Legislative Committee Holds Gambling Hearing

While proponents of an expanded definition of gambling in the state contend that casinos will bring in much-needed revenues, especially since the state is in the process of a budget crisis, opponents insist that the social ills that tend to accompany casinos are not worth the price.

The Wampanoag tribe, the only federally recognized tribe in the state, was on hand to advocate for legalizing casino gambling. The Martha's Vineyard-based tribe has made no secret of its intent to build a casino in the state if the legislation passes, and the tribe reiterated its message at the debate. In the past, the Wampanoags have said they had their eye on land in southeastern Massachusetts as a site for a casino, but more recently the tribe refuses to specify a potential location.

A spokesperson for state Senator Sue Tucker, an opponent of legalizing gambling, points out to GlobeSt.com that there are six other tribes in the state that are looking to be federally recognized. Since a tribe can build a casino once it gets that recognition, this could open the door for as many as seven casinos in Massachusetts. "That changes the culture of the state," he says.

A number of Connecticut state leaders came to the hearing to testify on the impact casino gambling has had on their state. The Tucker spokesperson says that the mayor of Ledyard, CT--where the Foxwoods casino is located--testified that the casino has had a "horrible" impact on his city.

"Indians are not required to pay for new roads or for the school system," says the Tucker spokesperson. "They don't pay any infrastructure costs." Indian tribes, which are not required to pay taxes, usually give a percentage of their profits from their casinos to the host state in a pre-arranged contract.

While advocates of casino gambling say these profits can offset current budget deficits, Tucker's representative contends that the casinos transfer wealth, rather than create it. "Any industry that relies on discretionary income will be hit hard"[by the development of a casino," he says. "The only reason we're talking about this is because the state needs revenues."

The House is set to debate the issue on April 15 and could vote on it that day. The legislation will then move to the Senate. Most industry experts say that the vote will be a close one.