Tuesday, October 22, 2013

For N.Y., an Election Day gamble


In just two weeks’ time, voters will decide whether to legalize full-fledged Las Vegas-style casinos in New York State. Here are a few things you should know before casting your ballot on the most important change to the state Constitution in decades:


Casino-style gambling is already here.


New York is home to five Indian-run casinos upstate, plus nine race-track-based “racinos” chock-full of so-called video lottery terminals that look, sound and take your money just like the slot machines at “real” casinos.


The biggest is Resorts World at Aqueduct Racetrack in Queens — which even features automated versions of table games such as craps, blackjack and roulette that use real dice, cards and marbles.


New Yorkers also have easy access to casinos just across the state border in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ontario, Connecticut and, soon, Massachusetts.


What the amendment opens the door to is siting as many as seven casinos outside of Indian reservations and away from tracks. Gov. Cuomo and other amendment supporters contend they will bring jobs and tax revenue to the state. Opponents worry that they will bring crime, compulsive gambling and pawn shops, too.


Economic success is no sure thing.


The Cuomo administration forecasts that developing the first four casinos will bring $ 1 billion in investment while creating 6,700 construction jobs and 2,900 permanent jobs.


But casinos are not the licenses to print money that they used to be — and there are signs that the gambling industry is nearing a saturation point in the Northeast.


Revel Atlantic City, built with the help of $ 260 million from the state of New Jersey, declared Chapter 11 just 10 months after it opened in 2012 and continues to struggle after emerging from bankruptcy this year.


Connecticut’s Foxwoods casino, owned by the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe, faced possible default until cutting a deal with creditors that slashed its debt from $ 2.3 billion to $ 1.7 billion earlier this year.


Further complicating the business picture, Cuomo agreed with the Legislature to bar casinos from two of the state’s most lucrative markets — New York City and Long Island — for seven years. Plus, side deals with Indian tribes prohibit new casinos in much of upstate. How eager developers will be to build in the Catskills, the Albany-Lake George area or the Southern Tier remains to be seen.


The city remains a possible target.


Directly tapping the nation’s biggest city — with 8.3 million residents and millions more in tourist traffic — would be a jackpot for the gambling industry.


Once the seven-year statutory restriction runs out, you can bet that casino owners will spare no expense to convince lawmakers to change their minds about siting a casino closer to the action in Manhattan — or to elect legislators who will.


For this reason, passage of the casino amendment would be a full employment act for lobbyists and open a floodgate of political contributions.


Cuomo originally proposed barring casino industry officials from donating to state lawmakers, but that provision was stripped in final negotiations this year.


There’s no guarantee the money will benefit schools or lower taxes.


Cuomo and legislative leaders are promising they will dedicate casino revenues to increase education aid and reduce property taxes. But that commitment is written into law, not the Constitution itself, meaning it can be abandoned at any time.


Plus — as New Yorkers have seen with the lottery — nothing prevents lawmakers from shifting other funds around in the budget to neutralize the benefit of dedicated revenue.


Don’t believe everything you read.


At the urging of Cuomo — who has made the casino amendment a centerpiece of his economic agenda — the Board of Elections went with decidedly slanted wording for what will be Proposition One on the ballot.


Rather than simply stating that the amendment would authorize up to seven casinos, the language asserts that their purpose is for “promoting job growth, increasing aid to schools and permitting local governments to lower property taxes.”


As explained above, each of these claims is dubious.


But as a tactic for changing minds, the wording works brilliantly.


According to a Siena poll released Monday, voters given a hype-free version of the amendment narrowly supported it, 49% to 45%. But when they were read language as it appears on the ballot, the “yes” vote jumped to 56% and the “no” vote dropped to 40% — a 12-point swing that could make a huge difference on Nov. 5.


“There is no question that the wording of the amendment sways some voters to support it who might otherwise not support it,” said Siena spokesman Steven Greenberg.


Think before you gamble.


whammond@nydailynews.com





NY Daily News- Top Stories




http://newyork.greatlocalnews.info/?p=16150

via Great Local News: New York http://newyork.greatlocalnews.info

No comments:

Post a Comment