< Back to Front Page Text size – +

Governor skeptical about Cahill's slot machine plan

Email|Link|Comments (9) March 3, 2009 04:27 PM

By Matt Viser, Globe Staff

Governor Deval Patrick said today he was skeptical about state Treasurer Timothy P. Cahill's proposal to license three slot machine parlors around the state, even as top lawmakers started embracing the idea as a revenue-generating proposal in the midst of drastic budget cuts and increased taxes.

Patrick said that he does not want short-term considerations to trump the long-term benefits of his preferred alternative, resort casinos. He also argued that gambling resorts would offer far more jobs and economic development than slot parlors, generating more benefits to offset the inevitable social costs of gambling.

“It seemed like the human costs would be less in the resort setting, and that the benefits would be greater,” Patrick told reporters this morning. “I think the most important thing in this area and others is that we not make long-term decisions on the basis of short-term factors. Whatever we do or not do is going to be with us for a while.”

But House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo, Senate President Therese Murray, and other lawmakers welcomed Cahill's plan warmly, although they closely questioned how he arrived at his $2 billion to $3 billion estimate for what licenses would bring.

“If they’re real,” Murray said of Cahill's projections, “I’ll take them.”

Cahill’s proposal comes as lawmakers are grappling with increasingly dire budget news. Murray and DeLeo said today that revenues are falling more than projected and could result in an additional $500 million budget gap in this fiscal year. That would come on top of a $2.5 billion budget hole that has already been plugged by the governor, and could require immediate budget cuts.

Cahill laid out his slot machine proposal during a legislative budget hearing. He plans to further outline the plan in an address tomorrow morning before the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce. His plan is very much in flux, and would need approval by the Legislature and the signature of the governor.

Questions also were raised about the 27 percent share that Cahill envisions for the state, because other states, including Rhode Island, get far larger pieces of the pie.

The 27 percent state share proposed by Cahill appears to be lifted from Patrick's proposal for resort casinos, but that number factored in the large up-front costs that resort developers would invest. Slot parlors are much cheaper to erect and operate.

DeLeo has advocated for slot machines at the racetracks for years, and was enthusiastic when asked about Cahill’s proposal.

“It’s been an issue which I’ve been talking about for a number of years,” he said, before entering a lunch meeting at Locke Ober. “To have the treasurer bring it back to the forefront of the discussion is something I’m very interested in. I’ve always been in favor of slots at the racetracks.”

9 comments so far...

Tax the poor is al this is.

Posted by Big Jim March 3, 09 05:09 PM

At least someone in state government has an idea to put people to work. All that I have heard lately is TAX, TAX, TAX. If Deval Patrick does not like this idea, what is the alternative. I am still waiting for 1000 more police officers and my property tax relief. Deval - it is time to Walk the Walk.

Posted by John Mullan March 3, 09 05:20 PM

it's time for the gov. to stop throwing spaghetti against the wall and raise some non-tax revenue.... yes you can !

Posted by john sudbury March 3, 09 05:48 PM

Why doesn't Treasurer Cahill just dispatch some employees to rob banks? That's a less destructive source of revenue that opening state-sponsored crack houses for gamblers.
Cahill is a nunbers guy. He is to be forgiven, but not to be put in a policy position.
He evidentally dismisses the willof the people in in Massachusetts who reject any more state gambling. We truy want to ensure that `what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas.'

Posted by JMFulton, Jr. March 3, 09 05:49 PM

Posted by JMFulton, Jr. March 3, 09 06:04 PM

Our "Lawmakers"don't seem to get it. If we let 1 Class 1 slot into the stateat a racetrack ,we give the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe a clear path to open a casino. It's the law. How do you think Foxwoods came about.

Posted by steve March 3, 09 06:04 PM

If you don't like gambling, don't gamble.
As a practical matter gambling is rampant among Bay Staters. Let's be honest.
a. lottery
b. people going to Foxwoods, Mohegan, Twin River
c. illegal gambling/bookies
d. internet
Cahill just wants to make sure that he captures as much of it as he can. That's good public policy as far as I can see.

Posted by Rick March 3, 09 09:12 PM

I say bring in the slots. If people don't want to gamble or go to the track, they can stay home or go elsewhere. In South Florida, lots of "tracks" have slots and casinos, as well as entertainment and restaurants too. It's a great social gathering spot for many individuals. While some choose the Symphony or the sports arenas, others choose the track and casinos. Revere and East Boston will be very popular among the italian-american community.....hopefully they will even build a performing arts center and bring in Frank Sinatra, Jr., Connie Francis, and Paul Anka. It'll save a lot of jobs and make a lot of people happy.

Posted by junior March 3, 09 10:02 PM

I think slot parlors are not a bad idea if they're done right. I have been to a slot parlor in Bangor Maine. It is a compact site with parking all around the casino and the parking is FREE I believe the location is important. The wrong location would have a negative impact on the communities surrounding the parlors.In Canada the winnings from slot machines are TAX FREE. If you want to give people even more reason to come to Massachusetts to gamble, make winnings TAX FREE. Ask people who have won in Canada if they liked not paying taxes on their winnings. The state could tax the casinos on their gross income and give us consumers and working people a break .

Posted by Lew Banelis March 4, 09 12:53 AM