Thursday October 29, 2009

Testimony submitted to the Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies

Laura Everett, Associate Director, Massachusetts Council of Churches

Chairwoman Spilka, Chairman Dempsy, members of the Joint Committee on Economic Development,

Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony. My name is Laura Everett. I am the Associate Director of the Massachusetts Council of Churches. The Massachusetts Council of Churches is an ecumenical partnership of seventeen Orthodox and Protestant denominations in the Commonwealth with more than 1700 affiliated congregations. Together, the member churches of the Massachusetts Council of Churches have opposed gambling expansion in the Commonwealth since the lottery began in 1972 with one ticket drawn once a week for 50 cents that was supposed to solve public education funding. We again oppose all forms of gambling expansion today.

Today, you will hear from economists, social workers, small businesses and environmentalists about why predatory gambling is a bad deal for Massachusetts. And they are right. I appeal to you as public servants who strive to do right and as people who have taken oaths to protect and defend.

All due respect to the out-of-state casino moguls, but these folks are not proposing casinos in Massachusetts out of their deep concern for the well-being of the Commonwealth and our state budget.  They are looking for a business opportunity that profits them. The Massachusetts Constitution tells us that “Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity and happiness of the people; and not for the profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men.”[1] Your calling as elected public officials is as the constitution says, “for the common good… and not for the profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men.” If you legalize state-sponsored and state-promoted gambling, you will be doing it to profit a few select casino moguls at the cost of many Massachusetts citizens.

In the October 23, 2009 edition of the Salem News, it was reported of Chairman Dempsy, “Asked whether there was any feeling of guilt making slots and other games of chances more accessible to some who might not be able to afford them, Dempsey shrugged and said, "If people are going to gamble, they're going to gamble."[2] Mr. Chairman, I sorry, but this is not right. If this body legalizes predatory gambling, you will actively be creating new gamblers. In fact, you would have a vested interest in making more people go to these casinos. Casino gambling is a business model that depends on new gamblers. It won’t work without it. And where there are new gamblers, there are new gambling addicts. The National Gambling Impact Study, created and funded by our Congress, reports that gambling addiction rates double within fifty miles of a new casino.[3]  If our Massachusetts government gets into the business of state-sponsored casinos, it won’t be to simply ‘recapture’ casino gamblers who now travel to other states. By introducing new casinos into our communities, our state actively will be generating more gamblers.

The churches stand in opposition to the state getting into the business of creating new gamblers and new gambling addicts. In fact, this is the exact opposite of the best ideal of what a government can and should do for its people. Our Constitution states: “the end of the institution, maintenance, and administration of government, is to secure the existence of the body politic, to protect it, and to furnish the individuals who compose it with the power of enjoying in safety and tranquility their natural rights, and the blessings of life.”[4] I appeal to the higher calling of your profession- is creating new gambling addicts legislative action you can be proud of?

Right now, according to the state, about 4% or nearly 250,000 Massachusetts residents already had a gambling problem.[5] 250,000 people amounts to the entire population of the towns of Middleborough, Raynham, Taunton, Plainville, Palmer, Revere, and New Bedford combined. And that’s not enough? If you legalize state-sponsored and state-promoted predatory gambling, you too will be in the business of creating more gambling addicts.  Our state government will be creating a new population of addicted gamblers because of the actions of this body, affecting their spouses, children, employers and the wider community.  If this proposal goes through, these people and their families will be our concerns and our financial responsibility. It is cruel to say that some peoples’ lives are simply the cost of doing business.

It’s amazing how a number of political campaigns have drawn on a deep truth of the Christian scriptural tradition to love our neighbor as ourselves. We’ve been told to want for our neighbors what we want for ourselves. Nobody wants a casino in their own back yard and nobody wants their college-aged-son or grandmother to become a gambling addict. Why would you place this burden on someone?

Our Constitution talks of “a social compact, by which the whole people covenants with each citizen, and each citizen with the whole people.” [6] At our best, we try to enact laws that lift up the lowliest, protect the most vulnerable and create a setting where all citizens can flourish. Instead, you are considering enacting a predatory gambling policy that benefits a select few and will hurt many. You are responsible for this social compact. As you consider these bills, I ask you to hold onto your calling of our social compact, a covenant we make with our elected leaders. Over 250,000 people in Massachusetts already have a gambling problem. By the very existence of ‘mitigating funds’ in these bills, the proponents acknowledge that you will be creating more gambling addicts. Is that the holy calling of the Great and General Court?