The Times endorses
Reject I-892's state gambling expansion

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive Most read articles Most e-mailed articles

Passage of this initiative allows one of the most sweeping expansions of gambling in state history. This unwelcome initiative should be soundly rejected in November.

Gambling interests tried and failed to get the Legislature to go along with adding slot-like machines to bingo halls, card rooms, bowling alleys, restaurants and horse tracks.

Legislators knew their constituents did not want this wholesale expansion.

Drafters of I-892 spent the time and money to ensure local governments cannot opt out if any local establishments already have pull-tabs, charity bingo or house-banked card games. If they have a gambling license, they can sign up for slots. It is worth noting that applications for gambling licenses — and access to slots — are up dramatically.

The language is necessarily tortured in describing the 18,225 electronic scratch-ticket machines that would be apportioned according to a formula in the initiative.

But let's be honest: They look, sound and play like Las Vegas slots or otherwise they would not be so popular — or as profitable and coveted by the non-tribal gambling industry.

The initiative is written to make state lottery operators the regulators. Unlike the state Gambling Commission, which is a law enforcement agency, the lottery is basically sales and promotion.

Training and equipping the lottery commission to enforce this flood of gambling will not be inexpensive.

I-892 is written to require a 75-percent payout by machines. That might sound generous, but payouts above 90 percent may be required to actually hold the attention of gamblers. If the winnings go up, the revenues to the state go down.

Indeed, the unpredictable overhead of these operations dim the optimistic chatter about how much state property-tax relief is really possible. Initial estimates range up around $120 in reduced taxes for a $300,000 home. Peanuts, if it comes with the expense of more neighborhood gambling.

Another hypothetical estimate is the amount of money dedicated to helping troubled gamblers. The initiative talks about 1 percent of the net, but that is a squishy number on which to build a treatment program.

Local cities that tax a share of pull-tabs and gambling receipts could see a dip in income if gamblers forsake those diversions and start to play the slots.

All of the glib projections about I-892 have one purpose — to blow gambling wide open. The only certainty is a pernicious and unwelcome expansion of gambling.

The Legislature refused to go along. Now voters must firmly and loudly say "No" to I-892 in November.