Wonderland's Doors Will Finally Shut

In a move that should surprise no one, the state accepted Wonderland's request to transfer its license to simulcast dog races to Suffolk Downs. It should be noted that the group that owns Suffolk also owns Wonderland, which makes it likely that they're consolidating the operations at Suffolk Downs, so it would no longer make sense to keep Wonderland.

Given the fact that there's a major redevelopment effort being made just across the street -- both at the Wonderland T stop on the Blue Line and surrounding it -- it just makes sense for Suffolk Downs to sell the property now. Given a few years, the potential development that could be built on what's currently Wonderland, as well as what's going on across the street, Revere and the surrounding area could be poised for a real economic boon.

On the other hand, from a no-slots perspective, this cements Suffolk's position as the regional gambling powerhouse, helping their balance sheets by being able to divest in Wonderland, which helps them keep Suffolk open. I wouldn't care about any of that, save for the fact that it strengthens their ability to fight for slots. Suffolk is the #1 force behind the yearly quest for casinos and racinos in Massachusetts, so it would have been nice to see that fly finally swatted.

The Speaker and the Senate in a Game of Suffolk Downs Hold'em?

I'm not really sure what's going on in the Speaker's head -- a check, a fold, a bluff, anyone's guess. Quotes below from today's O'Sullivan SHNS column, which unfortunately can't be linked, leave a very clouded answer.

On the one hand.....

Speaker Robert DeLeo left the door ajar Tuesday to ceding ground on a key provision of the House’s expanded gambling package, telling reporters he was willing to entertain compromises on a guarantee of up to 750 slot machines at the state’s four racetracks, an assurance the Senate and Gov. Deval Patrick oppose.

On the other...

“I’ve learned very well, you never can bet on anything in this place, in terms of what will be in, what won’t be in or whatever,” DeLeo said. “But I will tell you that in terms of myself – not only myself, but the members of the House who overwhelmingly supported it – that’ll be of major importance to us, keeping it.”

Emphasis mine. The Speaker, in that last quote, is talking about slots at the race track. Of course, I don't really buy that the racinos are "of major importance" to anyone who's not in a track district or near one -- but unfortunately that includes the all important Speaker, hence the "us." My point in bringing up that distinction is solely out of bitterness (so much for half the progressive caucus holding to their principals).

That said, we have a Senate Chamber that voted down the racino amendment in their bill, with 5 voting for it and 20 voting against it. The House, of course, passed DeLeo's racino-and-then-some bill by a 120-37 vote. Those are some pretty tall mountains to be scaled to get to any "compromise."

Is the Speaker really willing to listen about a comprise if it doesn't include slots at the race tracks? That's the big question. The smaller question is if the Senate is willing to see this die if he isn't. Perhaps, another question to ask is if the Governor would really stick to his long-ago-made promise to veto racinos, or his tough talk about slots at the race tracks from a few months back, as that decision could be huge in determining just how earnest the Speaker is about his real openness to comprise that veer far off from the House bill.

The Governor's reluctance to come out and say he'd veto racinos, at present, makes me very pessimistic that he'd still veto a bill that has them, but maybe he'll realize racinos would be particularly toxic in the Democratic base this coming election. He does want to win, right? His decision here will definitely impact how hard I'm willing to fight for him this fall.

There will be no answers on this blog today, though, on any of those questions. All I ask is that people who oppose slots or racinos call their state legislator, either for the first time or again. You can find a link to sort your legislators by town on the right.

Race Tracks: Liars to the End

I just had a SHNS Capitol Brief snippet forwarded to me from the afternoon of Wednesday the 23rd. One of the stories in the brief was about Speaker DeLeo, cheer leading slots at the race tracks again, statements which have long-since past Albert Einstein's definition of insanity. The other one was about how the greyhound race tracks had seen their last day of greyhound racing (amen!). Needless to say, when the track spokesperson was quoted, I nearly died laughing.

Raynham Park spokeswoman Amy Lambiaso said 25 of the track’s 600 full-time and part-time workers had been laid off to date. Once live racing ends, another 50 to 60 will be laid off and 40 to 50 workers whose jobs are tied to dog handling will be let go. Lambiaso said all of those workers have already been notified of their layoffs and that they will be the first contacted for jobs should slot machines be authorized.

Freaking liars to the end. As has been well documented on this site, Raynham Park employs a fraction of their boasts - boasts which seemed to change daily back during the ballot campaign. George Carney famously gave two very different numbers when interviewed by two different journalists in articles published within a day of each other back during the campaign, only three months after he laughibly claimed the two tracks employed literally 6,000-8,000 people. For the record, Raynham Park, in 2002, employed only between 100-249 people, according to the US Census. It is surely many fewer people now, given how badly the industry did between 2002 and today.

From the industry that literally prevented their workers from receiving state-paid retraining, so they could continue to cry foul about their workers, using them as PR devices, I guess this is right about what you'd expect. If only George Carney and his lackeys would let sleeping dogs lie, but the truth is he'll do almost anything to keep his track open in hopes of one day getting slots. It should surprise no one that dishonest, corrupt people would seek to open a dishonest and corrupt business.

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.

Not Quite Buying DeLeo on Casinos

The Globe and others are reporting on DeLeo's recent public statements, saying he's in favor of a bill legalizing casinos in Massachusetts. This differs from his past stance because he was previously in favor of allowing casinos only if slots were allowed at the tracks. Color me a skeptic.

DeLeo has not one, but two race tracks in his district - horse and dog. Is he suddenly going to backtrack on those two, powerful interests within his district? Don't bet on it.

This is mere speculation on my part, though an educated guess: DeLeo's recent statements are just to shape the debate and help get the ball rolling, adding pressure on the opposition, pushing the "inevitability" meme yet again. It's a psychological boost for the industry and those in the legislature that want to feed billions to that industry, but not much beyond that.

DeLeo will not willfully allow slots to be passed in Massachusetts, but not at the tracks. Either he thinks he can use his public statements as momentum to pass casinos and tack racinos on as an amendment, or he thinks he'll be able to pass them in a separate bill, using complaints across the state house over the 5 year waiting period before a casino could be built as a means to push racinos through after. After all, a racino could be ready before the trees next bud. Maybe he'll even use that very line (anyone in need of a writer?). Bottom line: the DeLeo/Pacheco/Flynn quest toward Racino, Massachusetts hasn't evaporated. So long as those tracks are open, it never will.

DeLeo on Slots

Can't say I don't understand the dynamic. From the State House News Service (sorry, can't link):

DeLEO CALLS RACETRACK SLOTS ‘THE INITIAL THRESHOLD’
An expanded gambling package bringing resort casinos to Massachusetts must include slot machines at the state’s racetracks, House Speaker Robert DeLeo said Friday. “That’s going to be the initial threshold,” DeLeo said during an interview on WBUR, according to the station's transcript. DeLeo has long supported racetrack slots, his district including Revere, home of Wonderland, and abutting East Boston, home of Suffolk Downs. DeLeo, unlike Senate President Therese Murray who issued a supportive statement Wednesday for GOP candidate Charles Baker, also neared the line of endorsing Gov. Deval Patrick, telling WBUR, "I will support the Democratic nominee, which I expect will be Gov. Patrick."

Now, we just have to see if at least 25% of the House will switch their votes this year from last, and if the Governor will violate a long-standing promise to veto any racino bill, because if any slot deal gets through the House, it won't come without racinos. Complete with minimal, noncompetitive licenses that make it impossible to get big ticket licenses on any other casinos or slot parlors allowed in this state. And how many people would vote for such a bottom-dollar, worst-case-for-Massachusetts scenario? It's a long shot.

Rhode Island Racino Bankrupt

It's official. Says a friend:

Of course, we should now expect that pro-slots people to reverse their argument and say that now that there will be less competition this is a perfect time to add slots to the Massachusetts mix.

Slots will save us!

Two or three of these in Massachusetts is just what we need:

Buried under a mountain of debt, Rhode Island’s struggling Twin River slot complex says it will file for bankruptcy at the end of June unless it can win sufficient financial concessions from its lenders and state officials.The 4,750 video slot complex, owned by a high-powered investment group that includes international gambling tycoon Sol Kerzner, appears to be running out of options after more than a year of high-stakes negotiations....

The impending bankruptcy filing also puts an end to months of speculation that state officials might orchestrate a takeover of the facility itself.

“Absent an agreement, Twin River will have little choice but to file for bankruptcy on or soon after June 26, 2009,” said racino spokeswoman Patti Doyle in a statement.

The Last Gasps of an Evil Industry

Despite the fact that the dog track industry in Massachusetts refused all help in worker retraining from the state and private sources, they're now begging lobbying intensively for an extension to the deadline in which they cease to exist - citing the jobs. From the State House News Service (sorry, can't link):

High-ranking state lawmakers are considering changes to another voter law, mulling strategies to provide both quick and lasting relief to the state's dog racing industry – including a two-year delay of the dog-racing ban voters mandated last November....

“Inasmuch as the voters went to the polls, I wonder if the election were held today, given the set of circumstances we face with regard to the economy, if the voters would have a different thought,” said Rep. Brian Dempsey, House chair of the Economic Development Committee, which oversees gambling legislation. Dempsey said no plan was currently in place to extend the implementation date.

When an industry refuses state help in retraining or shifting its workers to other industries, it's extremely disingenuous to then use a small number of jobs as an excuse to continue to kill and maim dogs. The very fact that those jobs are now at risk is actually a part of the public relations campaign of the track industry -- the people behind those jobs are at much greater risk precisely because the track industry is using them as pawns and refusing to help retrain them. If the workers were retrained and rehired elsewhere, there'd no longer be any Raynham and Wonderland jobs at stake.

But this is nothing new for any card-carrying members of the gambling lobbies. One of their frequent tactics is to continue to push for new rules and regulations that lead to a never-ending expansion of their interests. Whether its any number of the expansions to the state lottery or Rhode Island's racino begging for longer hours, less restrictions and smaller taxes, gambling industries always want more, more, more. Why would anyone ever think such tactics would stop at overturning the will of the voters from just a few months ago?

With the dog industry going bankrupt, though, one has to ask why these tracks are so desperate to stay open. Forcing these things closed, in terms of potential profits, is actually a thing of mercy. Companies that lose millions every year shut down -- but keeping the actual tracks open is not the modus operandi here. This is really all about slots. The day the tracks are sold, it's that much less likely there will ever be a racino in Massachusetts. The death of the dog track industry -- and their hopes to add slots -- can't come soon enough.

Some Questions for Matt Viser on Slots

Hey Matt, how's it hanging? After reading your Sunday slot parlor article, I have some questions for you.

First off, before you go ringing the praises of the Pennsylvania slot system, what sort of investigation have you done on the numbers? While I'll take your word for it that tax revenue from slot machines in Pennsylvania brought $900 million in for the state, did you consider the fact that the state is much, much larger than Massachusetts? When you looked at the rate in which Pennsylvania taxes slots (55%), did you consider whether or not the state could actually get the sort of up-front fees Cahill seemed to wish? If not, at a 27% rate, doesn't that mean a potential Massachusetts slot parlor industry would earn peanuts next to Pennsylvania? Furthermore, since all the experts, including the oft-quoted Clyde Barrow, derided Treasurer Cahill's profit-per-slot numbers and licensing fees as wildly optimistic, why keep repeating them? Isn't that blatantly dishonest? Did you consider if the amount of lobbying dollars Cahill recieves (most in the state) has anything to do with these seemingly low-ball numbers or why he continually pushes the slot machine business?

Secondly, did you at all consider the revenue that other taxable businesses lost in Pennsylvania? How much of that $900 million was the state already bringing in from local restaurants, bars, clubs and other businesses -- all of which have a large multiplier effect, because money spent locally tends to go from one business to the next? If most of that $900 million is old money, isn't that actually a drain on the economy, since its now out of local hands and no longer multiplies, as local businesses are forced to close? Did you consider the loss of revenue the state lottery would take and how cities and towns would be able to cope with it?

Thirdly, how many of these numbers and articles are coming from industry press releases and sources? How many articles have you written boasting the revenue casinos bring in, without spending considerable time answering the previous questions above, versus the number of articles you've written about how the slot machines are predatory in nature. How many articles have you written describing the lives of those who have been addicted to slot machines? Have you written any articles that attempt to explain why counties with any slots in this country have bankruptcy rates that are 18% higher than counties without slots? Or how about articles on businesses that went under around Ledyard in Connecticut, Atlantic City, Detroit or any other area that's introduced casinos or slot parlors?

In all my years reading the Boston Globe, I remember only one really good article on the predatory nature of slot machines -- that explained how and why they were addicting in detail. My final, most important question: Why didn't your article at least reference that excellent piece -- and will your future slot-related articles include that side of the story?

Casinos Don't Make Sense

Here's one of the most amazing posts on casino gambling I've ever read.

First, though gambling is taking place in other states and the lottery, this would be a massive expansion of the most addictive form which would put as many as 5% of the Massachusetts population at risk of new compulsive behaviors. That's as many as 300,000 people - if not you, then potentially your parents, your neighbors, and your kids. In any case, the argument that "two wrongs DO make a right" -- i.e. that if something bad is happening somewhere else we might as well encourage more of it here -- is morally and politically confused.

Second, if the the neurological studies don't convince you that there is a problem, maybe the terms that slot machine manufacturers and casino use will give you some insight. They both work tirelessly to increase a person's "time on device" in order to get a person to "play to extinction" (i.e. exhaust their bank accounts). Some otherwise healthy adults wear adult diapers so they don't have to leave a "hot" machine.

BMass goes on to tackle the 'inevitability' argument, quite convincingly. He also asks people to take up this issue at Democratic Party Platform meetings, which can be found here.

I added an addendum to the post in the form of a comment, one that I think is important enough to include here.

Senator Tucker made an eloquent point at last year's slot hearing. It was one of the most passionate, moving speeches I've ever seen given at a hearing of any kind before. Senator Tucker said that there are four basic tests that we need to consider before passing any sort of tax. Slot machines fail all four:

1. They're volatile. You never know what you'll get in a year, which means your budget is at the constant mercy of the casino lobby.
2. They're unfair. They prey on those who can least afford to pay it.
3. They're expensive to collect. We'd need to build a whole new bureaucratic gambling authority to oversee this mammoth new project. Folks, if you like the Turnpike Authority, you'll love the Gambling one. (Not to mention the huge cost and toll this will take on services within the state, from police to addiction counseling.)
4. It doesn't create new revenue. A slot parlor or casino is largely just a redistribution of the local economy. It's money going from local businesses to the Casino Borg. Instead of having local money have a ripple effect, it becomes money your local community will never see again. This isn't just a tax on users, but on the very local businesses that are the foundation of our cities and towns.

We need to seek stable streams of revenue that are efficient and fair to collect, that don't leech off of other industries that we tax within this state. There are mature and responsible ways of doing that -- but slot machines aren't one of them.

Awesome Cahill Quote (Stick a Fork in Him)

Amazing.

In an interview yesterday, Cahill called his numbers preliminary. "They're absolutely an estimate," he said. "But I would rather err on the side of overestimating what they're worth and get more than underestimate them and be kicking ourselves later."

More amazing-ness.

Cahill did not mention the potential legal impediment during yesterday's breakfast speech, which captured widespread attention, but he said in an interview later that he and his staff knew about the legal problems with the plan. He said he hoped the Justice Department's position would be reversed by the administration of President Obama.

Looking at the blogosphere...

Mass Liberal's got it right: Cahill's not ready for prime time. I say stick a fork in him. Lots of details in his blog, but this was the most interesting tidbit:

And oh yeah, another oopsie:

Cahill also encountered problems on a second major proposal, a plan to privatize the state lottery... It is a move that has been contemplated by other states, but... would violate federal law.

If you want to challenge Patrick's ideas.... definitely limit yourself to legal solutions.

It's amateur hour over at the Treasurer's office.

Also, here's what I wrote earlier this morning. It was easy pickings, but consider Treasurer Cahill sufficiently pwnd.

Cahill: Not a Real Democrat

Did I not just last night say that Cahill was sounding an awful lot like a Republican, including the part where he was coming up with ideas that weren't only stupid concepts, but inept on the details to boot? Well, we learn this morning that Cahill's thinking of running for Governor -- as an Independent. Yeah, good luck with that one, Mr. Treasurer.

State Treasurer Timothy P. Cahill is giving serious consideration to running for governor next year, either in a challenge to Deval Patrick for the Democratic nomination or possibly as an independent candidate, advisers to Cahill said recently.

My favorite part?

Others who are part of Cahill's inner circle said the treasurer does not want to appear to be abandoning the Democratic Party at this point, particularly as he continues to raise funds from Democratic sources and because of the possibility that Patrick would not seek a second term.

Kind of let the cat out of the bag on that one. Contemplating running against the Democrat, not-as-a-Democrat, isn't exactly going to endear you to "Democratic sources."

Gotta love two ineptly handled, PR-disasters coming out of Cahill's office in two days. That's impressive. Run, Cahill, Run!! Massachusetts needs a new State Treasurer.

Bonus points for the Globe editorial slamming Cahill today on his disaster of a slot plan. It was a stupid plan and he deserved the thrashing.

Cahill's Not Done: Wants to Privitize State Lotto

From today's State House News Service (sorry, can't link),

Following up on a plan he says would generate an immediate $2 billion to $3 billion through the licensing of private slot parlors, Treasurer Tim Cahill on Wednesday said the state could capture an additional $1 billion by leasing the state lottery to a private operator.

The fact of the matter is as much as I'd love to do anything to keep the lotto out of his hands, privatizing the lotto is just a bad idea. He's run the thing into the ground, eating up huge sums of money to revamp the HQ so newly minted millionaires can go watch flat screen TVs and get their checks in the lap of luxury, but that's preferable to a privately run lottery. Really, why else would we allow something to be privatized unless we a) wanted to slash employee benefits and b) wanted to allow the state lottery to do things we weren't comfortable with - like make the games more addictive and costly to those who are addicted.

It really gets worse, though. We need more quotes, so Cahill can hang himself:

Without privatization, he said, the added competition from the slot parlors he envisions could set up the lottery for a protracted decline in revenue.

So, buried in all his plans, he's finally recognizing that - yes - the slot parlors he proposes would eat the hell out of the state lottery. Duh. My question: why didn't he account for that in his $244 million number. The state lottery provides almost a billion dollars to cities and towns a year. The slot parlors would give up to $244 million to the entire state in a year - according to Cahill's inflated and bogus numbers. If that $244 million was redirected from the local economy and state lottery, it's not only not new money, but it's money that's sucked away from cities and towns and put into the coffers of state government. In other words, its money lost in the laundry that cities and towns should have but will never actually get back.

But he's sounding an awful lot like a Republican, the more he speaks.

We don’t run liquor. We don’t run the tobacco industry. We tax it and we regulate it,” he said. “We should consider that same model for the lottery.”

Just privatize it and everything will work out! Privatizing is always the answer. That's why we have such great health care in this country!

It gets worse:

Cahill said that without considering privatization, the Lottery could wind up like General Motors, “where you have a business model that you know doesn’t work.”

Call it GM and you know it should be privatized. Because GM isn't a private company, right? GM and the state lottery really are so much alike. For starters, the Massachusetts state lottery system does so poorly! I mean, it only sucks in more money per capita than any other state lottery in the entire country. What an unsuccessful piece of crap!

My question: if the State Lottery is doing so poorly, why doesn't Cahill resign? He oversees it, after all. It's his responsibility as Treasurer of this great Commonwealth. If bleeding dry more Massachusetts citizens, per capita, than any other state in this country isn't good enough for him, perhaps he should admit his failure and start drafting his letter of resignation.

Meanwhile, Cahill says the responsible tax - Governor Patrick's 19 cent gas tax - is too high, even if many communities are saying its too low. $2 a week for the average driver, a little over a hundred a year, is unaffordable - but taxing the poor extra thousands a year at the casino... no problem.

I hope he mounts a challenge against Deval Patrick in 2010 - and I hope he gets crushed. But the important part about that mounted challenge is he'll be out of State Government and Massachusetts will be a better state for it. Run, Cahill, Run!

Cahill's Bad Idea and his Website Specials!

I checked out Cahill's state website. There's some interesting stuff on there. I wonder if his slot machine is part of his Saving Makes Sense program, whereupon he teaches kids how to use basic monetary skills, such as opening a savings account -- and playing the cards right.

Then there's SMART Retirement & Beyond. In that program, there's a seminar that teaches state employees about getting ready for retirement. One of the available classes is "How to Get Free Watered Down Drinks (Just go to Mohegan Sun)."

What a lousy plan. For someone using state dollars to fund programs to teach kids how to manage their day-to-day finances, or people to save for retirement, this is just hypocritical. And stupid. We may as well light that money on fire, if this is the sort of teacher providing these lessons to kids. What good do those things do if we pass legislation that doubles the gambling addiction rate of this state - to the point that more than 5% of this state has a gambling problem? Do we really need that?

Governor Patrick's openly criticizing Cahill's plan, for good reason -not that the Gov's all that better on the subject. However, at the very least Governor Patrick is willing to admit the consequences of slot machines, something Cahill continually ignores. The fact remains that slot parlors have all the negative consequences of resort casinos - and none of the (rare) high points. They're just bad ideas - even worse ideas than resort casinos.

It's high time for some good ideas. Dump the slots - let's talk progressive income tax, at least for the top 1%. It may just bring in more revenue - and definitely with less downside. Why don't we have a single state-wide official talking about that in these disastrous times? Why not talk policy that will help the average citizen of the Commonwealth, instead of hurt them? It may take a while to pass such a measure, but this recession's only getting worse and will continue for the foreseeable future.

Cahill's Idea: Worst Ever?

In a word: Yes. Three slot parlors across the state makes no sense on any level.

State Treasurer Timothy Cahill plans to propose today that the state sell the rights to as many as three slot parlors across Massachusetts, a push far less ambitious than Governor Deval Patrick's bill for three casino resorts last year but one that Cahill will argue is the quickest way to boost state coffers.

Cahill says his plan would bring the state $244 million, to which I respond, so would raising the income tax by a small fraction of a percent. The kicker is the fact that it won't bring in $244 million, because slot parlors are merely a redistribution of the local economy and state lottery funds -- the very state lottery which Cahill has run to the ground. Why have people spending money at their local pubs, restaurants, bars, clubs and bowling allies, when up to 75% of that could be going to slot parlors, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston? Cahill's really got the interests of the people at his heart.

Furthermore, even assuming Cahill's numbers are accurate (they're not), what's $244 million? Does that balance our budget? Not even close. It invites a world of problems and starts the government addiction, which would be fed more down the road - through more parlors, real casinos, expanded gambling and reduced taxes on the industry.

Cahill's ties to the slot industry are well known and deep. He's taken in way too much in gambling lobby dollars - and he's run the state lottery to the ground. Hell, his slot parlor plan is merely an attempt to bail out the multi millionaires at the race tracks - who won't even allow the state to provide free retraining and employment services, because that would hurt the 'poor track worker' meme. His parlor "plan" is overly generous to boot - other states around the country tax these sorts of things at double the rate he'd plan. In other words, Cahill knows who his friends are -- and they're not the average, every day citizens of Massachusetts.

If this at all sounds a bit harsh - I apologize. I'm just sick of having this guy be our State Treasurer and continue his obsession with stale, insider ideas that not only don't solve any of our problems, but would only serve to create new ones, that cost more money to even think about solving. Don't we have enough problems already? Can't we use reasonable and fair methods of generating revenue to deal with those problems?

Money Donald Trump Probably Wants Back...

In 2007, Donald Trump's casino empire spent $137,500 lobbying in Massachusetts and an additional $24,500 in 2008, through the TER Development Co. LLC., intending to compete to build a casino in Massachusetts.

Now, Trump Entertainment's bankrupt for the third time. Oops.

The fact is Trump Entertainment, like the entire casino industry, is on the brink.

Trump had assets of about $2.1 billion and total debts of about $1.74 billion on December 31, 2008, it said in its filing with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey.

The company, eager to conserve cash, missed a $53.1 million bond interest payment due on December 1 as a sharp downturn in consumer spending hit casino revenue, prompting bondholders to push for bankruptcy.

One would hope that this is the kind of news that will make it into the halls of Beacon Hill over the next few months, most especially the Speaker's office, but that's probably too logical for the pro-casino forces. Normally, that wouldn't be a big deal - given the thrashing Governor Patrick's bill took last year, there aren't that many pro-casino forces on Beacon Hill - but things change when a powerful Speaker is among their number. They should note their beloved slot parlors and Racinos aren't doing any better.

So when Speaker DeLeo is considering whether or not there should be major hearings and votes taken on a casino bill this year we should waste months of this state's energy and time yet again, amidst the worst fiscal crisis of our lifetimes, hopefully he'll remember that the industry is doing so well that Donald Trump is fleeing his own company and ashamed his name is attached at all to the casinos he was once proud to own.

Friday's statement did not say when Trump's resignation would be offered or take effect. His daughter Ivanka Trump also said she was resigning.

Trump, a very public and flamboyant figure in an industry filled with colorful, headstrong executives, said the company represents less than 1 percent of his net worth, and that "my investment in it is worthless to me now."

If casinos are worthless to Trump, why should they be any different to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts?

Soon-to-be Speaker Wants Slots

Watch the last 15 seconds or so of the video in the Globe story. DeLeo's folks were practically dragging him away, but he couldn't stop himself from preaching about slots at race tracks and 'other discussion.' Hopefully, that battle won't happen for a while, but it's obvious that this is going to be a priority for him.

For newer readers, while there are no good ways to bring in slot machines, 'racinos' are by far the worst option. They don't take in very much money, they cater to prey on those with the least means to actually gamble - and they open the doors to full-scale casinos in this state, ones that may not even even be able to be taxed. Not only would slots not improve Massachusetts, they'd actually make the state much, much worse off.

ht Eury13

Updates- to reassure the democrat base, here's the talking point DeLeo's putting out there: the new speaker is a "good listener."

Um, yeah. Sure. Obviously, pushing for racinos, the Speaker is deaf to the 2008 ballot question results as well as last year's overwhelming vote. If he's a good listener, he'll leave slots as they are (banned in Massachusetts) and listen to reason. Slots are horrible policy for this state, like almost any other state. They ensnare countless people in a dangerous addiction (1 in 20 people w/in 50 miles) all the while killing local restaurants and businesses, which fuel our local economies and are owned by our brothers, sisters, friends and neighbors. Please, by all means listen, Representative DeLeo. We're tired of you not listening!

The Globe: Making Stuff Up

Seriously, this is crap.

Those two tracks - Raynham-Taunton Greyhound Park and Wonderland Greyhound Park in Revere - employ about 1,000 workers and give millions of dollars in gambling revenue to the state.

According to the state's own figures, the entire racing industry in Massachusetts - horse and car included - employ 707 people. There's maybe 350-400 people working at Wonderland and Raynham tops, many of those part-timers.

That's only the most egregious example, not the most offensive. Let's quickly talk sub heading:

Support remains, but Patrick, top lawmakers back off.

Let me get this straight, Patrick's not supporting it, DiMasi's not supporting it and no major Beacon Hill leader right now is openly pushing for it... yet support remains? Where?

Shouldn't the story be "Patrick, top lawmakers back off casino support?" Isn't that the story, along with the fact that the entire casino industry's going belly under? Why the need to insist that "support remains?" It sounds like the Globe is trying too hard. If there was so much support to begin with, wouldn't we have casinos already?

Like I said, utter crap - or an agenda. Pick your poison.

No, No, No, No, NO, NO, NO

We don't need to solve the local aid problem off the backs of the poor, thank you very much.

SHNS (sorry, can't link):

Advocates for slot machines at the state’s four racetracks seized Tuesday on renewed worries over local aid to sound the horn for revenue generators they say could solve almost the entire projected deficit. After House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi on Monday estimated that the state might have to slash local aid by 10 percent in fiscal 2010, Rep. Kathi-Anne Reinstein said Tuesday that legislation she files perennially would raise roughly $1.1 billion in gross revenues, citing a study commissioned last year by state Treasurer Timothy Cahill.

There's a thousand better ways to solve our budget problem than Racinos, which will only hurt this state's economy. They're only a redistribution of the money already spent in the Massachusetts economy. With all due respect to Representative Reinstein, I had much better ideas here.

Racinos are the worst possible way to introduce something that doesn't belong here in the first place, slots. It opens the doors to real casinos, which can't be taxed by the state and which will put the racinos out of business in the long run - something the Wonderland and Raynham folks know, but don't care about. They know they'll have years to rake in the dough in the meantime. The sooner this industry is dead, the better - 2010 and the end of the dog tracks can't come soon enough.