ECONOMICS, MORALITY AND GAMBLING ON THE MISSISSIPPI

Editor's note: The following questions were posed to the group, Citizens Against Riverboat Gambling. The responses were written on behalf of this group by Charles Grant, Dr. Richard Martin and Craig Nessan. Grant and Nessan are members of the local clergy; Martin is a Cape Girardeau physician.1. If we look at the money that is being generated for local economies in Alton, Metropolis, Joliet and other towns with riverboat casinos and project that an operation in Cape Girardeau would bring in $2 million to $3 million a year in local taxes, along with creating 600-800 direct jobs and over 800 additional indirect jobs, isn't this issue pretty clear cut? In a society where lotteries and bingo are already legal, and where we are less than three hours from other riverboats, why not bring the economic benefits here instead of watching them go elsewhere?The people of Cape Girardeau need to be clear from the outset on one central fact: Gambling interests do not want to set up their operations here because they care about Cape Girardeau. The only reason investors from places like Las Vegas are interested in Cape Girardeau is because of the money they can take out of our economy in order to increase their own bank accounts.Any revenue obtained by the city of Cape Girardeau would be a small fraction of the money flowing out of this community. The overall economic impact would be negative. All gambling involves is taking money out of one persons pocket and putting it into anothers. No new wealth is created as in honest business and industry. While a few benefit, everyone else loses.In singling out Alton, Metropolis, and Joliet, this question assumes Cape Girardeau will become one of the gambling syndicates showcase cities. One could just as well assume Cape Girardeau will be like Bettendorf or Ft. Madison, Iowa, where local governments planned on revenue from riverboat gambling, only to see the riverboat casinos leave because they were not profitable enough.Based on local property tax rates, a $30 million gambling property would have an assessed evaluation of $10 million and generate a mere $400,000 in tax revenue. This would amount to only a 1.5 percent increase in the school budget and a meager .04 percent increase for the city. This would hardly be the economic miracle being promised.A larger amount of local tax money would come from an admissions tax, sales tax and hotel and restaurant tax. Such taxes, however, do not come from the wealthy operators of the casino but directly from the general public who already carry a heavy tax burden. Taxes from this revenue are, in other words, regressive.Lastly, the tax on gross receipts is a tax taken from money that people have already lost to casino operators. Any benefit that might accrue to the city is at the expense of those who lose at gambling.It would be foolish for us to believe the false promises of the gambling interests regarding tax income and jobs. They will tell us whatever we want to hear in order to come in and take our money.2. One argument leveled against allowing riverboat gambling in Cape Girardeau is that it could lead to addictive behavior for some people. But couldnt that argument be made against almost any activity - whether it is watching television, playing video games, even eating chocolate? If we fear allowing people to do things which might be addictive, wouldn't we have to make almost everything illegal?

Gambling was first classified as a diagnosable mental disorder by the APA (American Psychiatric Association) in 1980 and defined as "a chronic and progressive failure to resist impulses to gamble." It is characterized by a constant preoccupation with gambling and the need for an increasing amount of money in order to achieve the desired excitement. The patient experiences restlessness or irritability while attempting to cut down or stop gambling.For four percent of the general population gambling is a potential problem, which threatens family and job and drives people to commit forgery, fraud, theft or embezzlement in order to finance gambling.For young people the promise of fast money is a powerful aphrodisiac no less addicting than alcohol and drugs and will be the "cocaine of the 1990s". A New Jersey study indicates that up to 9 percent of young people are likely to become addicted to gambling.

Chocolate is not an appropriate comparison.

3. In a Southeast Missourian column, Mike Royko pointed out that a trip to a major league baseball game averages a family over $100. Meanwhile, the average loss for a riverboat excursion in Metropolis, Illinois, is $43. If a person finds enjoyment in gambling, why shouldnt they be allowed to spend their own money as they choose?

First of all, how can one possibly compare our national pastime with casino gambling! Will "Take me out to the ball game" be replaced with "Take me out to the faro table?! `One, Two, Three rolls your out at the ole crap table?'" Baseball is family entertainment; it may be relatively expensive, but baseball is entertainment for the whole family. Gambling is not a social activity at all. Children and all minors are appropriately excluded from gambling casinos.We also think Royko was off base in his comparison: For $100 a family of four can park at the stadium, attend the game, eat a meal and buy some souvenirs. On the other hand, $43 only represents one gambler's losses - food, beverages, transportation and childcare would be extra.4. Another charge against allowing a riverboat restaurant and casino in Cape is that the jobs it would create would be low paying. Yet Missouri law establishes that the lowest wage on a Missouri riverboat casino must be 25 percent above the federal minimum wage. This won't even impact the wages for management and technically skilled positions, which would be well above this level. Meanwhile, when stores with histories of minimum-wage hiring practices have opened here in the past few years, nobody protested. Why the protests now?We do not protest new jobs for Cape Girardeau but only the half-truths and misleading information told about job potential by gambling promoters. Insofar as there are no moral arguments for riverboat gambling, the only arguments being presented in its favor are economic ones. We believe the impact of gambling to our quality of life would be so negative that any possible economic gain for a few individuals would never compensate for what we would lose as a community.What Cape Girardeau could really use are jobs from new industries who will permanently settle here, take raw materials and manufacture useful products. These are not the jobs gambling would provide.5. Many people have voiced support for riverboat gambling not because they want to gamble but because they would like to see the riverfront come alive with a beautiful excursion riverboat and restaurant. In fact, one group interested in opening a casino here has said that it would spend $15 million in developing the riverfront in addition to bringing in a $13.5 million boat with state-mandated restaurant facilities. What's so bad about developing the riverfront?This seductive offer is simply an effort to add legitimacy to the syndicated process of extracting hard-earned money from Southeast Missourians by luring people who wouldn't go on the boat to gamble but who might be willing to take a ride to see the sights. It is a means of dulling our senses to the reality or the primary focus. When the time is right the excursions will stop and the gaming will spread to the land-based front - predictably slot machines first.

6. Let's say that riverboat gambling is approved and a boat comes to Cape Girardeau within a year. Describe your vision of Cape Girardeau, specifically focusing on riverboat gambling's impact, ten years down the road.We do not and cannot assume that ten years from now a riverboat casino will even BE in Cape - the boat likely will have moved up or down river then, leaving us with a legacy of failed businesses and broken promises. If the boat IS here, we may well have a beautifully developed waterfront, significant tax revenue, and a steady, if diminishing stream of gamblers coming to town. But the respected businesses and retailers on Main and Broadway which have meant so much to our city will be gone. The downtown store fronts will be mostly empty, save for shops specializing in glow-in-the-dark wall hangings.And most frightening of all, we can see the aging and decline of the staple sectors of our current economy - the university, commerce, retailers, medicine - as young men and women and families seeking a wholesome community in which to live choose to live in a small city NOT dominated by casino gambling.

7. Finally, what do you believe defines a community? And why shouldn't a city's residents look to additional sources of revenue like gambling to improve their streets, fix up their schools, build additional sewer lines, etc?

The question more properly is, "what defines a heartland community?" Cape Girardeau as a heartland community is a place where the citizens work hard in respectable jobs, building and enjoying meaningful lives for their families. In a heartland community the citizens still believe they have obligations to protect and serve one another. In a heartland community the citizens gladly take responsibility for their schools and common life. In a heartland community the citizens trust and depend on one another to shape their common destiny, not depending on outsiders who promise something for nothing. In a heartland community the citizens treasure and enjoy a quality of life worth passing down to future generations. In a heartland community there is no room for casino gambling - at any price.