Hi 7° | Lo -10°

Letter: Reasons to reject casino

The largest reason to object to the casino proposal is that by passing this bill, New Hampshire loses too much control of state policy to the gaming industry, and probably to Millennium Gaming in particular. Think.

The governor’s legal counsel, Lucy Hodder, is a former lobbyist for Millennium.

The New Hampshire Association of Chiefs of Police has long opposed expanded gambling, but the New Hampshire Police Association and the New Hampshire Troopers Association recently support the bill. Isn’t it a strange coincidence that the Demers Group lobbying firm represents both Millenium and NHPA and NHTA?

The police organizations say the casino will bring in money for critical services (presumably to them). Yet the New Hampshire Center for Public Policy has stated, “While expanded gambling will yield revenue to the state, our model’s estimates of the social costs of problem gambling suggest no long-term net state benefit when the tax on casino operations is set at 30 percent or less.”

There is strong evidence that the governor’s projected revenue is less than probable. The share of revenue from gaming to New Hampshire is not based on gross revenue, but rather on profit. Millenium has control on how it calculates net income.

There are no rules and regulations in place to govern gambling. Have we not learned anything from the recent financial crisis?

Ask your state representative what gambling does for local charities or businesses. Do we want the gaming industry to have significant influence on New Hampshire?



Legacy Comments0
There are no comments yet. Be the first!
Post a Comment

You must be registered to comment on stories. Click here to register.