Melvin B. Miller
Editor & Publisher

The bottom line

Gov. Deval Patrick strode onto the political battlefield when he announced his proposal to establish three casinos in Massachusetts. Opponents vow to fight vigorously to defeat the plan. So far, most of the rationale for opposition has been a concern for the social cost of gambling addiction and the morality of gambling. Neither has much merit in deciding public policy.

There has been a strong tradition in Boston to combat what is perceived as immoral. The old Watch and Ward Society was established in 1878 to censure licentious literature. The group’s work often backfired; a “Banned in Boston” label all but assured that a book would become a bestseller. With the public’s greater acceptance of more sexually explicit literature, in 1950 the Society changed its name and shifted its focus to illegal gambling.

Establishment of the state lottery in 1971 put a friendlier face on gambling. Citizens who bet on their favorite numbers were no longer aiding a criminal enterprise; they were instead contributing to a fund to provide additional financing for public education.

The state lottery has grown into a $4 billion business. One cannot logically claim that buying a lottery ticket is morally sanctioned, while betting at a state-licensed casino is immoral.

Gov. Patrick has shown he is concerned about the problem of gambling addiction. He proposes to set aside 2.5 percent of gambling tax revenues to treat those affected. While a gambling disorder can be financially disruptive and harmful to the support of families, society has been extremely tolerant of addictions with far more serious life and death consequences.

Anyone of appropriate age can buy alcoholic beverages at numerous conveniently located package stores or taverns. According to a 2000 study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the economic cost of alcohol abuse in the United States was estimated to be $184.6 billion in 1998. With the projected average annual increase of 3.8 percent, those costs would be more than 30 percent higher now. More than 10 percent of those costs are for medical consequences of alcoholism.

The medical consequences of tobacco use are devastating. According to the American Cancer Society, “Half of all Americans who continue to smoke will die from smoking-related diseases. In the U.S., tobacco use is responsible for nearly one in five deaths … In addition, an estimated 8.6 million people suffer from smoking-related chronic conditions such as bronchitis, emphysema, and other cardiovascular diseases.”

Alcohol and tobacco are two “vices” that generate tax revenue. Both have socioeconomic consequences far more severe than what can result from excessive gambling. The government allows the sale and use of alcohol and tobacco because of an innate American belief in the individual’s right to free choice, even if the choice would be viewed as unwise by others. And of course, both “vices” are sources of tax revenue.

Opponents of Patrick’s plan must face one certainty: There will be casino gambling in Massachusetts. Either there will be one casino, established by the Mashpee Wampanoags under federal law, or there will be several casinos, as proposed by the governor. One of those casinos would be owned by the Wampanoags. A satisfactory agreement with the state would fulfill the tribe’s interests without the necessity of a battle in federal court.

Critics are wrong to assert that Patrick is bringing casino gambling to the state. Federal recognition of the Mashpee Wampanoags as a tribe did that. Federal recognition conveyed sovereignty and the legal right of the tribe to establish a casino on tribal lands. The only question remaining is how to structure this change in a way that will produce maximum revenue for the state. That is the only issue in Patrick’s proposal which should concern Massachusetts citizens.

Headline2

“I don’t know why anyone would say that I’m addicted to gambling …”