LETTERS: KEEP LIMIT ON GAMBLING LOSSES

To the editor:

In the Nov. 15 Southeast Missourian, gambling panel director Tom Irwin of the Missouri Gaming Commission has recommended that the $500 loss limit be lifted with the argument that Missouri is losing the big gamblers to other border states that have no limits. He states that Missouri took in just over $118 million in revenue from riverboats in the budget year that ended June 30. The article states that the gaming commission has "reported that enforcement problems, irritated customers, lack of evidence that dropping limits will increase problem gambling and lower revenue for education all result from the unique loss limit." He goes on to say that "the state's 16 casinos are collectively losing money and for two years have posted a negative cash flow and return on their multimillion-dollar investments."

As you may recall, the state's collections from these riverboats of $118 million represent 20 percent of the gross income of the riverboats, which hints that the actual gross income of these boats was $590 million. This would averge around a $38 million gross profit per riverboat in Missouri.

Some legitimate questions are to be asked to the commission and to the Missouri Riverboat Gaming Association, which basically represents the pooling of the casinos who hired Fred Walton, a consultant, who "studied the economic impact of gambling on Missouri communities" and who was paid by the casino industry to do so.

Has the budget for education actually gone up the last three years since we have had gambling in Missouri? Is it not a fact that the amount of money we spend on education remains the same and "gambling revenue for education" simply represents a means of playing on the emotions and goodwill of the people in an effort to raise money for the state without taxation?

The fact is, a government that become dependent upon splitting the profits with the casino industry is going to find itself more and more responsive to that industry and those who run it.

What are the enforcement problems of the gaming commission? If there is no evidence of "increased problem gambling," why are the customers so irritated to find that having lost $500 they can't come back to win it back? It seems like the argument itself is evidence of the problem. Again, the "lower revenue for education" simply represents budget and accounting issues, not a reality regarding actual education expenditures.

Is it not exceedingly ironic that this article appeared right next to the United Way goal, which was at 70 percent, the goal being $550,000. If we had a riverboat here that was taking an average of $38 million a year away from our area, would we be so likely to be able to contribute to the United Way?

There are many studies that show that, of the pool of gamblers, 65 percent come from the surrounding region. That is, they are not tourists but rather neighbors and friends. It is also well-known that 35 percent of the gamblers have incomes less than $25,000, and they tend to see gambling as a form of investment rather than recreation. Subsequently, they gamble more when expressed in percentage of income. The argument that we are losing big gamblers to other states is a hollow one when you consider that statistics indicate that the more gambling is available, the more people gamble. It is like an infectious disease that the more contact and exposure you have, the more likely you are to get sick.

The lifting of the $500 loss limit by the Legislature not only would mean more gambling, but also more casinos. It is critical, not that Cape Girardeau has rid itself of the Boyd Group, that we let our legislators know that we would like to keep the $500 loss limit intact, even if it means "allowing the gambling industry to suffer." The $38 million-a-year profit per boat doesn't sound like they are suffering that much.

Those who feel strongly that gambling should not be allowed in Cape Girardeau should be sure to write to state Reps. Mary Kasten and David Schwab and state Sen. Peter Kinder and not take their votes for granted. They need accountability, and they need your input. They need to feel that their votes are representative of the area to give them confidence in their stances.

The gaming industry has a strong foothold in this state and in the Legislature, and the Legislature splits the profits. Legislators sometimes find it difficult to vote against a revenue that seems so easy. The rest of us may find it easy that way as well when we consider that it is income without taxation.

However, one has to recognize the ultimate loss of personal income to the people that need it the most. This is truly a regressive tax and ultimately hurts all of society. Although we have not been able to keep it from our state borders, we may be able to continue to discourage those who would enter our county.

I fear that lifting the $500 loss limit is an invitation to those other than the Boyd Group and a threat to our regional economy. There may be some boost to the local -- downtown -- economy, but even then only certain types of businesses would benefit, and the region as a whole would suffer.

Like a parasite, there is an increased supply of blood to the immediate area from which he sucks, but a significant blood loss from the rest of the body. Don't be afraid to contact your legislators. They need to know how you feel.

RICHARD A. MARTIN

Cape Girardeau

EDITOR'S NOTE: State spending on education in Missouri's annual budgets has increased steadily in recent years, with growth from $1.15 billion in fiscal year 1993 to $1.97 billion in fiscal year 1998 in the state's School Foundation Formula. Included in the education spending has been revenue from riverboat gambling.