learntoplayslotmachines.com

While the Senate and House leaders in Massachusetts have been working very hard to hammer out a bill that will lead to the legalization of casinos and perhaps slot machines at racetracks, many people have forgotten the most important man of the hour.  As in most cases and in this one in particular, there most important man in the state is none other than Governor Deval Patrick.

Things initially looked promising for gambling expansion in the state.  The House of Representative easily passed a bill that advocated the construction of two commercial casinos and the operation of slot machines at racetracks.  Shortly after, the Senate passed a bill that would oversee the creation of two commercial casinos and one tribal casino.  From that point it seemed a small task to figure out how some sort of compromise to present a unified bill to Governor Deval Patrick, who also was a major supporter of casino expansion.

Initially Governor Patrick wanted to play an influential rule in the negotiation process.  However, as the negotiations slowly worked itself into a stalemate, the Governor has taken a hands of approach – essentially removing one more chef from the overpopulated kitchen.

“There’s a concern, given the fact that there are what, five days, six days, for an awful lot to get done,” said Governor Patrick.

“And it may not get done.”

Legislators only have a single week left to get a unified bill in place.  It would be a shame for them to come up empty handed after putting off so many other important issues.

Massachusetts is doing its best to work things out about casinos, but for many people they are not moving fast enough.  Though it is acknowledged that resolving the issues of how many casinos will operate in the state and whether tracks will be allowed to operate slot machines is important, as it will help the state balance the budget in the long run, many people are becoming frustrated with the amount of time being consumed by the issue.  The state has many fish to fry of varying importance.

Like most things in politics, everyone has their own agenda.  Many of these might be self serving and casinos are something that will help out the entire state, however they are not the only issue that will help that state.  There are many advocates that have been fighting for a change to the criminal records law in the state.  This year has been a major victory on this issue. Advocates managed to win support from both the House and the Senate.  But, now that the legislature has put this tunnel vision on the casinos issue, there is a fear that all of the hard work to change the criminal records law may have been for naught.  The hope was to ride the momentum of support and make some changes before the session was out.

“We want to make sure that the Legislature is reminded that this is an issue that is impacting people on a daily basis,” said Aaron Tanaka, executive director of the Boston Workers Alliance.

“It would just be a shame for the Legislature to let politics get in the way.”

Massachusetts needs to cowboy up and get this casino thing resolved.  I have already made up my mind about it.  I do not support the point of view held by House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo.  It is not very important to get slot machines operating at racetracks.  Sure, slot machines will preserve jobs at the racetracks, but I honestly believe it is only a matter of time before racetracks all across the country begin closing their doors.  If not, it is only a matter of time before the racetracks begin campaigning for table games to accompany their slot machines.  If that happens, it will be a major blow to the two or three casino that the Senate wants to approve right away.

The other problem is that there are other pressing issues that are at the very least just as important as a unified casino bill.  John Rosenthal is the president and founder of Stop Handgun Violence.  Rosenthal’s organization has been trying to push a bill through the legislation that will restrict the purchase of handguns.  He is very frustrated that the entire legislature is hung up on this casino thing, which he feels will only worsen a problem that he has dedicated his time to wipe out.

“It seems like this gun violence prevention legislation is taking a back seat to, frankly, a casino bill which could lead to more crime and gun violence,” said Rosenthal.

“It’s ironic.”

Whether you agree with handgun restriction or not, the point is that no work is being done on Beacon Hill until the casino measure has been rectified.

There is not question that it is very important for the Massachusetts legislature to finally come to an agreement on the casino issue.  The question is: how important are these casinos?  Having slot machine and table games operating in the state will absolutely lend a much needed hand to the state coffers and get the state back on the right track to finally balancing their budget.  However, there are other issues that need to be addressed still on Beacon Hill and many people would like to see them addressed before the end of the legislative session this week.  With the Senate President Therese Murray and House Speaker Robert DeLeo committing all of their energies to arguing over casinos and slot machines, it seem unlikely that any other major issues will be addressed before the end of the week.  This is, needless to say, frustrating to many legislators.

“If you’re on Beacon Hill and you have issues pending … certainly you’re paying attention to what’s happening with the gambling bill because that’s having an impact on a whole lot of other activity,” said Jon Hurst, president of the Retailers Association of Massachusetts.

For example, Hurst organization is very focused on making a change to the health care law and implementing a sales tax holiday for mid August.  Either of these issues might have been the big focus for legislators if they were not so entrenched in hammering out a unified gambling bill.  It is likely that both of these issues will have to wait until the next legislative session to receive any attention.

Things do not look very promising for those that are hoping Massachusetts will pass some sort of casino legislation before the end of this week.  The legislature may actually pull it off and present a unified bill to Governor Deval Patrick.  The problem is that it does not even seem that the efforts to communicate on the part of the two houses of the legislation seem to be working properly.  There is not a lot of hope for negation when neither side seems to speaking the same language.

There are serious miscommunications on the simplest issues.  It does not even appear that either side knows when discussions have been officially wrapped up for the day.  On one day a spokesperson for Senate President Therese Murray said that she and House Speaker planned to work into the night to resolve some key issues that are holding up the negotiations.

“They had a discussion on the broader issues,” said spokesman David Falcone.

“They expect to hear back from the Speaker later tonight. The lines of communication are still left open.”

However the DeLeo camp was under a complete different impression by 7 o’clock that evening.

“Today House and Senate leaders engaged in productive discussions aimed at maximizing local aid revenue and preserving jobs in our state,” said Seth Gitell, spokes person for House Speaker Robert DeLeo.

“After hours of talks, work on the bill will continue in the morning.”

How the two sides will ever reach an ultimate deadline when they cannot even maintain the individual deadlines between themselves, I’ll never know.

Something needs to shake up Beacon Hill in Massachusetts.  The state is in a situation where the entire legislative branch of the government agrees that it is time to expand gambling in the state.  Massachusetts will likely have no less than two commercial casinos in the near future.  The major issue that remains undecided is as to whether state racetracks will also offer slot machines.  As it stands House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo is the main advocate for these racetrack slots.  It is not entirely clear if he his holding up the whole legislative process in stubbornly refusing to move forward until the rest of the legislature agrees with him.  With Senate President Therese Murray and Governor Deval Patrick in open opposition to slots at racetracks, it does make Speaker DeLeo look pretty bad.

House Speaker DeLeo has said that he is not sure if the legislature will meet an agreement before the deadline at the end of this week.  That makes it sound as if he is willing to sacrifice any bill moving forward if it means that in order to do so he will have to say goodbye to his racinos.

“Would I definitively state ‘Yes, we’re going to have a bill by the end of the week?’ No, I probably couldn’t say that,” said DeLeo.

“But I think we’re giving it our best shot.”

Unfortunately, giving it their best shot is not going to help Massachusetts recover from their budget deficit.  Revenues from casinos will be very helpful to the state and they need to make sure this bill gets passed ASAP.

In every negotiation, a party stands the chance of losing some to win some.  The question is almost how much they can stand to lose.  That is a question the Massachusetts legislators have to ask themselves as they proceed with sketching a bill that will expand gambling in the state.  One thing is for certain, if the state can reach a compromise, the bill will include the construction of no less then two full service casinos.  When major point of debate is whether the law should allow racetracks to offer slot machines as well.  The main supporter of slot machines at tracks is House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo.  House Speaker DeLeo believes that slot machines at tracks will preserve thousands of jobs while only causing moderate competition to the coming casinos.

However, slot machines at casinos could cause the state as a whole to lose out even if it does preserve a few jobs.  Gambling operators that are watching the happenings on Beacon Hill very closely for a chance to bid on a Massachusetts venue are very much opposed to slot machines operating at the tracks.  Their concern is that slots will not always be content with slot machines and will eventually demand table games.  That would instantly create four new full service casinos in the state and an over saturation of the Massachusetts market.  Having slot parlors operating out of racetracks could lead to Massachusetts losing out on bids from some of the country’s premier casino developers.  Are slot machines at the track worth having second rate casinos in Massachusetts?

In every negotiation, a party stands the chance of losing some to win some.  The question is almost how much they can stand to lose.  That is a question the Massachusetts legislators have to ask themselves as they proceed with sketching a bill that will expand gambling in the state.  One thing is for certain, if the state can reach a compromise, the bill will include the construction of no less then two full service casinos.  When major point of debate is whether the law should allow racetracks to offer slot machines as well.  The main supporter of slot machines at tracks is House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo.  House Speaker DeLeo believes that slot machines at tracks will preserve thousands of jobs while only causing moderate competition to the coming casinos.

However, slot machines at casinos could cause the state as a whole to lose out even if it does preserve a few jobs.  Gambling operators that are watching the happenings on Beacon Hill very closely for a chance to bid on a Massachusetts venue are very much opposed to slot machines operating at the tracks.  Their concern is that slots will not always be content with slot machines and will eventually demand table games.  That would instantly create four new full service casinos in the state and an over saturation of the Massachusetts market.  Having slot parlors operating out of racetracks could lead to Massachusetts losing out on bids from some of the country’s premier casino developers.  Are slot machines at the track worth having second rate casinos in Massachusetts?

Speaker of the Massachusetts House of Representatives Robert A. DeLeo continues to gain more opposition as he searches desperately for support.  House Speaker DeLeo is doing his very best to convince legislatures that it is a smart idea to allow the state’s for racetracks to offer slot machines as they discuss a bill to expand gambling in the state.  Both the House and the Senate can agree to the fact that it may be time for Massachusetts to fight for its gambling dollars by building no less than two full service casinos that will give gamblers a more convenient alternative to traveling out of state for casino action.

However, House Speaker DeLeo has almost been a one man band as he tries to get slot machines in the tracks.  He believes that having slot machines at the tracks will preserve jobs, boost local aid, and only provide moderate competition for the coming casinos.  Really, how much competition create for a full service casino?  Not much; that is, if slots parlors were ever content just staying a slots parlor.  If other states – such as Iowa, Pennsylvania, and Delaware – are an example it is only a matter of time before the humble racino slots parlors of Massachusetts would begin demanding their right to operate table games.

This concern has spread to developers that currently have their eyes set on Massachusetts.  While it is not clear if slot machines at the tracks is exactly a deal breaker, it could certainly cause Massachusetts to lose out on investments from some of the world’s top casino developers.

Although it may seem that state and federal governments do not give a lot of thought to the laws that they pass there are some things that receive a lot of attention.  An example of a law that managed to get passed is the one in Arizona that is designed to crack down on illegal immigrants.  The law gives police the right to harass anyone they suspect might be an illegal immigrant.  It baffles me, and most of America for that matter, how on earth these legislators did not foresee that this law could lead to serious racial profiling on the part of law enforcement.  However, if the law had to do with money or taxes you had better believe it would have been gone over with a fine toothed comb.

When the 10 casinos in Pennsylvania, only offering slot machines, managed to generate more tax revenue for the state than the 260 casinos in Nevada, a lot of people started discussing the pros and cons of the different tax rates of each state.  To compensate for its lack of venues, Pennsylvania takes an enormous 55 percent chunk of the states slot machine revenues.  Meanwhile, Nevada is content with charging only 8 percent for tax.

“A higher tax rate brings in more money, but that usually means fewer jobs and less capital investment,” said Grant Govertsen, co-founder of Union Gaming Group.  Union group is a Las Vegas, Nevada based analysts for the worldwide gaming industry.

“Most of the recent jurisdictions that have approved gaming have opted for the high tax rate.”