Although Repeal the Casino Deal’s campaign to undo the 2011 gaming expansion law is coming on very strong, recent polling shows that it might not have the public behind it. According to the poll done by the University of Massachusetts-Lowell and WHDH-TV, 59 percent of registered voters oppose the repeal, while 36 percent support it, with 5 percent undecided.
Question 3 would reverse the 2011 gaming expansion law that authorizes three casino resorts and one slots parlor. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission has granted a license for a slots parlor in Plainville and a casino resort in Springfield. It is scheduled to award a license for the Boston metro gaming zone later this month, with the rival proposals being Steve Wynn’s casino resort in Everett and the Mohegan Tribe’s proposal for Revere.
On August 11 casino opponents from Revere and East Boston boycotted the Massachusetts Gaming Commission hearing on the Boston metro license and instead demonstrated “to draw attention to the sham being foisted on their neighborhoods,” according to a spokesman.
Kicking off their campaign, Repeal’s chairman, John Ribeiro declared, “Knowing full well the casino industry will spend millions—with estimates of $30 million or more—to defeat the repeal, Repeal the Casino Deal will hit the ground, house-by-house and community-by-community.” He added, “Slick ads from the deep-pocketed casino bosses won’t make up for the in-person conversations of friends and neighbors.”
Campaign Manager Darek Barcikowski said the volunteers will “grow our network of support across the Commonwealth. As we engage in conversations with undecided voters from the Cape to the Berkshires, we know that as voters learn more about the casinos, our support will grow to victory on November 4.”
Several high-profile politicians, including the Bay State’s junior U.S. Senator, Elizabeth Warren, support the repeal.
Warren last week announced she intended to vote to repeal, earning her kudos from Repeal the Casino Deal as having made a “bold stand.”
“Elizabeth Warren has a record of putting consumers first and we’re pleased she is raising her voice to stand up to the casino mess,” said Repeal’s chairman, John Ribeiro, last week. Warren’s stand is not a surprise, since she opposed the passage of the gaming law when she ran for Senate two years ago. The other Massachusetts Senator, Ed Markey, has not stated his intention.
Repeal has released names of candidates for statewide office who support the repeal. They include three candidates for governor: Democrat Don Berwick, Republican Mark Fisher and independent Jeff McCormick.
According to Fisher casinos, “can’t bring real jobs to this state.”
Berwick said recently, “I don’t believe that we should be teaching our children that economic development is best achieved through gambling institutions.”
Charlie Baker, a candidate for the Republican nomination for governor, says that even if the voters approve of the repeal, he would favor allowing a single casino to be built in Springfield, who voters have approved the $800 million MGM proposal for that city. “I’m going to vote against the repeal effort,” Baker told the Associated Press. “And if the repeal effort is approved, I’m going to file legislation to put the Springfield casino back on the map.”
Recently he told the editorial board of the Springfield-based newspaper the Republican, “If the repeal effort is successful, I’ll file legislation to put the Springfield casino back on the map.”
Rep. Joseph F. Wagner, who represents the Springfield area and is running for reelection, agrees with Baker. “We would have an ability … to revisit the issue and the question,” he told the Republican’s editorial board recently. “We would have to assess what was the percentage of the vote on either side, how did it break out across regions,” he said, adding, “Local control is a central tenet of the gaming law.”
Gubernatorial Candidate Steven Grossman, the current state treasurer, says that he supported casino legislation and plans to vote against the repeal. At a recent debate Grossman declared, “Massachusetts residents are now going to Foxwoods, Mohegan Sun and Twin River. That’s $850 million per year they are spending in other places.”
Martha Coakley, seen as the front-runner for the Democratic nomination, says she will vote against the repeal although she isn’t a fervent booster of gaming as a force for economic development. She said she would keep an open mind on whether to allow Springfield alone to build a casino if the repeal passes.
“I would keep an open mind on that. One of the strengths of the statute is the local option,” she told the editorial board of the Republican. “I certainly would take it one step at a time and see what happens. If it is repealed, I’d be happy to talk to people here and see if people wanted to go forward with it.”
Some candidates for Congress, such as Niki Tsongas, support the repeal, while Rep. Joseph Kennedy plans to vote against it. His constituents include towns where casinos are planned: Plainville and Taunton.
Christian groups of both the right and left are united in their opposition to casinos in the Bay State, something that Kris Mineau, president emeritus of the Massachusetts Family Institute, a right-leaning organization remarked on last week. “For all the polarization that goes on in Massachusetts, this is a momentous opportunity for us to come together on a common cause,” he said.
Like many Christians, Mineau sees gaming as a “regressive tax on the poor,” who gamble away money they don’t have.
Ben Wright, director of Progressive Massachusetts, a leftwing group, feels much the same way. “A progressive economy does not put in big businesses that suck money out of the small businesses,” he told the Boston Globe. “We’re obviously very supportive of the repeal.”
Bishop Douglas John Fisher, leader of the Episcopal Diocese of Western Massachusetts is encouraging ministers to urge their parishioners to vote for the repeal.
Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley of the Roman Catholic Church, is expected to join the campaign within weeks.
Polls show that people who call themselves either “very conservative” or “very liberal” are likely to be in favor of the repeal, according to Clyde Barrow, a gaming expert who was formerly based in Massachusetts, but now is part of the University of Texas-Rio Grande Valley. Barrow noted that the issue of casino gaming, “crosses the political and ideological spectrum.”
Repeal the Casino Deal says it has gotten donations from liberal and conservative religious people.
Although they were bitter rivals for the Springfield license, Penn National and MGM are now working together to fight Question 3. They are being joined in this effort by area chambers of commerce and labor unions. Together they have formed the Committee to Protect Massachusetts Jobs, which last week launched campaign activities. So far 250 groups and individuals have joined the campaign.
The group’s campaign manager, Wooten Johnson, announced, “Between now and Election Day of November 4, we will be engaging voters across the Commonwealth about the benefits that gaming will bring to Massachusetts. There are many benefits to highlight, and a fair amount of misinformation we need to combat.”
The group contends that gaming will create 10,000 permanent jobs and 6,500 temporary jobs.
Justine Griffin, a spokesman for the group, told the New York Times, “We can generate more than $400 million a year for state government, cities and towns, and that can go to improving fire, police, adding more teachers, infrastructure, roads and bridges here.”
Not part of the group, but allied with it is the American Gaming Association (AGA), which announced last week that it intends to fight against misinformation. “One challenge in Massachusetts now, while in the midst of the proper implementation of gaming by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, is you have a small crowd of critics that are spreading antiquated notions about the industry,” said CEO Geoff Freeman recently.
Some adverse publicity that the fight for the Boston metro license is generating may influence some voters pull the lever for Question 3. Anti-casino groups also hope that the lawsuit Suffolk Downs erstwhile partner Caesars Entertainment pursued against Commission Chairman Stephen Crosby—claiming that he was biased in favor of Wynn— may taint the process for some. That lawsuit was thrown out in May, but Caesars has appealed. The process has forced Crosby to recuse himself from any decision-making regarding the Boston-area license.
Clyde Barrow, an expert on New England gaming, told the New York Times, “A lot of the negative attitude toward casinos has been driven by the gaming commission’s performance. Massachusetts has already taken longer than any state in history on its licenses.”
Some observers of the gaming industry say that the current downtrend in gaming profits nationwide, the immanent closing of four casinos in Atlantic City and predictions by Fitch Ratings that weaknesses in the industry look long-term.
Supporters of the Bay State’s casinos say that Atlantic City is not a predictor of Massachusetts because all of its casinos are in one location, whereas its four casinos would be spread over the state.
Former state Attorney General Scott Harshbarger commented last month, “Maybe Massachusetts is unique. Maybe in fact we will be the first state in the nation and first city to actually see real economic development come from casinos. But it’s hard to believe.”
Pro-casino campaigners are calling attention to the Plainville Slots parlor that Penn National is currently building, and has spent $100 million on despite the electoral threat. Currently 200 building workers are going to the site every day. Soon that number will climb to 1,000. The slots parlor is planned for 1,250 machines.
The project celebrated the “topping off” ceremony of the $225 million project last week, marking the completion of the steel structure.
Jay Snowden, Penn chief operating officer, told the New York Times, “We want voters to understand this project is real. If Massachusetts votes to repeal the law, these jobs all go away the next day.”
Boston Metro License
The Boston Globe reported last week that it had learned that the day after the Mohegan Sun lost its casino referendum in Palmer last November that executives scheduled a meeting with the owners of Suffolk Downs to discuss switching over efforts to Revere.
This could prove embarrassing or even fatal to the tribe in its lawsuit with the Palmer real estate company that claims the tribe didn’t try hard enough to win its election. More to the point, the tribe had an exclusivity agreement with Northeast Realty Associates, that prevented it from talking to other parties about a casino in the state.
Political observers say this could prove to be a gold mine for Repeal the Casino Deal, since it could call into question the tribe’s trustworthiness.
The tribe is in a no holds barred contest for the Boston metro license, which it proposes for Revere and which Steve Wynn proposes for Everett. The gaming commission could choose the winner as soon as September 12.
Although the tribe filed for a recount when it lost the Palmer election by less than 100 votes, its erstwhile allies began accusing it of not trying hard enough soon after. Northeast and the Mohegans have lawsuits against each other, with the tribe claiming the real estate company of interfering with its campaign last year.
After the recount results were announced the tribe almost immediately announced its deal with Suffolk Downs.
