MISSOURI SHOULD NOT DROP LOSS LIMIT ON ITS GAMBLING BOATS

The funny thing about words is they can come back to haunt you.

Such is the case with riverboat gambling in Missouri. It was sold as a tourism draw for the state. Then, the $500 loss limit was seen as an advantage for Missouri. Now, proponents want to lift the loss limit to bring more gambling dollars into Missouri.

At some point, Missourians must draw a line in the stand when it comes to gambling. Gambling proponents have been fiddling with the law ever since it was approved by voters.

In November 1992, Missourians authorized the operation of excursion riverboat casinos. The fact these boats would traverse the river was integral to the sales job. Today, no gambling riverboats cruise in Missouri. It's too dangerous. Why wasn't that mentioned in the 1992 campaign? This change was made without a vote of the people. Mind you, Illinois riverboat casinos still manage to cruise.

It's hard to tell the newest casinos are even boats at all. New ones more closely resemble land-based operations.

Originally, the boats were to be regulated by the Missouri Tourism Commission, as a way to underscore the tourism nature of the riverboats. A state gaming commission now calls the shots.

And now the loss limit debate resurfaces.

Marjorie Beenders, the director of the Gaming Partnership for Education, says Missouri is losing revenue and gamblers to other states because of a $500 per person, per cruise loss limit. The Missouri Constitution requires that all gambling revenues go to education so this has to be a good thing, right? Wrong.

The issue has nothing to do with education. It has to do with promises kept. Missouri voters approved recreational gambling.

Rep. Herb Fallert, D-Ste. Genevieve, sponsored the riverboat gambling bill in the House. At the time, he said Missouri's proposal differed from Illinois in that it promotes more entertainment and tourism rather than serious gambling.

Representatives from MO-TARGET, Missourians to Authorize Riverboat Gambling Excursions and Tourism, stressed that Missouri's riverboat gambling proposal would be patterned after Iowa, which caters to the recreational gamblers and is family-oriented.

MO-TARGET said the kind of limits on boats in Missouri cater to the recreational gambler, while the boats in Illinois are more geared for high rollers.

What happened?

Take away the loss limits and gambling in Missouri will not be recreational. If gambling proponents want to keep changing the rules, then perhaps Missourians should consider putting the issue of gambling back on the ballot.