Gambling foes speak before special panel
CONCORD – Opponents of gambling came armed with statistics on crime, explanations on how slot machines aren’t designed for winning and a plea to not deprive them of mouths to feed.
They testified Tuesday before the New Hampshire Gaming Study Commission, a 15-member board appointed by Gov. John Lynch to examine a possible expansion of gambling.
The opponents included restaurateur Tom Boucher, who claimed the eateries and hotels of New Hampshire would lose customers if the state allowed casinos.
Boucher admittedly testified without the benefits of statistics. Rather, Boucher – CEO of Great New Hampshire Restaurants, the parent company of T-Bones – seemingly spoke from the heart and the wallet on what he and his industry peers perceive to be a threat to their livelihoods.
For instance, commission Chairman Andy Lietz told Boucher much of what he said seemed to be anecdotal, including a statement casinos would divert discretionary spending from restaurants and hotels.
Boucher responded: “It doesn’t take a lot of research that gambling is an entertainment industry.”
Gamblers would dine and spend the night at casinos and have no interest in nearby restaurants and hotels, he said.
The commission must present Lynch a report by June that reviews whether the state should legalize slot machines for racetracks and permit destination resort casinos. Earlier this month, the commission hosted a panel discussion with those who run or benefit from charity gaming.
On Tuesday, Boucher joined three other opponents who opined why expanded gambling would increase crime and gambling addictions.
Kevin Harrigan, a University of Waterloo (Ontario) professor, detailed how slot machines are built to make gamblers lose. He has studied the popular gaming machines for a decade.
Whether the slot machine has an old-fashioned mechanized reel or one on a video touch screen, it is a computer, Harrigan said. Outcomes from the computer are random, but always weighted to prevent the gambler from winning more than losing, he said.
The machines hook gamblers with a deceptive presentation, Harrigan said. For one, the machine shows the number of credits but not money gamblers have invested. Gamblers thus typically don’t fully know how much they have lost, he said.
Sixty percent of wins are actually losses, Harrigan said. The machine produces “winning” sounds and effects, but a gambler who just “won” $2.25 has in reality wagered $3.75, he said.
And the reels that contain the winning numbers appear above or below the live reel 12 times more than other combinations, producing an “aw shucks” effect, Harrigan said. After thinking they’ve come close to winning, gamblers will say, “Aw shucks,” and spend more money thinking they’re close to hitting it big, he said.
Earl Grinols, a Baylor University economics professor, presented his findings on how gaming harms tax revenue and increases crime.
He pointed to how New Mexico had gained revenue from casinos, but the expense of related crime, social ills and lost nongaming business opportunities had cost the state more revenue in return.
About 75 percent of those who frequent casinos live within 35 miles of them, Grinols said. His studies couldn’t prove an increase in crime was caused by those who visit casinos from greater distances.
Since the introduction of casinos to many states in 1989, crime in counties that have casinos has increased while the national crime rate has fallen, Grinols said.
Also, the Pennsylvania director of the nonpartisan watchdog group Common Cause told commission members that in many states, political aspirants who back gambling can outspend their election opponents with the help of the gaming industry.
It typically takes time to learn these politicians benefitted from the industry, James Browning said, but by then, they are already in office, and their decisions are irreversible.
University of New Hampshire Survey Center Director Andy Smith didn’t offer any stance on gambling, but instead polled Granite State residents, on behalf of the commission, on gaming.
A recent random poll of 502 adults showed that 21 percent of them worry about increased crime and 16 percent fear a climb in gambling addictions, Smith said.
Of those who strongly support or oppose expanded gambling, opponents outnumber supporters by a 2.5 to 1 margin, Smith said. Conversely, of those who have “modest” support or opposition to expanded gambling, 49 percent back it while 36 percent don’t, Smith said.
Albert McKeon can be reached at 594-5832 or amckeon@nashuatelegraph.com.
