Question 3 on the November 4, 2014 election ballot would repeal new legislation allowing casinos in the commonwealth.
John Ribero is chairman of the Repeal the Casino Deal Committee, which collected signatures to put the question on the ballot. He tells us why he believes casinos are bad for Massachusetts.
This proposed law would (1) prohibit the Massachusetts Gaming Commission from issuing any license for a casino or other gaming establishment with table games and slot machines, or any license for a gaming establishment with slot machines; (2) prohibit any such casino or slots gaming under any such licenses that the Commission might have issued before the proposed law took effect; and (3) prohibit wagering on the simulcasting of live greyhound races.
The proposed law would change the definition of “illegal gaming” under Massachusetts law to include wagering on the simulcasting of live greyhound races, as well as table games and slot machines at Commission-licensed casinos, and slot machines at other Commission-licensed gaming establishments. This would make those types of gaming subject to existing state laws providing criminal penalties for, or otherwise regulating or prohibiting, activities involving illegal gaming.
The proposed law states that if any of its parts were declared invalid, the other parts would stay in effect.
A YES VOTE would prohibit casinos, any gaming establishment with slot machines, and wagering on simulcast greyhound races.
A NO VOTE would make no change in the current laws regarding gaming.
As provided by law, the 150-word arguments are written by proponents and opponents of each question, and reflect their opinions. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts does not endorse these arguments, and does not certify the truth or accuracy of any statement made in these arguments. The names of the individuals and organizations who wrote each argument, and any written comments by others about each argument, are on file in the Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth.
IN FAVOR: Massachusetts can do better than casinos. Just ask the “experts”:
• Governor Patrick, Speaker DeLeo and Senate President Murray agree: No casino in their hometowns.
• The former CEO of American Gaming said he would “work very, very hard against” a casino in his hometown.
• Ledyard, Connecticut’s mayor said there has been “no economic development spin-off from (Foxwoods). Businesses do not come here.”
• Moody’s downgraded its casino outlook from “stable” to “negative” and Fitch Ratings said the casino market “is reaching a saturation point.”
• Indiana prosecutors needed an additional court just to handle casino-related crimes.