Poll: Casino support still strong in New Bedford

DARTMOUTH – New Bedford residents remain strongly in favor of a resort casino in their community, despite the existence of “some identifiable pockets of opposition or indecision,” based on a poll last week by the University of Massachusetts–Dartmouth Center for Policy Analysis. “Since the casino issue was first broached in Massachusetts in 1995, New Bedford…
To read the full story, Subscribe or
Subscribe to PBN
- Advertisement -

1 COMMENT

  1. I am more than a little surprised that a reputable University would lend their name to a bought and paid for study sponsored by a gambling enterprise without an iota of objectivity.

    It is the subject of much debate whether the economic benefit of gambling outweighs the many negative social impacts like increased gambling addictions, alcohol and drug abuses, family neglect, divorce and abuse, crime, bankruptcy, even suicides, etc.

    Then there is the economic drain on the community by siphoning money out of the pockets of those who usually cannot afford to lose it and would spend it elsewhere in the non-casino economy.

    . But mere gambling occurs in Nevada, New Jersey and a few other places. This is Indian casino gambling.
    How many respondents to this poll knew the difference when asked these questions? Did they know, for example, that Indian casinos and businesses can and do operate without having to comply wiith the hundreds of state and local laws enacted to protect the customers, the public, the workers in the casino and ancillary businesses and the lhealth, safety and quality of life of the community?

    Were these respondents told that these Indian casinos and businesses do not pay any of the taxes that fund state and local public services and pay for the construction, maintenance and repair of infrastructure even though they place great demmands upon all of them daily and this cost must then be made up by the non-Indian taxpaying community?

    Were the respondents told that any agreements made by state and local governments in which the tribe agrees to pay some money, ((always an inadequate amount) payable perhaps in lieu of taxes that they don’t pay, are virtually unverifiable because the tribes operate in secrecy and refuse to disclose any business information. Were they told that any lawsuit that might be necessary to enforce such an agreement is extremely difficult, first because the casino is already built when the tribe hedges on paying and they cannot be sued without an airtright waiver of their legal immunity from suit. Once built, open and operating they are virtually impossible to remove or shut down and lastly the taxpayers have to foot the bill for such suits and match tribal gambling warchests funded with the profits from the unregulated, untaxed gambling casinos and businesses!

    In fact, even though the tribe may be making millions in profits they still recieve millions in federal welfare and grant monies because those federal laws do not limit the income a tribe recieving them may make and the regualtion and supervision of those grants and federal payments is so lax that the tribe could be using those same funds to resist any lawsuit between the state or local agreementand the tribe and it’s outside non-Indian Gambling Investors to pay money due. The very contrat that was used at the outset as an enticement to allow them to locate their gambling casino in a community like New Bedford or Middleboro!

    Were these respondents informed that Indian tribes, their busineses, casinos and therir agents, employees and officers cannot be sued, no matter how outrageous their misdeeds, breaches of contract or torts, because of that same outdated court created legal immunity doctrine?

    Were they told that NO agency, federal or state, effectively polices the day to day operations of Indian casinos, or inspects their slot machines and gambling games for fairness and accuracy or compact compliance?

    The legal landscape is littered with innocent people or businesses who have been cheated, damaged an injured, stiffed on contracts and left in the cold because they had NO LEGAL RIGHTS against any Indian tribe or business? Or that the campaign limitation, disclosure and other anti-corruption and conflict of interest laws do not apply to Indian tribes including the federal McCain/Feingold Campaign Limitation and Reporting Act? That the experience in states like California is that not only was there no noticeable economic benefiit from the proliferation of Indian Gambling casinos there but that the vast cash profits from the losses of gamblers in them, most of whom cannot afford to lose that money, have made a handful of casino Indians THE biggest political contributors to the politicians in Sacramento and completely corrupted the state and local political systems and perverted the system of laws infended to protect everyone!

    That these California casinos have effectively prevented legislation to restore the rights of the people and the workers and to impliment policies to publically disclose the extent of crime, corruption and negative social impacts from reachig the public’s attention as it should. Even the once impartial media has been co-opted from reporting the truth by the extent these welthy casinos buy up advertising space and time in a media economy that is in dire economic straits!

    So the question arises here, that before any reputable University makes a public statement about what the people of any state’s population “favors” in a “poll” that they have taken, especially in the controversial realm of casino gambling, one would expect that the responses reported should be from those who have been adequately informed of all the relevant facts before they were expected to give any intelligent and reliable response.