LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: THINK ABOUT HUMAN COSTS

To the Editor:

In the midst of our debate over whether to permit gambling on a riverboat downtown, I would urge us to look carefully at the potential costs and as well as the potential the benefits. The proponents of riverboat gambling have concentrated on the financial aspects of the issue, but the discussion must be broader than that if the costs are to be analyzed as well. We must include the human costs in the analysis.

According to Robert Goodman of Hampshire College, who is the director of the U.S. Gaming Study at the University of Massachusetts, 1-3 percent of the adult population and about 5 percent of the teenage population are addicted gamblers. As the opportunity to gamble proliferates, and with it the highly addictive forms of video gambling, these percentages are likely to increase.

Using the 1 percent figure to be conservative, this would mean that of the population of the City of Cape Girardeau about 350 individuals will become problem gamblers. Now, we have been told that the presence of the riverboat casino will provide about 800 direct jobs, so for the City we have a human cost of almost 1 destroyed life for 2 enhanced lives (i.e. a job). We are also told that the gamblers will come from a much wider area than just the City of Cape Girardeau. If that is true, then we must include in the calculation those from all the surrounding Missouri and Illinois counties who are likely to become problem gamblers. If we include Cape Girardeau, Bollinger, Scott and Perry Counties in Missouri and Union, Jackson, and Alexander Counties in Illinois, we have an additional 1200 problem gamblers. The human cost is now nearly 2 destroyed lives for 1 enhanced life. Quite a bargain! Even if we allow an additional 700 "spin-off" jobs due to the riverboat, the human costs equal the benefits. Is it worth it?

We simply must consider these human costs in the gambling debate. We cannot deal only with possible tax revenue and possible economic benefits. Neither can we dismiss the issue of problem gambling because only a small percentage of people are affected by it, but we must consider the individual lives that are destroyed by it. President Clinton is promoting his health-care plan in exactly this way, by bringing before the nation individuals and families who are not being well served by the current health care system. Please consider the individuals and the families who will pay a very high price for the easy access to casino gambling. Please vote "no" for their sake.

David K. Probst

Cape Girardeau