 2012, has ignored the collateral damage from “recapturing,” by new in-state casinos, gamblers who have been going out of state.  In not acknowledging  this collateral damage, he says in effect that thousands of NYS residents are expendable.  Do you believe that too?

You will hear over and over that “the State needs the money.”  CAGNY does not deny that the State needs money.  We don’t deny, either,  that governments at times  lay out money putting  lives at risk—soldiers and first responders, for example.  We do hold that government should never plan a revenue-raising strategy that exploits illness and misery in its people !  Government  should never on purpose enable life-threatening addictions!

 We don’t know when the vote will be.  In the days to come, however, we will return to your door often with more handbills that show why a “no” on second passage is a vote for truly good government.  We’ll try to meet with you in person. We welcome your questions and your requests for detailed background.  Feel free to call 917-453-7371 or e-mail our Chairperson at sqs@columbia.edu.

Gov. Cuomo tips his hand on amendment for casinos

flickr-3882328030-original Venetian

Gov. Cuomo tipped his hand a little in SOS yesterday.  He  wants for now (1) no new casinos in NYC (2) three  “upstate,” another four in future (3) locations and scale to be decided by a Gam[bl]ing Commission he will appoint.  I thought the first-passage bill in 2012 said “as prescribed by the legislature,” which seems cut out of the deal.  If the amendment proposal goes to referendum, how much devil will be in the details?

Continue reading

Opposing the amendment is not “prohibitionist.” It is protective.

New_York_City

Photo by Alain Maury,  found through Creative Commons

 

 

 

 

On  January 2,  2013 I told a friend about the petition started recently by A.K. France,  Vice-Chairperson of Coalition Against Gambling in New York (CAGNY), against the proposed constitutional amendment that would  allow < 8 new commercial casinos in NYS.   I sent the link by http://tinyurl.com/cj2v5bj.  It was disappointing to get the following response by e-mail:

Continue reading

Is This An Acceptable Way to Govern?

 

new-york-hi

 

 

 

Editor’s note: This short essay by Joel Rose, Founder and Chairperson of CAGNY, was  distributed to members of the press in Albany May 29, 2012 and to legislators visited  by CAGNY members May 29-30.  It  reviews the  abuse of due process by which the legislature has handled certain bills related to gambling.  The March 14,  2012 vote for “first passage”  is a case in point. 

In his state of the state message this year, Governor Cuomo noted that “It’s time we confronted reality. It’s not a question of whether we should have gaming in New York — the fact is we already do.” He went on to urge a constitutional amendment so that “we can do gaming right,” whatever that means. Notice that gambling promoters always use the term gaming rather than gambling to try to create the impression that they are promoting something innocuous.

So the merits of the pro-gambling case come down to this: We’ve already used every trick in the book to get around the law in order to have gambling in this state. So now, let’s just take the gloves off and remove any remaining restrictions on casino gambling.

We note that New York been so successful in finding ways to allow gambling that according to its own study, New York already leads the nation in annual revenue from gambling. But no amount of gambling will ever be enough. If casinos are allowed, the argument will then turn to sports betting and Internet gambling.

Governor Cuomo and Speaker Silver have already let it be known that they do not want any casinos in Manhattan. They just want access to the revenue to be derived by putting them everywhere else in the state. If this activity would be beneficial for upstate, why not enjoy its benefits everywhere in the state?

So the Legislature, performing what passes for due diligence in this state, passed this amendment in the middle of the night. There were no hearings, so opponents were never able to testify. In fact, there was no debate. Article III, Section 14 of the Constitution specifies that every bill be held for final passage for three legislative days so that legislators may have time to read it and understand its ramifications, unless the Governor issues a “message of necessity,” indicating the reasons why it is necessary to waive the three-day requirement. Of course, governors routinely issue such messages, and legislatures routinely meekly accept them. And that was done in this case.

Now here we have a bill which could be passed anytime during this legislative session, with final passage not possible before January 2013. How could it possibly have been “necessary” to vote on it right away?

The final indignity to good legislative process: in the Senate, the Democrats, angered by the extreme gerrymandering of the majority redistricting plan, walked out, all except for four “independent” Democrats who generally vote with the Republicans, and were absent for all the votes taken that night. Thus, this important vote on casino gambling was taken with only 36 of the 60 Senators present.

So our question to our fellow citizens, and particularly to our legislators, is this: Is this an acceptable way to govern?

The opinions expressed in this piece are those of the author, Joel Rose, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of any or all other members of CAGNY.

 

New Commercial Casinos Will Mean Thousands of New Gambling Addicts

Adverse Impact of New In-state Casinos on Prevalence of Pathological and Problem Gamblers in New York State

by
Stephen Q. Shafer, M.D., M.A., M.P.H.

Summary: Up to seven new commercial casinos would be allowed by a proposed amendment to the State Constitution, risking the creation of eighty thousand new gambling addicts and two hundred thousand new problem gamblers in New York State. The quantifiable costs related just to these new out-of-control gamblers would far outweigh the tax revenues New York State would see from “recapturing” gamblers who  had been crossing state lines and also taxing new in-state casinos on their take from new gamblers. The number of pathological (addicted) gamblers and problem gamblers created would exceed the number of new hires at the casinos by a factor of ten or more.

Continue reading