Casinos: Majority of Somerville Reps Against Them

The bulk of Somerville's elected officials on Beacon Hill oppose a bill that would bring casino gambling to the commonwealth of Massachusetts.

State Sen. Pat Jehlen and state Reps. Denise Provost and Carl Sciortino all oppose the bill, saying, among other things, that casinos could eat into Massachusetts lottery revenue and lead to cuts in lottery-funded state aid.

They also expressed concern that casinos in Massachusetts could negatively impact neighboring communities and local businesses, and they don't feel casino gambling will bring the amount of revenue and jobs into the state that proponents of the bill think it will.

The bill, which is supported by Gov. Deval Patrick, House Speaker Robert DeLeo and Senate President Therese Murray, would permit the construction of three casinos in Massachusetts—one in each of three designated regions—in addition to a 1250-machine slot parlor.

There would be one casino in western Massachusetts, one in central and eastern Massachusetts and one in southeastern Massachusetts.

Jehlen, Provost and Sciortino represent most of Somerville in the state House and Senate. 

Rep. Timothy Toomey, who represents most of East Somerville (Ward 1 and Precincts 1 and 2 of Ward 2) did not return a phone call seeking comment on the casino bill. 

Sen. Sal DiDomenico, who represents two precincts in East Somerville (Ward 1, Precinct 1 and Ward 2, Precinct 1) was not in the office when contacted by Somerville Patch, and therefore has not been able to comment. However, DiDomenico has supported casino bills in the past, and does support the current bill, according to the Everett Independent newspaper. 

Opposing casinos

Jehlen said one of the likely sites for a casino in Somerville's region would be Suffolk Downs in East Boston. If a casino is built there, she said, it could negatively impact Somerville. 

In Norwich, Conn., which is near the Mohegan Sun casino, "drunk driving arrests doubled" once the casino was built, Jehlen said, adding that the small city has had to spend millions more to deal with the casino's presence.

"Bankruptcies are very common near casinos," as are cases of embezzlement, she said. 

She also expressed concern that restaurants and other entertainment venues near casinos would see a drop in business.

Provost said, "Slot machines would be a terrible thing to bring into Massachusetts." She opposes the bill, "largely because of [casinos'] destructiveness to real economic development."

Cutting into lottery revenue

For Sciortino, along with Jehlen and Provost, one of the biggest concerns is a potential drop in revenues from the Massachusetts lottery. Every dollar spent on a slot machine is a dollar not spent on the lottery, said Sciortino. Because the lottery brings in funds for schools, that's a problem, he said.

Casinos will "divert spending from the lottery, which is really essential for our school system right now," Sciortino said.

Jehlen said, "The lottery is a very efficient way to raise money from gambling," but casinos are inefficient.

"Everyone admits that the lottery will lose money," said Provost, adding that dwindling lottery revenues lead to cuts in local aid.

Also, with casinos, which have investors, owners and backers in other states and countries, it's easy for expected revenues to slip out of Massachusetts, she said.

Skepticism about revenue and jobs

Provost said, "I think we have better alternatives" for creating jobs and generating revenues. "I think casino gambling is in the majority of states now; it hasn't saved the economy of any state."

Connecticut is in bad shape, she said, and Nevada has a high unemployment rate. 

Provost also said that if casinos came to Massachusetts, "they [would] gain power and influence" and, over time, ask for and receive looser restrictions and regulations. "Any revenue assumptions we have … that's going to change because it"—revenue derived from casino gambling—"becomes unpredictable."

As for jobs, "I think we have to look at net jobs," Provost said. If casinos come to Massachusetts, "People will move into the state looking for jobs. This happened in Connecticut." At the same time, "You will also have job loss[es] because of the competition casinos will exert over the local economies."

Provost also said, "The new jobs created [by casinos] won't necessarily be good ones … a lot of these jobs are going to be fairly low-paying jobs."

Jehlen said that bringing in casinos would create "a big new bureaucracy," with a gaming commission and added costs to the state police.

"It's just not a good way for the state to raise [money]," she said.

Social costs

"I grew up in Connecticut when the casinos opened up there, and I saw families collapse," said Sciortino.

A close family member attempted suicide due to depression from gambling addiction, he said.

For Sciortino, social costs are ultimately economic costs.

Provost said, "I'm not a prohibitionist on wagering at all," adding that controlling gambling helps prevent criminal elements from getting into the business. Provost said she might be open to the casino bill if it didn't include a provision for a slot parlor.

Tribal casinos

The Mashpee Wampanoag tribe, which won federal recognition in 2007, is a likely group to build a casino in the southeastern part of the state, and Provost expressed concern that tribal casinos bring a host of difficulties to local communities and complictions with oversight and federal law.

"If you look at some of the issues in other states surrounding tribal casinos, you sort of go, belch," she said.

American Indian tribes with casinos soon "acquire all sorts of friends … who will help them," she said, referring to business groups, lobbyists, lawyers and investors who may not have the tribe's best interests at heart. Tribal casinos in Connecticut, which thrived at first, are now struggling, she said.

Also, tribal casinos are regulated by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), which is highly complicated and complex, she said. "Nobody should be messing with IGRA in the absence of a lawyer who knows it really well," Provost said. She's not convinced the state legislature, or even the governor's administration, fully understands complex federal tribal gaming law.