Gambling.
The mere mention of the word stirs the passion of Kentucky voters quicker than a lucky streak at the craps table. Many view gaming as a financial panacea, a golden cash cow capable of curing the state’s deepening financial woes. But other Kentuckians see gambling as something more akin to the golden calf of biblical lore - an idol that if followed will unravel the state’s moral fiber and create social problems far outweighing any economic benefits.
In the latest act of Kentucky’s seemingly endless gambling drama, Sen. Damon Thayer (R-Georgetown) announced on Oct. 20 that he plans to propose an amendment to the state constitution that would allow voters in the seven Kentucky counties that already host live horse racing to decide if they want to allow video gaming machines. The amendment would put the decision in the hands of local jurisdictions.
At the same time, Senate President David Williams (R-Burkesville) said that he plans to propose an amendment that would require a constitutional amendment to expand gambling further, in essence forcing a statewide referendum.
The two Republican senators outlined their plans at a private meeting with representatives of Kentucky’s horse racing industry, who strongly support video gaming. They hope that expanded gambling options at horse tracks will generate revenues and revitalize the struggling Thoroughbred industry.
Under Thayer’s proposal, 25 percent of the net gambling take or $100 million, whichever is greater, would go into a fund to increase racing purses, support breeding and fund marketing for the horse industry. Machine operators would get 25 percent with the state raking in the other half. The state lottery would regulate the gaming, and a competitive bidding process would determine who receives licenses.
"It's time, after debating this issue since 1993 in Kentucky, that we put it on the ballot in November 2010 and let the people of Kentucky decide its fate," Thayer told the Associated Press.
Thayer has it half right. Kentucky citizens should have the opportunity to vote on an issue as divisive and morally charged as gambling. Allowing each county to decide if it wants gambling in its community makes sense. The proposal puts the decision making power directly into the hands of citizens - exactly where it belongs.
But why limit gambling to seven counties? If gambling truly represents the economic bonanza supporter’s claim, shouldn’t all Kentuckians have an opportunity to reap the rewards?
The current gambling proposals reveal a deeply imbedded mentality permeating politics – the belief that government should choose economic winners and losers. And industries spend lavishly to influence these decisions. Kentucky horse tracks have spent over $290,000 on lobbying efforts in 2009, according to the most recent Kentucky Legislative Ethics Commission reports. The Keeneland association leads the way dolling out $106,645 to lobbyists so far this year.
Rep. Ben Chandler (D-Versailles) weighed in on the gambling issue in a recent op-ed piece published in the Herald-Leader and the Woodford Sun. His thinking illustrates this tendency to favor one constituency over another. Chandler calls horse racing one of Kentucky’s “signature industries” and sees it as government’s role to protect it.
“There are a number of forces at work, but the lack of gaming options in our state is crippling Kentucky’s horse industry. Race tracks that allow casino gaming in other states have been able to provide bigger purses, giving owners and trainers bigger incentives to race in these states.”
The Thoroughbred industry undoubtedly contributes mightily to the state. It generates billions of dollars, provides employment for thousands of Kentuckians and as Chandler puts it, “helps define Kentucky’s ‘brand’.”
The industry also contributes to Chandler’s reelection fund. The National Thoroughbred Racing Association Political Action Committee gave $5,000 to the Sixth District congressman’s campaign on May 7, 2009, according to the federal financial disclosure reports issued in October.
So, do these industries really deserve special treatment? Are Kentuckians working in these businesses more important than those working in the coal industry, the grocery business, or in any one of the thousands of other enterprises that make up the economy of this state? Wouldn’t motels benefit from slot machines in their foyers? What about restaurants or movie theaters?
Government certainly has a role to play in creating a positive economic environment, but policies should benefit of all Kentuckians, not just select industries or constituencies chosen based on political factors and campaign contributions. Government oversteps its bounds when it begins to choose economic winners and losers.
Thayer’s proposal hits the mark in giving the power of self-determination to Kentuckians, but using gambling as a lever to boost the horse industry to the exclusion of all others smacks of political favoritism. If gambling is truly good for the state, every business and industry should have an opportunity to sit at the table.
Comments