(Publisher’s note: InsiderAdvantage Georgia welcomes op-ed submissions representing differing positions on public policy issues.)
In the January-February issue of James Magazine, the Democrats’ state House Majority Leader Rep. James Beverly proposed that Georgia explore the legalization of sports betting and casino gaming. Beverly advances the arguments customarily heard in favor of such action: Georgia money goes out of state and that the newly legalized operations will produce new employment opportunities. Those arguments are unconvincing for several reasons.
First, at the most general level, Georgia already has a lottery. That lottery, which is run by a state corporation, successfully generates funds for educational purposes. Even so, it must and does advertise in order to overcome lottery fatigue.
In contrast, casinos would be privately owned and Georgia has no business making the rich casino owners and promoters richer– even if it takes part of the pie. More to the point, Georgia has no business allowing a private business to prey on Georgia’s citizens. The lottery is more than enough. Its operations result in those who participate in funding the educational advancement of others.
Second, as Nicole Gelinas points out in the Autumn 2022 issue of City Journal, the claimed employment opportunities are overstated. She explains, “Nationwide, the average gambling-industry worker earns $18 in mean hourly wages, federal data shows— not much more than New York’s statutory minimum wage of $15.” She continues, “[T]he average casino worker does not command the spending power to support jobs across other industries. Nor does the casino worker earn enough to be a significant source of state or city tax revenue in a highly progressive state dependent on high earners.” As a result, a 2016 study by two economists from North Dakota State University’s agribusiness and applied economics department found only a small positive effect (less than 1 percent over a three- and ten-year period) from the establishment of a casino in a particular area.
In the same way, Gelinas points to the way in which gambling revenues in New York failed to meet expectations. The state of New York has used gambling expansion to balance its budget, making changes when additional revenue was needed. Some of that additional revenue went to help the upstate. Those upstate facilities, though, generated only two-thirds of the projected revenue.
Spending money in a casino represents the cannibalization of spending on other social activities. Consumers have only a limited supply of funds to spend on restaurants, sports events and related social activities. What they spend on casino gaming doesn’t support restaurants, sports teams or other such activities. So, casino spending is working against a ceiling– and it will compete with the lottery for revenue.
Finally, there are the collateral consequences. Gelinas writes that, in Atlantic City, New Jersey, “Casinos . . .brought with them the negative effects of gambling— not just addiction but public corruption.” We already see warnings about addictive behavior that include hotline numbers. We can also expect crime and personal bankruptcies to increase.
After all this, the arguments in favor of casino gaming are weak sauce. Georgia should reject the suggestion.
Attorney Jack Park lives and works in Gainesville
