Saturday, January 13, 2007

With the Legislature likely to debate expanded gambling this year, gambling
opponents drew more than 100 legislators and lobbyists to a Concord
presentation yesterday, urging lawmakers to swiftly kill any bills that
would turn to slot machines or casinos to raise money for the state. The
Legislature has consistently defeated similar measures in the past. But
expected decreases in state revenue and continued uncertainty over education
funding have gambling opponents worried that lawmakers might reconsider
gambling this year, given widespread opposition to a sales or income tax.
"As everyone in this room knows, you will face unprecedented pressure in
this upcoming legislative session to find tough solutions to very, very
intractable problems - and the siren song of easy, quick money," said
Katrina Swett, a former Democratic congressional candidate from Bow and the
co-chairwoman of the Granite State Coalition Against Expanded Gambling.
Gambling supporters say video slots or casinos would plug budget deficits
and bring tourists to the state. They also say the expansion would be modest
step in a state that already offers a variety of lottery games, including
$20 scratch tickets. Opponents say gambling would exacerbate crime, harm the
state's image and drain money from lower-income residents, not out-of-state
vacationers. Swett called the allure of expanded gambling "the ultimate
mirage and the ultimate bait-and-switch tactic." The anti-gambling coalition
held a luncheon for lawmakers in the basement of St. Paul's Church
yesterday, hoping to draw a crowd of about 75. Instead, they attracted a
standing-room audience of roughly 125 people to listen to presentations from
local and national anti-gambling advocates, including a New York billionaire
and a Massachusetts lawmaker, who warned against the social and political
ills of expanded gambling. But while many in the room signed pledges
afterward to oppose legalizing video slots or casinos, others were
expanded-gaming supporters who wanted to hear the opposition's argument.