POKIN AROUND: Time to lift casino loss limit?
If so, let voters decide, not lawmakers
State Sen. Scott Rupp, R-2nd District, of Wentzville, has sponsored a bill that would abolish the loss limit, which is intended to keep gamblers from losing more than $500 in two hours.
In theory, the limit serves as a speed bump that lets gamblers know their hobby, or addiction, depending on your point of view, can lead to financial ruin.For years, Missouri gaming lobbyists have complained to lawmakers about the loss limit. Missouri is the only state that still has a limit.
As such, the argument goes, Missouri is at a disadvantage when it comes to attracting big spenders who, instead, go to New Jersey, Nevada or right across the river - for those OK with Illinois' new smoking ban.
It seems to me that for quite some time Missouri's casinos have warned that the sky is falling as a result of out-of-state threats that will most assuredly doom the state's gaming industry.
This time, the threat is Kansas' decision last year to approve four casinos, two in the Kansas City, Kan., area, that would compete with two Missouri casinos.
Kansas' new casino law is being challenged in the courts.
Here in St. Charles, when I look skyward to see what's falling all I see is the brand-new 25-story, $265 million Ameristar Hotel. And in downtown St. Louis my view of all that doom and gloom is blocked by the brand-new $507 million Lumiere Place casino.
The people who operate casinos are smart people. Their recent investments tell me one of two things.
They know they can continue to earn a healthy profit with the loss limit.
Or they are supremely confident that the loss limit soon will be removed.
I am not an expert on gaming and I am not fundamentally opposed to it. In fact, believe it or not, my endearing personality is not the main factor in luring my father and two brothers from Chicago for an occasional visit. It's Ameristar Casino.
I'm opposed to lifting the loss limit in Missouri because it would be unfair to do so. It would devalue a statewide vote.
I don't believe Scott Rupp and his 33 Senate colleagues or the 163 people in the Missouri House should be the ones making the decision.
I think the people of Missouri should decide. Here's why.
The history of casino gambling in Missouri starts with a statewide ballot question, posed on Nov. 3, 1992, that read:
"Authorizes riverboat gaming excursions on the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers, regulated by the State Tourism Commission. Excursions may originate where locally approved by the voters. Five hundred dollar maximum loss limit per person per excursion."
The ballot question was approved with a 63 percent majority. Many believe it would not have passed without the assurance of loss limits.
And now the gaming industry wants them removed because times have changed, they say, because competitive circumstances have changed. States like Iowa, for example, have dropped loss limits.
If they are going to be removed, it's unfair for lawmakers to be the ones who pull the rug out from the voters of 1992. Let Missouri voters decide what type of gambling they want in Missouri.
I called Scott Monday and told him I intended to write a column opposing his bill.
Scott has done his homework. He told me he's talked to many people, including addiction counselors, who don't believe the loss limit works - it doesn't keep problem gamblers from financial ruin.
According to Scott, most people with a gambling problem lose an amount under the limit and those with greater financial resources get around the limit by stealing someone else's casino-issued card, or buying someone else's card or by enlisting friends to create multiple cards.
"They are pretty much a joke," Scott said of the limit.
It does not surprise me that enforcement is a problem. After all, casinos don't like the idea of a limit. The Missouri Gaming Commission, which oversees gaming, doesn't like the idea of a limit.
And, lo and behold, it's an enforcement problem. Surprise, surprise.
I asked Scott if, following his logic, Missouri should also give up trying to enforce illegal immigration because it's been so difficult to do.
He said there's a difference between gaming and immigration. Missouri is in a unique position in the gaming field because it's the only state with a loss limit. When it comes to immigration, he said, other states are mutually concerned.
Finally, Scott said, Ameristar and Pinnacle Entertainment, which operates Lumiere Place, are backing a statewide petition drive to put the loss-limit question on the Nov. 4 state ballot. Ballot language has been approved by Secretary of State Robin Carnahan. At least 86,000 signatures must be collected by May 4.
This time, if the Legislature does not act to toss the limit, the casinos will fund an effort to do it themselves.
According to Scott, the casinos are confident, based on polling data, that the measure will pass. And they certainly have the financial means to mount a formidable campaign, Scott said.
In Scott's view, it's better for lawmakers to make the change. That way the casinos will shoulder a greater tax burden on their increased revenue.
In my view, the fairness question remains the trump card. Let the voters decide. And in that process let's explore the full impact of casino gaming.
How much of the money actually goes to education?
If enforcement is a joke, is there a better way?
How much gaming revenue does Missouri lose as a result of loss limits?
What percentage of gamblers have a problem? And how many gambling addicts can be expected to lose their homes or jobs if they suddenly lose, let's say, $5,000 in two hours, instead of $500?
And one final thing before we vote, let's make sure the research and answers come from multiple sources, not just the Missouri Gaming Association.
