A three-day follow-up to our original series

Betting on casinos

File photo

A steady dose of dollars from Massachusetts regularly pours into Foxwoods Casino in Connecticut.

Proponents ready
to make push in Mass.

By CHRISTOPHER WALKER ~ The Patriot Ledger - 9-2-03

espite increasingly daunting odds and a series of setbacks, backers of casino gambling in Massachusetts aren’t giving up the fight. The state Senate will take up casino-related bills in coming weeks, and financial backers with deep pockets have not completely lost interest in the potentially lucrative Massachusetts market.

Developers are still seeking property for a casino in New Bedford, and the state’s only federally recognized American Indian tribe continues to hold on to its long-held goal of opening a casino somewhere in the southeastern corner of the state.

All this as the state’s two most powerful political figures show no signs of dropping their opposition to full-fledged casino gambling in the state. Gov. Mitt Romney says the state’s financial problems are outweighed by the potential problems and questionable benefits of a casino. House Speaker Thomas Finneran agrees.

The House easily voted down casino-related bills in the spring, with Finneran putting the issue on the table early during the legislative session to prevent it from becoming part of budget talks, lawmakers said. In the face of that opposition, some in the industry have backed away from the state.

“That market remains very attractive, but the prospects of creating an opportunity are not as great as they were, say, six months ago,” said an executive with a major Las Vegas casino developer.

“It’s just a hard-nosed business reality that there are plenty of other places where there’s a greater chance for opportunity and, therefore, that’s where you devote the time and energy,” the executive said.

But casino backers and gambling experts suggest the issue isn’t dead, saying much depends on whether the state shows any sign of emerging from its fiscal slump. If the state economy continues to founder and more drastic budget cuts are required, minds can be changed by the prospect of cash payments that casinos could provide.

“It all depends on what’s happening when the Legislature comes back after Labor Day and how big the deficit is going to be. I would imagine that’s going to be a big part of it,” said the Rev. Richard McGowan, a Boston College professor and gambling expert.

Sen. Michael Morrissey, chairman of the powerful government regulations committee, will unveil a casino bill in the fall. The proposal is still in draft form, but it’s likely to include slot machines at the state’s four racetracks and at least two licenses for full-fledged casinos. While there’s apparently the will to pass such a measure in the Senate, Morrissey acknowledges that the House and Romney loom as a tough sell.

He admits that casino cash won’t be a cure-all, but the up-front cash payments from developers could provide sizable short-term help. The state’s troubled finances aren’t showing many outward signs of improving, and Morrissey said lawmakers must consider every available option, including casinos.

Other state lawmakers, including some senators, doubt the casino prospects. Without at least tacit support from Romney and Finneran, a large-scale casino in Massachusetts in the near future could be a pipe dream, several officials said.

“I don’t know if much is possible when you’ve got the speaker opposed, and he has great sway over his members,” said Sen. Robert Hedlund, R-Weymouth, a gambling opponent.

David Nunes, who is leading the development effort for the Wampanoag tribe of Martha’s Vineyard, agreed that the next several weeks will be critical. But even if the immediate future doesn’t produce results, he said the tribe is prepared to battle for its right to operate a casino over the long-term. That could include waiting for a more favorable political climate.

Video slot machines appear the most feasible target for supporters of expanded gambling. It’s the only plan Romney will back, but it also falls well short of the potential cash benefit and job creation that casino backers tout.

Meanwhile, the possible encirclement of casino states around Massachusetts continues. Rhode Island officials are in the throes of an intense casino fight, and the state recently doubled the number of video slots it allows.

In November, Maine voters will be asked in a statewide referendum to allow a pair of Indian tribes to build a major resort casino in Sanford, near the Massachusetts and New Hampshire border. The project is being financed by Marnell Corrao, the developer of the Bellagio in Las Vegas, and its backers are pointing to Massachusetts as one of its prime arguments.

Supporters of the Maine casino estimate that more than 80 percent of its business will come from out of state, primarily from Massachusetts. This state already provides between a 30 and 40 percent share of the business for Connecticut’s two casinos, Mohegan Sun and Foxwoods.

Casino proponents in Massachusetts have long argued that the state is losing out on its share of the gambling pie by not giving its residents the chance to lose money in their home state. That point could be amplified further if more states surrounding Massachusetts allow gambling.

“The whole thing is based on the fact that Massachusetts and New Hampshire don’t have casinos; once that happens, this whole thing would tank,” said Dennis Bailey, a spokeman for Casinos No!, the advocacy group fighting the Maine proposal. “This arms-race strategy is really just a race to the bottom. It’s a well that can only be tapped so many times.”

Whatever the immediate prospects for casino gambling in the state, it’s doubtful that the debate will end anytime soon. The issue has lingered in Massachusetts for longer than a decade, sometimes drawing more attention than others. That’s not likely to change, experts say.

“I don’t think it’s ever really going to go away, not when you think about all the money that’s involved,” the Rev. McGowan said.

Christopher Walker may be reached at .