Last week a full-color, four-page brochure began appearing in mailboxes around the state. An organization calling itself “Yes on 2” is, not surprisingly, urging citizens to cast an affirmative ballot on a question reading, “Do you want to allow a slot machine facility at a harness racing track in Biddeford or another community within 25 miles of Scarborough Downs, subject to local approval, and at a harness racing track in Washington County, with part of the profits from these facilities going to support specific state and local programs?”
The campaign literature says that if enough Mainers vote “Yes,” the result will be hundreds of new jobs and more than $30 million for the state to fund education, public safety and much more. And if that’s not sufficient, “Yes on 2” even has a website, www.puttingmainetowork.com, which advises visitors that Calais is a unique, ripe spot for a racino. It also discloses that the recent closing of the Biddeford Lowe’s is even further evidence that “The Proud City Rising Where The Water Falls” desperately needs new jobs. According to “Yes on 2,” it would seem an affirmative vote on Question 2 would be the only sensible course of action to take on Election Day.
But there are at least two points of view on any given issue, and it’s worth noting there are contrarians who, for whatever reason(s), are intent on resisting this supposed cure to many of Maine’s woes.
An outfit called “Casinos No!” has been actively opposing state-sponsored wagering since the first fast-talking gaming proponents began trying to convince Mainers to approve a casino over a decade ago, and it is predictably campaigning against Questions 2 and 3 (that one asks voters to approve yet another gambling palace, this one in Lewiston).
The Casinos No! website contends that casino operators prey primarily upon those who can least afford to be taken advantage of, citing statistics and anecdotal evidence which suggest legalized wagering often costs host communities ”“ through increases in crimes like embezzlement, robbery and theft, each of which can often be connected to gambling addiction ”“ far more money than it produces for them. Angus King, Maine’s chief executive from 1995-2003, is vocally opposed to further casinos as well, but that’s not surprising either; he’s been stridently anti-gambling since he was governor.
But more eye-opening is a pair of political action committees that have announced their opposition to Questions 2 and 3. According to a story in the Oct. 13 edition of the Journal Tribune, Dan Cashman, an aptly-named spokesperson for the “Penobscot County for Table Games & Jobs” PAC, claims that if new casinos are permitted it could mean a drop in revenues as high as 30 percent at Hollywood Slots in Bangor, which is the only legalized gambling establishment currently operating in Maine. And Mark Ferguson, who heads up the “Friends of Oxford Casino” PAC, expresses similar concerns about what the presence of similar establishments might do to the already-approved gaming palace that’s currently being erected in Oxford County.
That’s right: The same advocates of free enterprise who were promising thousands of new jobs when their gambling dens needed building have abruptly decided that Maine needs to put the brakes on further gaming facilities. Maybe they think the state’s economy is suddenly so robust it can no longer use the sort of construction-related jobs which building a new casino or three would undoubtedly create. But the reality is that duplicitous gaming industry monopoly holders don’t like competition any more than owners of non-parasitic businesses do, and that apparently there truly is no honor among thieves.
Mailing visually attractive but misleading literature urging a vote for more legalized gambling in Maine was a bad bet in at least one case; none of the three registered voters residing in my home will be voting “yes” on Question 2 or Question 3. Ironically, though, by turning thumbs down on those two ballot questions, gambling opponents like us will out of necessity be aligning ourselves with an avaricious group of hypocritical, disingenuous rogues in Oxford County and Bangor who stand to profit immensely if the efforts to build casinos in other Maine cities go down to defeat. Sometimes politics does indeed make strange bedfellows.
But make no mistake ”“ the motivation of would-be casino operators in Biddeford, Lewiston, Calais and other communities who are attempting to lure voters with deceptive promises is identical to that of the people who’ve already got their license to pick the pockets of their fellow citizens.
There’s nothing admirable about lust, sloth, envy, wrath, pride, or gluttony. But the latest battle over how many casinos Maine will ultimately contain ”“ and who’ll profit from them ”“ is merely further evidence that when it comes to Cardinal sins, none is more pernicious, divisive, and ultimately more harmful to society than greed.
— Andy Young teaches in Kennebunk and lives in Cumberland.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
