NEGOTIATIONS OVER expanding gambling in Massachusetts reached an impasse weeks ago, and the only sensible way out is for House Speaker Robert DeLeo to abandon his insistence on so-called “racinos.’’ While DeLeo and Senate President Therese Murray both favor at least two resort casinos, the speaker has also insisted that the state’s existing racetracks be allowed to build slot machine parlors. Murray has opposed this idea just as steadfastly.
She should stick to that position. So should Governor Patrick, who has criticized racinos as the equivalent of a no-bid contract. There’s some truth in Patrick’s analogy. Would-be operators of resort casinos would have to compete for licenses, but existing track owners, who’ve spent gobs of money lobbying the Legislature, would get a clear path to operating slot machines.
DeLeo, whose district includes tracks at Suffolk Downs and Wonderland, has emphasized that racetrack slots would come online sooner than resort casinos and could quickly generate money for cities and towns. But the presence of racinos in Massachusetts may also limit how much would-be resort casino operators are willing to pay the state for their licenses — and how much they invest in building the job-creating amenities that distinguish a resort casino from a roadside gambling hall.
Anyway, the terms of any casino bill will have implications for decades, both for the state and for host communities, and lawmakers and the governor should take the long view. Over time, racinos are likely to draw more heavily on convenience gamblers — people who gamble as a habit, rather than as an occasional form of entertainment — than resort casinos do. And over time, the integrity of the legislative process will suffer if lawmakers make special arrangements now for politically potent racetrack owners.
Even if DeLeo agrees to back down on racinos, some compromise between the two legislative chambers is still possible, for the House and Senate bills differ in more than one way. The Senate bill, for instance, divides the state into three districts and calls for a resort casino in each; the House version calls for a special commission that would review all proposals and select the best ones. Instead of locking horns over racetrack slots, House and Senate negotiators should be hashing out the cleanest, most transparent process possible for seeking and evaluating casino bids.
The advent of Las Vegas-style gambling in Massachusetts brings the potential not just for economic development but also political intrigue. Citizens need to have confidence that any gambling establishments authorized by the state have been carefully vetted and approved on their merits — and not because they lobbied the Legislature hard enough to get an inside track.
