Future of Massachusetts casinos
THE future of three casinos and a slot parlour lies in the hands of Massachusetts lawmakers. The legislation that would license three resort style casinos and a slot machine parlor is being discussed today within the Massachusetts House Democrats. House leaders including Speaker Robert DeLeo are hoping to convince fellow representatives to support the bill, which they say will create jobs and boost revenues.
However, not everyone is so eager for the legislation to be passed, as cautious casino critics have been reported to have started protesting at the Statehouse steps. They believe that the state’s in a rush to embrace a gambling expansion, without exploring the possible social costs of casino gaming. An amendment was filed to the gaming bill, Rep. Denise Provost, D-Somerville, and called for a cost-benefit analysis that would study a number of economic factors, such as expected tax revenue and net jobs created. This would determine the potential lying within casinos.
“We have had estimates of some benefits without ever having had a realistic analysis of costs prepared for us in recent years,” Provost said in an interview, pointing to analyses of previous gaming bills that focused on potential benefits of casinos but did not quantify the social costs, such as compulsive gambling treatment, associated with casinos.
Provost thinks that people who don’t have ties with the industry should look at the potential revenue gambling could bring.
The current bill, which Provost worries “overpromises and will under-deliver,” requires casino developers to invest at least $500 million into the casino resorts. Those casinos would pay 25 percent tax on daily gaming revenue, while the slots parlor would pay 40 percent tax on gaming revenue.
That tax revenue would be divided across state funds, and communities would receive funds to mitigate costs related to hosting a casino, such as hiring additional police officers, but Provost and other gaming opponents doubt that revenue will be as high as expected and worry casinos will impact communities in ways that additional revenue cannot fix. They want an analysis to provide more concrete numbers.
If Provost’s amendment is added and the bill is approved, no casinos could be licensed before the analysis is completed. If the study finds net revenues are insufficient, no licenses would be issued. More news on this as it develops.
