[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 173 (Friday, November 3, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S16677]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           BETTING ON A LOSER

 Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, Kristina Ford, the executive 
director of the New Orleans City Planning Commission, had an op-ed 
piece in the New York Times about casino gambling in New Orleans. 
Because it touches on a subject that we have not seriously examined as 
a nation, I believe it merits the attention of my colleagues.
  Let me remind you also that Senator Lugar and I have a bill in to 
establish a commission to take an 18-month look at where we are and 
where we should go in this whole question of legalized gambling.
  I ask that the article be printed in the Record.
  The article follows:

                [From the New York Times, Oct. 18, 1995]

                           Betting on a Loser

                           (By Kristina Ford)

       New Orleans.--In New York State, opposition to gambling has 
     crumbled in the face of a budget that apparently is to be 
     balanced by windfalls from games of chance. Keno is trumpeted 
     as a solution to the state's $5 billion deficit, and both the 
     tourist-hungry Catskills and Niagara Falls hope for casinos. 
     Promises of prosperity have also paved the way for a casino 
     in Bridgeport, Conn.
       After the oil and gas industry largely abandoned the New 
     Orleans area a decade ago, we heard similar stories, and we 
     can offer advice to lawmakers who believe their fiscal 
     problems can be solved by a roll of the dice.
       This week, just five months after Harrah's opened a casino 
     here, The New Orleans Times-Picayune characterized it as 
     ``beleaguered.'' It is bringing in only a third of the 
     projected $33 million monthly revenue.
       The whole gaming experiment here has been disappointing. 
     Two of our four riverboat gambling operations have failed and 
     another is reported to be sinking. Casino operators are 
     seeking waivers from city building regulations that were 
     designed to preserve the historic French Quarter from gaudy 
     marketing schemes more appropriate to the Las Vegas strip.
       Two years ago, when the city planning commission asked 
     casino operators what effects they predicted for New Orleans, 
     they gave us revenue projections based on Harrah's 
     experiences in Atlantic City, a city very different from ours 
     in demographics and spirit. They also claimed there would be 
     no limit to the demand for gambling, saying the proof was in 
     the state of Mississippi, where riverboat profits were paying 
     off their loans in 12 months and cities were reducing 
     property taxes. (Seven of the Mississippi gambling boats have 
     failed since then.)
       Despite the assurances, we knew that legalized gambling is 
     at best a crapshoot whose projected effects are most 
     frequently stated in terms of anecdotes, cooked-up numbers 
     and promises. The one clearly foreseeable result--families 
     bankrupted by parents with uncontrollable urges to gamble--is 
     often overlooked.
       Public policy should not depend on who can fashion bigger 
     promises but on how gambling will really effect a city. Yet 
     as we debated the issue, it was impossible to get a clear 
     picture of how it would transform civic life. Would it 
     increase or decrease our considerable crime rate? What would 
     be the effect on our poorest neighborhoods? How would it 
     effect our essential tourist business?
       So the city has instituted a five-year study to assess what 
     gambling will do to our fiscal well-being and community life. 
     We will study how the industry has affected other businesses, 
     determine whether tourists perceive the city's attractions 
     differently now and measure the consequences of gambling on 
     families. Harrah's is paying for the research, but the work 
     is being conducted by a consortium of local universities, 
     which will make annual reports.
       Arguments over casino regulation will dominate the City 
     Council's agenda for years. Our study should give us reliable 
     information for these debates. Should we permit restaurants 
     in the casinos? Should we allow large billboards and flashing 
     light displays in our downtown? With any luck, policy 
     decisions will be based on something other than developers' 
     promises and entrepreneurial baloney.
       New York and Connecticut would be wise to pay attention to 
     our experience and to establish their own commissions to 
     measure performance against promises and to fight facts with 
     facts.

                          ____________________