Are riverboat casinos worth the gamble?
Like the old paddle-wheeled steamboats that used to come and go along some of America’s great rivers in the 19th century, the idea of riverboat gambling in Pennsylvania continues to make periodic visits to the state Legislature. The latest proposal was introduced last week by Beaver County’s Mike Veon, the House Democratic whip. Veon’s plan would allow 15 floating casinos (more like barges anchored to shore rather than boats that go anywhere) on the state’s waterways. Veon estimates his idea would create as many as 36,000 jobs and generate annual revenue in excess of $500 million.
The impetus for this latest effort to expand gambling in the commonwealth is the same as it always is: Pennsylvania needs money. After a sustained period of in-the-black budgets, which corresponded to the nation’s wave of economic prosperity in the 1990s, the state these days is staring into pools of red ink.
Legislation to legalize gambling last made the rounds in Harrisburg about five years ago. With the state budget now full of holes, Veon feels the time might be right to finally get a bill passed, and he’s not alone in his thinking. Some of his colleagues in the House and Senate, particularly those representing regions that would feel the direct impact of riverboat gambling, reportedly are warming to the idea.
No doubt the state could raise a lot of money by legalizing and regulating gambling. Short term, the sheer novelty of riverboat casinos would guarantee big revenues. Longer term, the existence of casino gambling in Pennsylvania would keep a lot of the money here that now is wagered in Atlantic City and other gambling venues around the country. Veon says the state’s “take” could be used to fund, among other things, prescription drug assistance, property tax reduction and grants to volunteer fire companies – much the same as the state lottery funds programs for senior citizens.
The question lawmakers have to ask themselves is whether they’re willing to solve an economic problem (the budget shortfall) at the risk of exacerbating a social one: the damaging effects compulsive gambling can have on individuals and their families. People who gamble beyond their means – whether they’re buying lottery tickets or playing the ponies or wrestling with a one-armed bandit – represent a serious problem. Should Pennsylvania prey on this vulnerable segment of society ostensibly to help others? Is that the way state government should go about solving its budget dilemma?
We’re willing to listen to what gambling proponents have to say. But they should be prepared to address the fears of those who oppose any expansion of gambling in Pennsylvania. Theirs are powerful arguments, too.