THE PUBLIC MIND: WEIGH THE FACTS, COSTS AND BENEFITS, THEN DECIDE HOW TO VOTE ON GAMBLING ISSUE

~

To the Editor:

Over the past few weeks, a variety of letters have been published on the riverboat gambling issue. Unfortunately, there has been a tendency for some writers to make increasingly irresponsible and factually incorrect statements. I recall reading one writer who claimed that allowing riverboat gambling in Cape Girardeau would increase unemployment and drive down property values, while another linked gambling to illegal drugs.

The economic facts are indisputable. Riverboat gambling would add hundreds of millions of dollars to the local economy over the next five years. The initial expenditure of $30-40 million on facilities, the hundreds of jobs created, and millions in local tax revenues, plus the economic multiplier effect will significantly stimulate the local economy. Businesses of all kinds in Cape would benefit. Property values would rise, and tax revenues generated by the riverboat will reduce the likelihood of increased property and sales taxes on all of us. In fact, a "yes" vote on riverboat gambling may be the best way of minimizing local tax increases in the future.

Preliminary plans have already been announced for opening a riverboat casino in East Cape Girardeau, should the Cape Girardeau initiative fail. Then Cape Girardeau would be faced with the negative consequences of gambling, without reaping the full benefits.

Voters should individually perform a cost/benefit analysis to determine how they should vote. If you feel that the possible societal "costs" of gambling addiction of a few, the moral concerns about gambling and similar questions outweigh the substantial "benefits" then you should vote "no." A number of friends of mine sincere, intelligent people advocate a "no" vote, based on their evaluation that the costs would exceed the benefits. While I share some of their concerns, I think they have overstated the "costs" and understated the "benefits."

On the other hand, if you see these societal "costs" as relatively insignificant compared to the tremendous benefits, then you should vote "yes." Based on my observations and several surveys, it seems unlikely that riverboat gambling will be approved in Cape Girardeau. If it does fail, then I can only hope it is the result of an informed, reasoned "no" vote, not one cast out of lack of knowledge, fear of change or based on the misleading assertions made by some of the opponents.

Peter Gordon

Cape Girardeau