In June the Legislative Committee for Economic Development and Emerging Technologies held a pep rally for the racetrack industry, thinly disguised as an informational hearing on expanded gambling.
I detailed this in my post Six Degrees of Suffolk Downs.
Lately, my friend Ryan has been doing his own hefty share of sifting through the sand, or should I say, digging through the mud, to discover just who's behind those studies that paint a pretty picture of predatory gambling.
I hope you'll check out his enlightening post, Will Beacon Hill Make an Informed Decision? and then, send it on to your favorite legislator urging them to read it too. Because what they don't know, can hurt us.
Posts
6 comments:
Gladys,
Your idea was stellar, but I had had a conversation with an aide in Senator Pacheco's office on Friday while doing the lit drop and raised the issue of Barrow's funding.
As you are aware, Senator Pacheco has included Cyde Barrow in his monthly video that is currently airing on cable.
Senator Tucker asked Clyde Barrow very specifically about money he has received from the industry in June 2009 and Clyde Barrow did not include the +$15,000 he received in the previous calendar year.
Since the hearing was recorded, this is easily verified.
This seems to raise some very troubling issues about credibility and the use of UMass resouorces that need to be clarified.
Kudos to Ryan for doing the digging!
I'd also like some clarification as to our public university system being used as a front for casino interests!
And yes, I remember Mr. Barrow neglecting to mention his ties to the Olympia Maine project.
We knew better, but what about the public??
When Ballot Question 3 successfully eliminated greyhound racing at the 2 Massahcusetts tracks, Senator Pacheco was quoted as erroenously blaming voters in Newton and Wellesley as if that was significant.
Recently, the Senator was quoted as discrediting the information predatory gambling opponents use as 'ridiculous.'
When discrediting those who have done their own research from sources that don't receive funding from the gambling industry, that label constitutes name-calling, IMO.
When Massachusetts voters saw images of an elected official stuffing cash into her bra on its way to feed slots at Foxwoods, many paint all politicians with the same broad brush.
For that very reason, it is incumbent on not only Senator Pacheco, but all on Beacon Hill to ensure the appropriate fact gathering, transparency and public scrutiny of the process as it moves forward.
That includes an explanation of a professor at a state college using his credentials and perhaps school resources for a study that he was personally paid for.
More worrisome is why he neglected to include that in response to Senator Tucker's question.
It also raises the question of other funding he might have received and failed to mention.
So they lie? You expected something different from this sleazy bunch?
This is like reading Pravda with all the misinformation.These are our leaders who beleve this? Pitiful sight!
The Wizard of Oz is so like what's going on here. Good analagy!
Post a Comment