Gambling on the future: state government hedges its bets while citizens lose their shirts

May 26, 10:10 AMBirmingham Atheism ExaminerJerome Triplett

Previous Next

4 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Birmingham Atheism Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

With the world in the midst of financial collapse, Alabama finds itself desperately searching for an identity in the changing economy of the 21st century. The jobs most Alabamians have relied upon for generations, especially in rural areas, continue to disappear with little or nothing to replace them. A drive through rural northwest Alabama reveals closed factories, empty retail buildings and neighborhoods littered with for-sale signs. Talk to the people in these areas and you hear a quiet desperation that arises in hardworking men and women who have lost the ability to pay their bills, to provide for their children, and are facing an educational system that has been left to die on the vine.

One proposed solution to Alabama's economic woes, in an effort to increase tourism, create jobs and provide extra tax revenue, has been legalized gambling. Perhaps the most memorable is the 1999 lottery initiative, put forth by then governor Don Siegleman. While that initiative failed in the voting booth, that failure has done little to halt gambling across the state, especially in the form of electronic bingo, which has become the new front in the war for state sanctioned gambling.

But recently Governor Bob Riley had this to say concerning legalized gambling: "The only thing you hear is about how much money these machines generate. That is the biggest bunch of malarkey there's ever been. There's more misery. There are more families broken up. There is more corruption surrounding these things than there's ever been in Alabama. The reason we don't have gambling in Alabama is because the people of Alabama understand the social consequences of it. What it does to a family, what it does to a community." This statement has left some Alabamians wondering whether Governor Riley would be more comfortable speaking from the pulpit rather than the podium, and how a successful model employed by other states can be dismissed so easily.

While there is ample controversy and debate surrounding the impact gambling has on local communities, several studies provide promising statistics centered on the introduction of legalized gambling. A UC Riverside study of 1990 and 2000 census data shows income levels for families living near Indian casinos rising by 55 percent, finding that Indian casinos brought not only jobs, but also reduced welfare dependence on reservations and in surrounding areas. A report by the Michigan Tourism Center found a positive impact on Detroit tourism to the tune of $165 - $286 million, stating that this revenue would not have come into the Detroit area without the presence of casino gambling.

Increased tourism and jobs aren't the only effects gambling could have on the state. Georgia's HOPE program, funded by gambling tax revenue, has already provided $3.8 billion in funds to help students with a B average or better attend any public or private university within Georgia, and that's not the only example. Many other states have also put tax revenue from legalized gambling to good use. Reports from the National Conference of State Legislatures, the American Gambling Association, State of the States and the AGA Survey of Casino Entertainment produced the following figures for 2003:

• Colorado: $95.6 million - Shared by local communities, historic preservation and state.
• Illinois: $719.9 million - Shared by local governments and state education assistance fund.
• Indiana: $702.7 million - Shared by local governments and the state for property tax relief, economic development and capital expenditures.
• Louisiana: $448.9 million - Shared by local governments and state for teacher salaries/pay raises and gambling enforcement.
• Mississippi: $325 million - Shared by state and local governments.
• Nevada: $776.5 million - Shared by education, local governments and the state general fund.
• New Jersey: $414.5 million - Used for financial assistance to the elderly and disabled.

Given the above figures, increasingly painful shortfalls in the state coffers, and well documented instances of funding received by Governor Riley's campaign from out-of-state gambling lobbies, one can't help but wonder whose financial and social well being is being served when the Governor waxes prophetic about the evils of gambling. Many Alabamians certainly seem to be wondering this as they find themselves forced to supply public schools with everything from money for textbooks to hand soap, all while watching with despair as the PACT monies they entrusted to the state treasury evaporate.

Still many anti-gambling groups, religious organizations and elected officials maintain that crime and gambling are directly linked, often with numbers to support this claim. But recent studies point to the possibility that economic growth in these states, rather than legalized gambling, could be the cause of increased criminal activity. The National Criminal Justice Reference Service, in a 2001 report submitted to the Department of Justice, reached the following conclusion: "The examination of the crime data indicated that there can be no conclusive statement, either way, regarding the effect that casinos have on crime…One could easily hypothesize that what is interpreted as a casino effect is actually a tourism effect...as the introduction of resorts and theme parks into an area have been shown to increase an area's crime." It would seem that regardless of the source, prosperity comes with its own set of problems.

And so it is that Alabama finds itself at a crossroads: adapt to make a bid on new economic alternatives or gamble on traditional attitudes and practices, hoping they prove more viable next time around. The latter seems to present many in Alabama with the agonizing decision of either leaving behind the homes and families they love or resigning to scrape by on dwindling opportunity, receding incomes, and an anemic educational system. It is hard to predict what the future holds for the people of Alabama, but one question seems to be moving to the forefront of discussion: What happens to the moral authority when there is no one left to read the rules?

(This article was orginally posted at Discover West Alabama.)