Published: 04/05/2006
Some local lawmakers say slots a loser for Merrimack Valley
By Edward Mason, Staff writer
Eagle-Tribune
BOSTON – A proposal to allow slot machines at four Massachusetts racetracks would hurt rather than help border communities and reduce aid to cities and towns, some area lawmakers and business leaders said yesterday.
House lawmakers are scheduled today to vote on the plan, passed in October by the Senate, which would allow slot machines at Suffolk Downs, Wonderland Greyhound Park, Raynham Park, and Plainridge Racecourse.
If approved, Massachusetts would join 11 other states that allow slots at horse or dog tracks, according to the American Gaming Association.
Some North of Boston lawmakers say legalizing slots here will spur New Hampshire to broadly expand its own gaming laws, affecting Merrimack Valley communities along the border.
Rep. Michael Costello, D-Newburyport, said he’s convinced New Hampshire will follow Massachusetts if slots are approved here.
“You’ll see slots at Seabrook Greyhound Park and at Salem at Rockingham Park,” Costello said.
Slots could pave the way for casino gambling, said Rep. Barbara A. L’Italien, D-Andover. Earlier this month, the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe received federal recognition, a first step to being allowed to open a casino in Massachusetts. L’Italien predicted New Hampshire would counter with its own casino along the border, which would attract Merrimack Valley residents.
“For our area, it would end up having people driving across the border to casinos there,” L’Italien said.
Restaurants are among the businesses that could see a loss of revenue, according to Peter Christie, president and CEO of the Massachusetts Restaurant Association. He said restaurants depend on disposable income, which would dip if spent on slots and casinos.
Michael Difeo said his business, Mr. Mike’s in Haverhill, would be affected.
“It would hurt considerably,” Difeo said.
Mr. Mike’s restaurant is also Massachusetts’ 10th busiest seller of Lottery tickets and keno. The border towns of Merrimack Valley have five of the state’s top 10 Lottery agents, in part because of all the traffic from New Hampshire.
New Hampshire gaming, Difeo said, would entice Merrimack Valley residents to go north rather than to slots and casinos farther away.
“Why drive two hours when you can play in your neighborhood,” Difeo said.
A drop in Lottery sales is a big argument against expanding gaming in Massachusetts.
The Lottery returned $736 million to cities and towns in fiscal 2005. Costello, who as of yesterday was leaning against voting for slots, echoed many area lawmakers who said it was their main concern.
Slots supporters are looking to steer a portion of the new slots revenue to local aid. But Rep. Brian S. Dempsey, D-Haverhill, also said he thinks increased gaming here and in New Hampshire could reduce spending on the Lottery and reduce money available for local aid.
“My primary concern is the erosion of the Lottery,” Dempsey said. “If you factor that into it, the numbers may not be what they appear.”
The racetracks and the AFL-CIO of Massachusetts, primary supporters of the legislation, argue it would save thousands of jobs in the troubled racing industry and steer new tax dollars to cities and towns. Gaming supporters here argue that Massachusetts gaming tax revenue could reach $500 million a year.
The bill’s opponents – such as the Massachusetts Restaurant Association and Citizens for Limited Taxation – question the economic assumptions. Greyhound advocates oppose helping the dog racing industry, while the Catholic Church opposes expanded gambling on moral grounds.
The Senate approved the gaming bill in October. House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi only recently agreed to put the measure to a vote, which House lawmakers said they believe will be close. There are questions about whether House supporters have the votes to override an expected veto by Gov. Mitt Romney.
Rep. Bradley H. Jones Jr., a gaming supporter, said Massachusetts should adopt slots because the money is already being spent on gambling in other states. This is a way for Massachusetts to capture that money for itself and cities and towns.
“It’s an opportunity to get back some of the money we see go overboard into Connecticut and Rhode Island,” said Jones, a North Reading Republican.
Massachusetts residents gambled $1.1 billion out of state in 2005, according to a recent study by the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth. Connecticut was a major beneficiary.
The study by the Center for Policy Analysis said Bay State residents gambled nearly $890 million alone at Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun casinos, resulting in $123 million in new tax revenue for Connecticut.
Outside the Statehouse yesterday, animal rights and anti-gambling groups stressed the effects of gambling on families.
Holding signs and clutching the leashes of several greyhounds who used to race, opponents called dog racing cruel and said any expansion of gambling that would bring more people to the tracks should be opposed. They also said gambling hurts the poor.
“Every dollar thrown into a slot machine is a dollar not available to pay for food, clothes, rent education or health care,” said Laura Everett, associate director of the Massachusetts Council of Churches.
