Bangor Daily News (OpEd) Thursday, October 10, 2002
Casino
Concerns
There
are many good reasons one could be opposed to casino gambling in Maine, or at
least valid concerns one would want addressed first. That a casino, such as the
one proposed by the Penobscot and Passamaquoddy tribes, would create too many
good jobs is neither a good reason nor a valid concern.
The Maine Restaurant Association found
itself in the awkward position of suggesting such at Monday's meeting of the
casino task force. Within that awkward position, however, is an issue that
should be considered as this legislative-commissioned study moves forward.
The association's concerns, as expressed
by Executive Director Dick Grotton, are that the Southern Maine project, at the
size and scope envisioned by the tribes, would employ some 4,700 workers at the
$650-million resort's casino, restaurants, hotel, golf course and other
facilities, with many of those workers coming from the hospitality industry at
wages and benefits far surpassing what most restaurants can pay, thus
exacerbating the tourism industry's existing labor shortage. Those may be
concerns of the restaurant association; they should, however, be of no concern
whatsoever to the task force or to the Legislature to which it will report. The
only reasons Maine should be interested in legalizing casino gambling at all are
the revenue it will generate for the tribes and the state and the jobs it will
create. If the jobs a casino will create are better than the jobs that exist,
good for the casino.
An issue that deserves consideration is
how a casino can be structured so that it enhances, rather than harms, existing
businesses. It is widely recognized, for example, that the glut of full-service
casino resorts in Atlantic City had a devastating effect upon existing
businesses, from hotels and restaurants to beauty parlors and souvenir shops. It
also is widely recognized that the ability of full-service casino resorts to
subsidize these peripheral offerings with gambling proceeds gives them a
competitive advantage. Mr. Grotton calls this "predatory pricing" and
he is correct in calling it unfair, particularly since a Maine casino would be a
monopoly. The best guarantee that a casino will create good jobs is by
preserving a competitive environment among diverse employers for the best
workers, not by giving it an edge that drives other employers out of business.
Some places have figured out ways to
give existing businesses and new businesses not associated with the casino a
chance to prosper because of the casino. Michigan and Ontario, for example,
limit the size and number of peripheral businesses the casino can operate (two
restaurants, for instance, instead of 10) and require that the actual design of
the casino allow other businesses to locate near enough to enjoy the expanded
customer base. Some of the riverboat casinos of the Midwest are required to
operate shuttle busses to the host community's business district to boost
existing businesses. Any state that licenses a casino can require strict
accounting practices so that the gambling proceeds are not allowed to underwrite
other offerings.
It's a competitive world out there, so
let the best employers win. The concerns of the Maine Restaurant Association
about fair competition, though, are valid and the experiences elsewhere offer
ways to address them.