Casinos make no sense or cents
By State Rep. Daniel E. Bosley
After studying the economic implications of casino gambling in Massachusetts for over a decade, I am certain that it is not sound or responsible economic development policy. The costs simply outweigh the benefits in both short and long term analysis. Even if you are to concede that the advent of casino gambling in the state would yield hundreds of millions of dollars in state revenue — a number of which I am skeptical — the cost to the state of expanded gambling exceeds the projected revenues.
The Governor has stated that expanded gambling in Massachusetts would yield approximately $450 million dollars in new state revenue. It is important to consider the cost of collecting this projected revenue. In a 2006 study, the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston found that between 30% and 70% of state revenues from casino gambling come from economic transfer, money being shifted from one sector of the economy to another. This money cannot be considered new revenue. Given that the Commonwealth has one of the most vibrant tourism sectors in the country, the Governor’s “resort style” casinos create direct competition with one of our state’s biggest economic assets. While I believe that Massachusetts would experience more towards the 70% side of economic transfer – given the tourism industry — even if you split the difference, $225 million of the projected $450 million would not be new state revenues.
In addition to the economic transfer, the social costs of gambling are extensive. There are significant public safety, transportation, social service, and emergency service costs associated with expanded gambling. Consider the effect that 40,000 cars a day driving through a town like Randolph or Milton would have on the local transportation infrastructure. How would it affect roads in small towns throughout the western part of the state if traffic activity were to increase by 100% like it did in Ledyard, Connecticut after Foxwoods? Given the average salary for casino workers is less than $30,000, the state will see a significant rise in costs associated with welfare, counseling, housing and shelter, and utility payments. Fire and ambulance departments are probably the most impacted departments due to casino development. From 1988 to 1996, the number of emergency calls in Preston, Connecticut rose from 204 to 955.
Additionally, there is agreement across the board that the number of problem gamblers in the Commonwealth will significantly increase with any expansion of casino gambling in the state. There are estimates of the cost of each problem gambler that reach as high as $13,586. Even at 25% of this amount, this particular social cost would get prohibitively expensive very quickly. The social costs associated with gambling may be felt more prominently within the elderly community.
For people living on a fixed income, the prospect of a casino within a 50-mile radius is both alluring and daunting. Senior citizens are currently hampered with high costs of health care and living expenses and must budget their income appropriately. The financial temptations imposed by the mere presence of casinos, coupled with the fact that retired seniors have a lot more free time than most, create a higher risk for seniors to fall victim to a gambling addiction. Due to impacts such as these, the Commonwealth must take an in-depth look into both the social and economic implications surrounding casinos.
Casino gambling is not a long term, sustainable, economic development policy. It is band aid public policy at its worst, because we can’t cut our losses and go home after we let it in and it fails. Once it is here, it is here to stay.
Daniel E. Bosley is State Representative Commonwealth of Massachusetts’ First Berkshire District.
He can be reached at 617-722-2370 or by email at Rep.DanielBosley@hou.state.ma.us.
