Private Enterprise Rolls Snake Eyes in Gambling Fight

By Chuck Muth

While I recognize that an inordinate amount of hypocrisy is almost a prerequisite for politicians, the examples of such never cease to amaze. Which brings me this week to Rhode Island.

Here's the deal. Back in 1973, the people of Rhode Island held a constitutional convention in which a state-run lottery was approved. Then, in 1981, the state Supreme Court expanded the definition of "lottery" to include what became known as "video lotteries." You and I know "video lotteries" by their common name: slots.

Anyway, video lotteries have since been approved for two Rhode Island "facilities," one in Lincoln Park and the other in Newport Grand. You and I know "facilities" by their common name: casinos. The big difference being that the "house" in Lincoln Park and Newport Grand isn't a privately-owned company, but the state. So the net revenues generated at the facilities aren't profits, they're, well...taxes.

Enter the Narragansett Indian tribe and Harrah's Entertainment. The two have partnered up together to open a privately-owned casino in West Warwick, RI. In both 2004 and 2005, state legislators passed bills allowing the people of West Warwick to vote for themselves on whether or not they wanted to approve the new privately-owned casino in their town. However, the state's Supreme Court overruled the General Assembly, saying the bills were unconstitutional.

To reach this decision, the court played one heck of a game of legal Twister. Remember, the constitutional convention in 1973 only empowered the state to run a lottery. It said nothing about casinos. Then in 1992, slots were renamed and reclassified as video lotteries in order for the state to "constitutionally" open up the two government-owned casinos. But now that a private firm wants to open up a competing casino, the court laughingly ruled that the constitution only allows the state to run a casino by equating a full-scale casino to a number-drawn lottery.

Thanks to this goofy ruling, the only way for the people of West Warwick to get a chance to vote for themselves whether or not to approve the proposed privately-owned casino is for the entire state to first vote on a constitutional amendment which clarifies the clear language of what is already crystal clear to the Average Joe: that casinos and lotteries are two completely different things. But the only way for a constitutional amendment to make it on the ballot in Rhode Island is if the General Assembly approves and submits it. There's no petition option for citizens to gather signatures and place a measure on the ballot themselves.

Now here's where the world-class hypocrisy comes in to play.

Republican Gov. Donald Carcieri boldly proclaimed earlier this month, "Let the people decide." He was talking about a measure which would allow citizens to gather signatures to put an issue on the ballot without having to go through the General Assembly. But when asked about letting the people of West Warwick decide for themselves whether or not to approve the privately-owned casino, Carcieri just says no. Why the forked tongue on letting "the people decide"?

"We already have gambling in Lincoln and Newport," the governor said.

So? If there are already casinos in his state, what's the big deal about letting "the people" in communities OTHER than Lincoln and Newport have a casino, too? Well, because ALL of the revenue from the Lincoln and Newport casinos goes to the state government - while the net revenue (after taxes) from the proposed West Warwick casino would go to a privately-owned business.

Heaven forefend!

Indeed, in objecting to a privately-owned casino project proposed for Johnston, RI, Gov. Carcieri actually said, "For every dollar such a new casino takes from Newport or Lincoln, Rhode Island is losing 35 cents. Why put a third one in when it will draw from the other two?"

You see, the government hates competition. There's no objection to gambling. There's no objection to casinos. A casino in another town would be fine, according to Gov. Carcieri, but only "if it's operated and controlled by the state." Which is kinda like the old saying that you can get your car in any color you want...so long as it's black.

It's bad enough the Supreme Court decided that a tree was a goat, but for Gov. Carcieri to take a position that the people should be able to decide important public policy matters EXCEPT when those matters might limit government or promote free-market competition really takes the cake.

If Gov. Carcieri was principled, he'd pressure the General Assembly to put the constitutional amendment on the ballot in November and let the people decide if the government should continue to hold a monopoly on gambling operations in the state. And if the people say they want free-market gaming competition, then the people of West Warwick should get to decide if they want a casino in their back yard at the earliest opportunity.

Anything less on Gov. Carcieri's part is pure, unadulterated hypocrisy. And it's darned hard to swallow.

Chuck Muth is president of Citizen Outreach, a non-profit public policy advocacy organization in Washington, D.C. The views expressed are his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Citizen Outreach. He may be reached at chuck@citizenoutreach.com.