We are hearing this key negative from undecided legislators agonizing over pressure to find tax money from any source - even a casino that will induce thousands of new gambling addicts and violent crimes:
There is no means to stop even one casino from proliferating into slots barns and slots in gas stations and bars throughout our state.
No community will be immune. This has already happened in Oregon, West Virginia, Nevada, Montana, South Dakota, Louisiana, and most recently, Illinois and Delaware.
We urge legislators to consider two voices who have wrestled at length with this concern:
Governor Lynch on Gambling Proliferation
November 11, 2011 casino veto letter to legislature
Even if proponents are successful in limiting an initial bill to one or two gambling locations, I do not believe expanded gambling would stay limited to one or two locations over the long term. When revenue failed to meet expectations, there would be a strong push to expand gambling to other parts of the state. West Virginia, according to a study commission report, began in 1994 with just allowing slot machines at racetracks. Yet by 2009, gambling had expanded to such an extent that a single West Virginia county, with a population of just 37,000 people, had 37 mini casinos. New Hampshire could end up with casinos, or slot machines, across our state.
Concord Monitor: Casinos are the wrong answer
January 25, 2013
Over time, the relentless lobbying by pro-gambling forces and the grinding task of allocating insufficient resources has worn down the resistance of many New Hampshire lawmakers who long opposed expanded gambling. Some cracked under the pain of denying services to children who need them or placing the disabled on waiting lists for services. With a shudder, they agreed to support a casino for the revenue proponents said it would provide.
We ask them to reconsider. We ask that the New Hampshire House, which has been a bulwark against expanded gambling, hold firm. And we ask Gov. Maggie Hassan, who supports the construction of a casino near the Massachusetts border, to change her mind. Casino gambling is not the answer to New Hampshire's fiscal problems.
It would be the beginning of a whole new set of problems.
The ancient Greek oracle at Delphi gave up opinions more readily than John Lynch, but in his last days as governor Lynch warned against opening the state up to casino gambling.
"I worry about proliferation. I don't know how you contain it and what it would mean for New Hampshire over 20 years. It could have a structurally negative impact on the state," Lynch told Monitor editors in a recent interview. "We have all these good things going for us. Let's not mess it up by doing something structurally different," he said.
The money that gambling interests are willing to spend to influence legislation can have a corrupting influence on government, one that puts the interests of out-of-state investors ahead of those of the citizenry. Casinos and their low-brow cousins, slot parlors, are hard to contain because the revenue they bring in is addictive.
The temptation to expand is ever present. Because one legislature can't bind another, the power of lobbying money, as well as the "You let them, so why not us?" argument would lead to an increase in the number of gambling outlets.
Since casinos draw most of their business from within a 50-mile radius, most of the money they take in would come from New Hampshire pockets.
In a casino market that's doing poorly, the likelihood that anyone will gamble on building a huge destination casino in New Hampshire is zilch, not when one super-casino already exists at Foxwoods in Connecticut and a $1.5 billion casino may be built near Boston.
To attract business, a casino would spend far more on advertising than the state spends to promote tourism. Permitting a casino would allow gambling interests to brand New Hampshire in a way detrimental to its image as a family-friendly outdoor paradise. When people think of Connecticut, they think of Foxwoods; the same could happen here.
Legalizing casinos would also increase the incidence of gambling addiction and the fragmenting of families that can result.
Wavering legislators should think of the interests of their constituents in business and the people they employ. A casino, let alone multiple casinos, racinos and slot parlors, would efficiently suck up disposable income that would otherwise be spent in New Hampshire shops, restaurants and entertainment venues. The effect on existing businesses could be profound enough that any estimate of revenue gained by the state would be offset by a reduction in business profits taxes and losses at the local level from increased enforcement and lower property taxes.
Two casino bills have been filed so far, and more wouldn't surprise us. One, by perennial gambling proponent Sen. Lou D'Allesandro and Salem Sen. Chuck Morse, calls for the single, large casino Hassan has said she could support. The other posits two small casinos, one in southern New Hampshire and one in the North Country. Neither are gambles worth taking.
Thank you for considering our urge to caution,
Jim Rubens
Chair, GSCAEG
