Local Politicians Split on Gambling Bill

After plenty of debate, Governor Deval Patrick sent the gambling bill back to the legislature earlier this week.

The proposed law would bring three resort-style casinos to the state one each in Western Massachusetts, Metro West/Central Massachusetts and Southeastern Massachusetts. The proposal would also call for slot parlors at two of the four racetracks in the state.

Both the House and the Senate passed the bill, but local politicians are divided on the bill. Rep. Jason Lewis (D-Winchester) voted in favor of the bill, while his counterpart in the senate, Patricia Jehlen (D-Somerville) voted in the negative.

"I'm disappointed Patrick even started this conversation," Jehlen said. "It's a mistake for him to suggest that this is the solution to any problem."

Jehlen believes the cost of the bill will far outweigh any benefits the state will receive. She explained that there has been no neutral analysis of the costs and benefits of gambling. She said that the firms doing the research all have some connection with gambling and were only asked about the benefits of gambling.

"The costs are too high," Jehlen said. "I haven't seen a single report that says that state's going to gain 15,000 jobs. It's going to be nowhere near that. There are other things we can do to develop jobs, and that will more likely help our long-term development."

Instead, Jehlen believes the state should focus its energy on making health care affordable, specifically to the small-business owners. She also believes the state should turn its attention on preventing the decline in education to continue and to focus on the transportation infrastructure.

"I agree there will be jobs at casinos," Jehlen said, "but according to the Boston Business Journal, the spending doesn't come from nowhere. More people are just going to use their discretionary money to spend. Getting people out of state to come here is the only way we'd break even. With five facilities open they'd cannibalize each other, which would in turn reduce visitors."

Lewis, however, believes the casino bill is something the state needs. While he supports Patrick's decision to send the bill back because, like the governor, Lewis does not support the slot machines in certain racetracks.  

"We have close to nine percent unemployment in the state and we have an opportunity to create up to 15,000 new jobs," Lewis said. "Now that's not going to solve all the economic challenges, but that creation of jobs is the main reason I support the bill."

Another concern Jehlen has is the negative social impact of casinos – gambling addiction, dinking and drunk driving, the return of smoking in restaurants. But Lewis believes the state has instituted enough precautionary requirements to limit those concerns.

"If this bill is passed it has a number of comprehensive regulatory standards," Lewis said. "It has gambling help, it prevents corruption, it limits the negative impact on the community. It's well though out."

While Lewis doesn't mind having to go back in session to pass this bill, Jehlen is unsure of the bill's future.

"It won't be passed this year," Jehlen said. "It could pass next year. It depends on who gets elected and who's in office."