Question 7...

[hootinholler]

I'm not sure what to think, but I'm leaning yes.

Opinions please?

[elleng]

1. Sorry can't help.

Don't like gambling, but understand need for jobs and revenue.

[DCBob]

2. This refers to the gambling issue.. right?

Not sure either but I think yes also.. we need the jobs. Im assuming there will be some controls and restrictions so it doesnt become Las Vegas here.

[hootinholler]

3. Yes that's right, it's the casino question.

The thing is, I'm not sure that putting one in PG county will actually keep money in Md. Geographically Charles Town is closer to a lot of people than National Harbor. I don't see it impacting WV casinos, as people in Montgomery, Howard, Carrol Frederick and west will go to C.T..



There sure is a lot of FUD being spread in the ads I've seen.

[DCBob]

5. Sorry but I dont even know where the casino is supposed to be built.

Is it only in PG county?

[LiberalEsto]

4. Personally I am anti-gambling

just as I was anti-gambling long ago when I lived in New Jersey. It ruins people.

[Orangepeel]

6. I'll probably vote yes

I don't believe any of the claims about jobs or money for schools. I just don't think gambling should be illegal. It should be a zoning issue, not a state legislative one.

[elleng]

7. Good idea, Zoning issue.

[madinmaryland]

8. NO. How many casinos do we need. There are only so many gamblers.

Two of the existing casinos are already seeing a large decline in business after the Anne Arundel parlor opened.

Enough, already.

[AnnieBW]

9. On the Fence

I live in northern PG County. I've been to the Maryland Live! casino at Arundel Mills twice - the second time because we had a BOGO coupon for the buffet. I wasn't impressed. My friend who likes table games called the video "table" games an abomination.

Personally, I don't give a hoot what goes on in south county. I've only driven by National Harbor, never been there. I resent the people that run the Charles Town casino butting into Maryland's business. I'm tempted to vote for Question 7 simply to stick it to these jerks that are getting up in our business.

[qwlauren35]

10. I am so glad to see this thread.

I am so confused. The question goes so far beyond "gambling in PG County". It expands the option for a 6th casino ANYWHERE IN THE STATE. People are just assuming it will be PG County. It also expands options to tables for blackjack, etc.

The no arguments I've seen are: the money won't go to education - it didn't before, the jobs are Union and will go to non-residents, the addition of a 6th casino may hurt the business of the ones we have.

I have also heard that the state just LOWERED the taxes/state revenue on casino profits. That really pissed me off.

The yes argument is a big DUH. "More casinos with more gambling options are good for Maryland." Gambling has "the potential" to bring revenue to the state, including revenue from outside of the state. The taxes on gambling profits have the "potential" to go toward needed projects, including schools, and the additional revenue COULD relax the tax burden on Marylanders.

If I went on principle alone, I would vote no because I hate gambling. But Pandora's Box has already been opened, so it's just a question of expansion.

At any rate, these are the thoughts I'm mulling over, and I would love to see comments on them.

[hootinholler]

11. Personally I hate slots

But game tables are another issue altogether. I go to Charles Town about twice a year. I doubt that would change if the new house was in PG county, but PG county/National Harbor would be a big draw from Northern Va. I kind of like the idea of Virginians coming to Md to gamble and help fill our coffers.

I doubt that the jobs will go to non Md residents, and hurting the business of an existing casino is well, business. Neither of those arguments are a strong reason to vote no. The money not going to education is well, possible, but that goes for any form of tax. The legislature can allocate or reallocate the disbursement of taxes. Unless there's a constitutional amendment that designates the use of a particular tax, they can essentially do what they want with revenues by changing the law.

I'm leaning yes, but probably won't be sure until I actually vote. It's a real flip flop issue for me.

[deutsey]

12. I just voted no in early voting

I'm anti-gambling industry.

I may be wrong, but I seem to recall the same argument about schools was used back in the '70s to justify establishing a lottery here. I was in 7th or 8th grade, so I may not be remembering it clearly, but I swore that lottery proponents made that argument.

[yellowcanine]

17. They did make the same arguments for the lottery.

And for slots a couple of years ago. At that time we were told we had to keep the slots money in Maryland. Lots of people predicted it wouldn't be long before the gambling interests would be back for more and here they are again.

[shireen]

13. inclined not to vote on 7

I'm really put off by the incessant advertising on tv. That's a lot of money that could be better used helping schools. Big money is obviously behind both sides of it, and I don't trust them.

[Orangepeel]

14. I voted for it.

I don't believe it will do much of anything "for jobs and schools" but I didn't buy the reasons to vote against it, which seemed to boil down to "they're lying about it providing money for schools" and "it's bad for poor people."

The first reason didn't convince me because even though I don't think it will provide money for schools or jobs, I don't believe it will cost them either. The second reason reminds me of the temperance movement and I don't much like telling people what they can and can't do with their money.

So I was pretty much on the fence up until I voted, but I came down on the side of letting people do what they want.

[hootinholler]

15. Actually I did also

Pretty much for the same reasons plus as I said before I hate slots, but table games are funner.

[yellowcanine]

16. I am voting NO because this was a bait and switch.

We were told two years ago that if we approved slots that would be the end of it. Now they are back for more. And yes I know that gambling interests are weighing in on both sides of this debate. If this were just about where the gambling venues go I might vote yes. But the bait and switch pisses me off. That said, I think it is probably going to pass, though most of the people I have talked to are voting no.

The whole gambling thing is leaving a bad taste in my mouth. We are racing to the bottom with surrounding states. And corruption inevitably goes where gambling goes. That is why slots were outlawed in Southern Maryland in the 1960s. And this also does not consider the social costs, which everyone wants to wish away by throwing a pittance of dollars at gambling addiction treatment. Well guess what, that doesn't feed and house children whose parents are pissing away their paychecks at the casinos. I think we might be better off getting rid of all of it again, including the lottery, and raising money for schools the old fashioned way, with taxes.