BOSTON – Both House and Senate
leadership announced today that they've agreed to go back to work in order
to add a new amendment to the same gambling bill which passed
through both houses in the preceding months.
But in what is perhaps an odd
coincidence, the announcement came directly on the heels of a
Commonwealth Magazine op-ed which cited several studies which would indicate that expanded gambling disproportionally harms minorities
and the poor - "especially blacks and specifically black women" according to the op-ed.
Research suggests that while most people who gamble can do so
without a problem - the majority of casino profits, to the tune of 70% – 90 % - are derived from patrons who are problem and
pathological gamblers.
When asked about the timing of the
amendment, the Senate's "casino-guru” Stanley Rosenberg (D –
Irony) insisted that the amendment wasn't intended to take advantage
of any particular demographic for the purpose of increasing revenue,
but rather to provide what is obviously a popular entertainment
attraction in regions of the state where they have been previously
unavailable.
“Since most people can game
responsibly, this amendment actually helps those members of the poor and minorities
who might otherwise be unable to afford transportation to gaming opportunities in
distant areas of the state” said Rosenberg.
Senate President Therese Murray
responded to questions about the studies by stating that, “These studies
are clearly elitist and don't show the whole story. This amendment
has nothing to do with taking advantage of the poor and minorities.
On reflection, senate leadership merely realized that casinos and
slot parlors should ideally be located in areas where people have
given up hoping for a job that pays a living wage."
When asked asked if he felt the studies
were cause for concern, House Speaker Bob DeLeo dismissed the idea,
stating that research also suggests that “rich white men have also been negatively impacted
casinos... casino investors haven't been immune from the recession,
you know.”
When asked to comment about the new
amendment, Governor Patrick responded “I think it's a move in the
right direction, one that actually offers more protection to the poor
and minorities.”
Patrick, a self-professed practitioner
of social justice, continued, “Locating casinos in
predominately white or affluent neighborhoods across the state would
just impact the poor and minorities even more. Look, we all know that they're
the ones who'll be stopped and harassed by local police on their way
home through the suburbs."
The Governor added, "I mean, it's bad enough to lose your shirt
at a casino, but then to wind up with an expensive ticket or jail
time - now that's a real economic hardship.”
1 comment:
Wow, those pols really seem quite concerned...NOT. Senator Murray seems to be very confused with the meaning of the "elitist", it being an excellent word to desribe casino operators and politicians who won't listen.
Post a Comment