State Senate Paying for Propaganda

From the SHNS:

ANTI-GAMBLING GROUP DRILLS ROSENBERG OVER STUDY: One of the loudest critics of the push for expanded gambling slammed Senate President Pro Tempore Stanley Rosenberg for sitting on what the group called “the one-sided, apparently taxpayer-funded benefits only study they have reportedly undertaken to prop up their gambling industry bailout.” Rosenberg, point man on gambling policy for the Senate, commissioned an outside study of the market and economic benefits of the proposal. Kathleen Conley Norbut, president of United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts, ripped Senate leaders. “It looks like Senate leadership is using untold taxpayer dollars on a private firm to create more propaganda to justify a proposal which, even proponents admit, will lead to increased corruption and crime, harm to families and children, losses to small businesses and their employees and vast new taxpayer costs,” Norbut said in a statement.

So, let's get this straight: the Senate's paying for a study to see what the economic benefits would be? How about the costs? When are we going to get a study on the costs to cities and towns, businesses, the state lottery, law enforcement, transportation, infrastructure, and social nets? How much tax dollars the casinos would peel away from lost business at local businesses, their cut staff and the lottery? Seriously, that stuff is by far the most relevant -- the industry and politicians have paid for dozens of propaganda reports before. Right now we need some facts, not more meaningless numbers. Without the costs, that's all these propaganda reports can be -- utterly meaningless.

State Senate to take up casinos in June

Senator Murray says the State Senate will take up slots in June, also saying she's only in favor of resort casinos.

I ask readers to remind her -- and their own state legislators -- that we just grew over 19,000 jobs last month and not a single one of them came from a slot machine. We don't need casinos in this state to grow jobs; they're a gimmick that sucks money right out of the local economy, depositing it to the executives and shareholders of massive casino corporations the world over, never to be seen in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts again. Instead of creating permanent jobs, they swap the local, home-grown jobs for the Big Box jobs, and there's usually less of them. Everything from local theaters to restaurants, bars and clubs get smashed by the casinos, while the local businesses that did business with and provided services for those companies get hurt, too.

This is not a jobs grower for Massachusetts. It's just politicians looking for headlines, glitz and the big bucks of slot-machine political donations.

Peter Smulowitz for State Senate on Tuesday

Senator Brown may have won a seat in the US Senate, but that meant he had to give up his old position in the State Senate. The door may have been shut, but we can safely call this an open window.

Peter Smulowitz, a medical doctor living in the district, in Needham, was campaigning to replace Brown since even before Brown defeated Martha Coakley, and now he finds himself an established candidate in an open seat. With an impeccable resume -- from Cornell for a degree in Biology, to the University of California for Med School and then Harvard for a grad degree in health care policy, Smulowitz has been in Massachusetts since 2003, when he started at Beth Israel Deaconess for his residency, where he still works as an emergency physician. As Co-Chair of the Governmental Affairs Committee for the Massachusetts College of Emergency Physicians, he's worked closely with both state regulatory agencies and state legislators, including his work with State Senator James Timilty to file "An Act to Improve Access to Emergency Care," which has nudged the Department of Public Health towards taking action on reducing overcrowding at ERs across the state. He's also had close ties with his home community in Needham, working on environmental causes and affordable housing.

Undoubtedly, health-care related questions will pop up, as well as questions about his record, stances on the issues and the campaign in general. People can listen live, Tuesday at 2:30, or catch it later at the same site, at LeftAhead.com or on itunes.

Senator Pacheco is Wrong About Barrow

First off, let me just preface all of this by saying I have an enormous amount of respect for Senator Pacheco. I consider him an ally on many issues. He was essential, for example, in passing several bills last year to help combat Global Warming and grow green jobs, making Massachusetts an environmental leader again. He's just very, very wrong on the topic of casinos. Sadly, he's misinformed on that topic, too.

A constituent of his and friend of mine sent Senator Pacheco a message today, including a link to my last blog. Pacheco has had Clyde Barrow on his monthly show and frequently uses Barrow's research as evidence for the need to build casinos in Massachusetts. Here's what Senator Pacheco had to say:

From: Pacheco, Marc (SEN) <Marc.Pacheco@state.ma.us>
Subject: Re: Cyde Barrow
To: [redacted]
Date: Monday, September 21, 2009, 9:16 AM

Professor Barrows has NOT received any funding from the Gaming industry

I'm sorry to have to tell the Senator this, but he's completely misinformed. Barrow took no less than $15,000 from Maine's Yes on 2 campaign in 2008, under the guise of Pyramid Associates. Furthermore, from the same link, Clyde Barrow's Center for Policy Analysis itself takes money from the industry -- and that fact comes straight from Barrow's own research papers. So not only is Barrow personally on the take, but his Center's research depends on the funding it receives from their "clients."

It's hard to blame Pacheco for being misinformed, though, because Clyde Barrow danced around the issue and failed to answer the question of whether he's taken money or not, when he was asked at a state house hearing by Senator Tucker.

Senator Pacheco has a race track in his district. That track is very important to him -- which is understandable. He's actually being a good legislator in defending his district's interests. However, just because the track is important to his district doesn't mean he should be making decisions when he's clearly misinformed.

Since Clyde Barrow has been so important to Senator Pacheco's rational behind supporting slots in Massachusetts, the Senator should at the very least hold off on a yes vote until the state commissions an unbiased, comprehensive look at casinos in Masssachusetts -- or, at the very least, until he reads the work of Professors Goodman, Grinols and/or Kindt.

Or, You Could Just Not Allow Casinos

Weird and perplexing argument coming from Senate President Murray in the SHNS (sorry, can't link to it) roundup today...

SENATE PRES. SUGGESTS WIRETAPPING COULD BE PRECURSOR TO GAMING
When Senate President Therese Murray explained why the Legislature declined to sanction wiretapping in an ethics, lobbying and campaign finance proposal unveiled Wednesday, she suggested the provision would be revisited when the state looks to create a “gaming commission.”

So, let's get this straight -- we can't have wiretapping allowed in our current reforms before gambling. Wonder why?

Asked about her comment Friday, a Senate spokesman said, “We need to establish oversight and enforcement before bringing gaming into the state. The enforcement establishment needs to have all the right tools. Wiretapping would be part of that, but it wouldn’t necessarily be limited to gaming. I think that’s what she was getting at.”

So, Senator Murray recognizes that it's so likely casinos will create the need to be able to wiretap public officials... but she's not going to support it until after slots are legalized? And why would the Senator for even a second think it should be limited to gambling? Does this make sense to anyone? It brings up so many more questions than answers.

Why is Senator Murray against wiretapping now? Why would she only support it, with potential caveats, after casino legislation is filed? Most importantly, why on Earth does she want to get Massachusetts mixed up in an industry in which even she recognizes is ripe with corruption, one that is notorious for getting public officials in prison? Seems like we've been having a little more of that than we'd want, already.

This is dirty politics, when we've been promised reform. This is less transparency, when we need more. It's certainly not inspiring confidence in the system. Why shouldn't we give these tools to our state agencies now, before there are more votes concerning slots. Numerous major Massachusetts politicians have already been caught on the take by the feds, but they can't catch everyone. The gambling industry has a very bad record here. We should be giving our state investigative agencies all the tools they need, not capping them off at their knees, until the damage is already done. Senator Murray, get this right, please.

Why Palmer?

They may as well turn the UMASS Amherst Student Center and its hotel into a Mohegan Sun, it's so close to Palmer. Am I crazy to think that's why Mohegan wants it there? (The correct answer is no.)

The good news is that there's almost no chance this bill goes anywhere. No chance that the Governor pushes it after last year's fiasco and this year's economy. The bottom line is this is one area the unions are very, very wrong on - casinos are bad for people, bad for Massachusetts and bad for our state's economy.

A Permanent Way for Patrick to Deflect Questions

Don't cut local aide! See, that's easy.

Slightly harder part? Raise revenue. .3-.5% on the income tax should cover it, along with some sensible cuts and efficiencies. Heck, the Senate just came up with one.

Finally, to save money, don't wait to regulate health care. Do it now. Make a goal to put in place regulations that will save this state 10% on its health care premiums, even if that means limiting the health industry's profits, starting with the HMOs. That saves schools and saves wallets, money that will go right back into the economy to create jobs. Put some of the state's savings into UMASS Worcester to expand its size, as well as create scholarship opportunities. That will help shore up the shortage of doctors. There, we solved our structural deficit and improved health care at the same time.

Awwww, Trav's Heartfelt Goodbye

I only wish I cared. The old guard is almost gone. That's a good thing.

MassEquality seems to be in a cheery mood too.

This afternoon the Senate elected pro-equality Senator Therese Murray (D Plymouth and Barnstable) as its next leader. This follows the resignation of Senate President Robert Travaglini.

This is terrific news. Senator Murray is a long-time friend of the gay community and a strong supporter of equality. With her at the helm, we are one step closer to defeating this discriminatory effort to take away marriage rights from gay and lesbian couples.

Isn't it mildly humorous though that Travaglini cared so little for his own personal agenda, that he'd pre-select a pro-equality senator to succeed him? Don't get me wrong, I thank Travaglini for recognizing his outmoded ways, but if he cared so little for his position he should have at least voted against advancing the ConCon in January. Well, that would assume he counted glbt persons as fully equal citizens and worthy of his support. The Health Care lobby can have him.