Iowa Press; 1521; Casino Gambling

If I were correct because I will press show 15 21 taped February 28th. Oh. Major funding for this program was provided by friends of Iowa Public Television. Many have expressed a great concern. About the difficulties. Of putting into practice. The massive casino gambling operation in the

state. While the Iowa legislature wrestles with legalizing casino gambling to raise revenues. It's a national legislative spectator say such a move won't solve the state's economic woes for long. That a total solution. To Iowa's economic problems casino gambling could make a contribution. But you could no way be a solution. Tonight a talk with legislative leaders about the future of gambling in Iowa. This is the Sunday February 20th edition of the Iowa process. Here is Dean Borger. Good evening. Supporters call it economic development and an opportunity for oil would have developed a new and much needed source of state revenue. Detractors say it represents another giant step down the road to a state run institutionalized gambling and certainly not an economic quick fix. This issue of course is gaming in wagering

casino style. If the legislation passes Iowa would be the third state in the nation to legalize within its borders a form of gambling that has drawn its share of criticism. The issue will continue to be a hot one in legislative circles and as Nancy Crowfoot explains the reason for that is because the effects and benefits of casino style gambling are not all that clear. The spin of the real world the shuffling of cards a new set of sounds may be added to the ambience of Iowa and some say the state will never be the same. Iowa like many other states continues to look at state sanctioned gaming and wagering as an answer to state revenue problems. The treasure at the end of the gambling Rainbow Family is not really a pot of gold. Actually gambling can make a contribution to. Helping a state that's in financial difficulty. But many people have a mistaken idea of how big the revenue

potential from gambling is. Steve gold is a former professor of economics at Drake University and he serves as director of Fiscal Studies for the National Conference of State Legislatures in Denver. The states seem undeterred by such information. Indeed state sanctioned gaming is on the grow and a look at the map would indicate that gambling perhaps is becoming the country's number one pastime. The number of states involved in the lottery business now totals 28 and national trade sources say the number is on the rise. Thirty one states currently have active parimutuel tracks dogs or horses and 10 more states have legalized PR mutuals and will soon have tracks in operation. Currently five states have parlor gambling better known as off the track betting in two states Nevada and New Jersey have casino style gambling and many in Iowa want the state to join that exclusive club.

But others in the not too distant future will try to join the club as well. And gold sees that as a factor that proponents may be leaving out of the revenue equations. As more and more states get in the casino gambling that means the potential revenue for any of those states is going to be less because there's more competition. Just as Nevada has been hurt by New Jersey many of the late comer States in terms of casinos would find that they were in competition with the other states. That would mean the gambling dollars would be spread thinner across the states and it would also mean Iowa would need to attract out of state dollars to support casino style gambling along with state supported lotteries and private PR mutuals. But the difference between to see those in power mutuals is that the big money in casinos would come if the state were able

to attract people from outside of Iowa. Where's the power mutuals. Mainly are going to be getting people from Iowa and from the towns on the borders of Iowa. I mean the idea of a lottery jackpot. So it was all there by ambling as a revenue source must be looked at closely. According to gold and others who have looked into the gaming industry lotteries get high marks producing five billion dollars in revenues. That's two to three percent of the total monies raised by states in 1086 nationally. Peer mutuals don't fare as well producing 650 million dollars just one third of one percent of state revenues nationally. The jury is still out on the economic effect of casino style gambling but Gold says gambling as an industry is not going to rescue the state's fortunes. For looking at a total solution to AI was economic problems casino gambling could make a contribution but it would no way be a solution.

House speaker Don even as Iowa lawmakers will continue to explore and approve gambling schemes for economic development until the state's economic recovery is complete. Well tonight we'll talk about gambling schemes with two legislative leaders one who agrees with the Vinson is Senate Majority Leader Bill HUTCHENS he's a Democrat from Oregon. Our other guest has doubts about gambling as an economic tool and he's House minority leader. Del when Strummer Republican from garner the big question by Mike Glover a correspondent for The Associated Press and Jay normally legislative reporter for The Des Moines Register. Why don't you fill us in on where the bill is that right now in the Senate. Well with the adoption of the RIF amendment limiting the number of casino boats last. Friday really slowed you know action where we can't pass the bill in the form of too many votes fall off. When you lose. That number of boats out of the total

picture and so we're just going to hold up on it while we've got some other bills to work on this coming week. The deadline for getting bills out of committee is here this weekend. I think all of it will reconsider the amendment and go on to debate on the bill. But you would agree that with that amendment which cuts down to six the number of votes will be allowed to build is just not viable. So what have we done to the bill at this point. Where are we and how do you get out of this box you've got you say well there's you reconsider the vote actually there were you know it's hectic around the Senate when we're in session there were some people outside the chamber in the lounge visiting with us. There are legislators. And quite frankly didn't realize that. Are you telling me that only briefly I was voted cut by a third the number of both would be allowed without realizing the impact some of them didn't realize what that meant was when they came in. And I will admit that there

was. It's not something that we're very proud of but it does happen on occasion. So directors or maybe some people who have just back in I went from having been gone for the week and I didn't realize what happened on Friday. When you go back and tell us what the original bill was and now an amendment that was tacked on on Friday which you say kills the bill in its form what it did. Well the bill was going to allow 15 boats rivers lakes and. You know I was and when rifleman passed that limit for people who want to miss water on a lake and want a river in one river and that it's anyone's guess as to where the water of the lake and water in the river might go but there are people that are supportive of that bill that they would like to have water on a

river near their community or a lake near their area the state Strohm or over here in the house was not in on that action but he's smiling like a Cheshire cat here why is that. Well because if the inland lake happened not to be Clear Lake Iowa then there is a lot of people in my district that have asked me to support the bill that would lose an awful lot of support for the bill. Actually you know I don't listen closely to what Mr. Gold was saying and what Mr. what other people have been saying about this issue and I think they're clear like maybe the Mississippi communities maybe want to Missouri border would make sense because you might be able to track out-of-state money. But if we're just in state money being churned. Not a good investment. Let's get to the bottom line of all this. This amendment been put on the bill has been changed it's passed the House is waiting in the Senate. Bottom line what are the odds against for oh it's 60 percent.

Favor passing before the session ends. If you still would you agree with him. Well I think that eventually the bill will probably pass but I think that maybe Senator Dielman recognizes some of the safeguards like making sure you know what your odds are when you're playing blackjack or playing with that roulette wheel or even at the craps table. OK now that. So we're going to have about gambling and I want some point maybe after this session. What does the state get from it both from direct revenues and from other kind of economic benefits like tourism or whatever it is a big deal. I think I think it is I don't think the tax revenues generated from the gambling per se is that large an item but I think the potential for tourism is tremendous and I think it says Steve gold has suggested I think we'll see people coming from all over the country to participate in this form of a tourist place here and. So I think it's really hard to put a volume of

hours tours because I think you're aware yes tick. Do you agree with that you seem to not really know I you know my greatest concern is this that if it is successful then the other states will do exactly what Iowa did when we passed lottery said there is no sense exporting dollars to Illinois. We're going to have to get into the same ball game. But if you really consider what I think is an important aspect of this whole thing is the fact that this consider one crap table in Las Vegas going 24 hours a day 365 days a year cost about three hundred three hundred fifty thousand dollars just to pay the salary of those people that work there before they make any profit at all. Magine which you couldn't do with that kind of resource if it were used on retraining workers in Iowa rather than hiring somebody to run it. A crap table for somebody's pleasure.

Do you think it's worth all the time and effort that's going into this all the legislative time. One of the biggest problem your member I opposed vehemently based on that we were looking at medical malpractise we weren't looking at tort reform. We weren't even looking at tax reform tax reform behind this but with the other issues are still before us and we're spending too much time on this issue and not enough time on what the state needs to do. Let me just respond to that. I came to the legislature 16 years ago I was a supporter parimutuel betting when I came here it took 10 years to pass it. There are there are people that would like to drag this out for 10 years. We drug out lottery for two years longer than we should have we would have been two years a head of where we're at with economic development. Had we passed not had Laurie vetoed twice. You look at cancer blossom to be you. Those are two cities in this state that were in economic distress since they have dog tracks council bosses one of the community

populations increase could be turned around. You know we have to look at every idea we could think of to try and bring the state you know back around. But you bring up a good point here. You're talking about Clear Lake represented astronomer in LA and you're in Linda anyway there and in Hancock County but you have clear lake nearby. But you're naming some River Cities here that are benefit what about limo and I center Vale Arlington old wine. What have we got to gain from it about art. I don't live within 90 miles of where there would would be a riverboat But I I look at it as a possibility. Another factor that might drag this state ahead. We were coming slow but we're going to in the future and the rest is in the 90s. It's going to take everything that we can dream up to put the state back on the map and one of the things that Democrats have argued on the lottery on parent

child batting and now we're about gambling is that it's something that Iowans want. You're giving I want something they want to have even for government reluctant to give it to him while he was with the people vote about it put it on the ballot. Well we have a representative form of government I suppose you could do that I think the people there are supported as they did a lottery as they did parimutuel and and and in those cases this representative form of government didn't work just like it should. We're we're seeing it right now. Some people are not supporting it because they're not going to benefit directly in their area. If if we're going to have legislators be so parochial that they only look at their own house or senate district then maybe we ought to amend the Constitution and remove state from state senator and state from state representative.

It troubles me a little bit that some legislators think the situation with what you're describing that legislators are not going to vote for the bill because they're not going to have a vote in your district. Well you're there are some that are more. Statesman like and I think look at what's overall good for the state. You have most of the support from this is came from Chamber of Commerce's and normally legislators support what Chamber of Commerce's want because they think that's good for business and I just read a magazine this morning called state government. With a synopsis of every one of the 50 states state of the state address and every one of them had two priorities primarily education economic development. The real reason there's some support for tax for for this concept is it think it will generate taxes that they won't have to pay and somebody else will pay. I know a lot of people that support a lottery they have never bought a lottery ticket yet but instead all federal help pay for government. And I don't have to pay so much that must be a good good way. We said in introducing you I just want to clarify something here you predict that we will have out of the session a riverboat gambling bill which will be sent to Governor Branstad.

I introduced you saying that you have some doubts about this but the more we go along here you seem committed gate that the doubts I have is that it isn't going to do anything. For I will because of a disease as great as most people say within five years after a lot of people have investments and use capital that they could have used some more results. Other states have been doing the same thing and we probably won't be able to be able to keep the industry that may be or it may not. And yet that's what I and my concern is why invest in something. Why give industrial revenue bonds or whatever you have to tax breaks for these people to put up these facilities and only have and have them sold five Senate cents on a dollar. Lose a lot of income tax because they can write it off 10 years down the road we are going to things that we really believe will work. Senator Hitchens was Friday evening. We went to dinner with a couple of friends got back from Las Vegas about a week ago.

They spent 10 days in Phoenix Las Vegas. Last night I was to a function in another county in my district and two friends that I know just got back last Wednesday from two weeks in Las Vegas and Phoenix. People are spending money on airplane tickets and hotel rooms in Las Vegas and Phoenix and going there from here too to take advantage of that you know. There it's out there people are doing it today. But at the same time there's a lot of concern about organized crime be about the social costs of casino style gambling or the third state in the nation. Jean Shepherd is the Commissioner of Public Safety is very concerned about gambling on Indian reservations. How do you address those. Well we had the same kinds of concerns for the way there was a lottery in parimutuel and and we passed very. Tightly written bail that is kept crime out of.

Gambling and I want my opinion we had. I remember a couple of days before parimutuel passed and the opponents dredged up the report that wasn't factual and had a distributor doesn't every senator's desk it looks I don't remember that and you know others we haven't had that problem and I think people will argue that part of the appeal. A Las Vegas is not simply that you can go to Las Vegas and gamble but there's a whole aura in Las Vegas the floor she goes to girls all that kind of stuff. The same thing in New Jersey. Is that what you want to base economic development State on. No I I don't know how you get the other letters that draw people in. Well I think we have a lot of things with it that those people would be interested in it gives you an opportunity to expose outsiders to the many other attractions that we have. That would be of interest for two or three Stromberg you think in Garner Iowa

that people would be willing to go to a casino and explore. The lights of downtown garner anything fancy look and wow you know one of the things is that I don't I don't see the great the great moral problem or the that it can't work. I just don't think it works as well as even even the most pessimistic people say it might work but do explain a little bit what Senator Hutchison said today if in fact he's concerned about those people going to Las Vegas or going to Phoenix. We probably have committed the crime by having too good a football team because we will export 10000 people to one of those bowl games each year. And if they spend a thousand dollars each has 10 million dollars so you know that I don't think you'll ever stop that from happening. I think the other part and I really am concerned about. That's a fact that if you happen to have one. And Cedar Rapids didn't even take conventions away from Cedar Rapids that rightfully belong in Cedar Rapids because of the riverboat gambling or

greater gambling aspect of the thing. We've heard some comments from the chambers of commerce are pressing for this and some groups within the state would like to have this because of a place in my and so forth. But what are we hearing from people outside of Iowa. People like the ex-army in Omaha. People like the Quad City towns in Illinois are you getting heat from those people contacts from communities that have dog tracks that I would know or you know or opposing that and I I think. It's I think they're wrong. I think they're again being selfish. All of us helped pass a law so that they could have their tracks. And now for them to block something that would be maybe better if other communities in the state and I don't buy it represent a straw Murs argument competition you know. Competition is good for business but is the competition going to be

among those already and I are you really going to draw an outsider's from well if I thought it was you know if I had my say I would go for it right now and suggested. That. We would expand the 3 million. That the governor wants to spend on marketing I would take to take the revenues from riverboat gambling and use it for nationwide marketing. Quite You know we know that the people are going to be making those large investments in boats are going to be advertising nationwide. Those people go out of market and and they will be doing that. We you know it is just another small step but I heard a statistic the other day that suggested that in 1984. We were spending a dollar and 17 cents per capita. In this state on economic development. We're now spending about $10 and 70 cents.

That's from lottery dollars that we're doing that. Where would we where would we be had we not made that investment. Let's expand this just a little bit if I could with talk about the Chamber of Commerce One group who have tractors don't want who wants this. Who other than containers of Commerce would like to see an economic development want to spill over here I have family interest we have I'm not I'm not for it because gamely interest I'm just you know I'm on my own course. I don't I don't want to because of the gambling. I think it's another. Piece that can put this economy together and keep moving. We are we are headed downhill. With respect to the long haul. We're growing elderly population the way we're de knowing. Health care in rural Iowa. You know the trend we were all in. We have got to do something to turn that around or we face serious problems. Sure in the

next 10 to 15 percent of the storm. Well you know that when you bring in health care and have completely ignored medical malpractise and then delay that riverboat gambling is going to be solved the problem solve the problem of long term health care. Senator Hatch you're stretching pretty hard I think. Well we passed a malpractise bill last year the House didn't take. I understand. They're working but you can't lay all of the problems with health care on malpractise. No no more than you are when you believe that economic development will come if you automatically have riverboat gambling because you know we need we need a lot of other pieces put together that we're ignoring if we do it as a big package may move faster than just moving one little piece at a time. What we're seeing here is not so so much Republican Democratic rivalry is how some rivalry we're hearing and I sense we're also about to expand the agenda just a little bit so as long as we're doing that let's go to something other issue that happened last week said of Hutchings your

Senate Agriculture Committee was pretty hard on a state university researcher who tension things about red meat. They lecture pretty sternly told her that she ought not to be saying bad things about red meat because that's a big on the industry. There have been critics who said that's infringing on academic freedom stifling research and perhaps even came to the universities are you going to do anything to rein in your farmers in the Senate. Well they're they've been around longer than I have and anything to reign in your. Well I visited with some of those people before they went into that meeting that morning and suggested that some restraint. When they went in let me where you think and they. Well I don't know what they had I thought for a word. This is even with all the warning that it was you know we were very you know they were uptight about those comments.

You know that's their business and that's a major business in the state and it's a very sensitive area. I guess you know the. Head of Department of Economic Development a great company last week too that's in the production of lean beef. So you know there's kind of like a casino gambling in the. Green. Isn't this going to do further damage though in efforts to attract bright good people to the universities if they see lawmakers on the attack against white researchers who are saying things that are fairly commonly accepted. The beef industry asked me to respond because the beef industry accepts the fact that eating too much of anything is dangerous to your health smoking is dangerous to your health. I drinking liquor is hard on your health. But they also recognize that we've done enough research that that fats saturated unsaturated fat can be trimmed off of meat and if in

fact you eat three ounces of lean. Round steak or certain wine that's less than 200 calories and probably isn't any more dangerous than a piece of chicken or a piece of fish and I think that's what we're trying to sell. But the point really is it is not what could be trimmed off and things like that is whether or not that researcher had a right to report her research to the general public. And I doubt legislative interference. And I had in the beef industry in my response. I think she does have the right to say what she believes. I'm not sure that it might not have been taken out of context a little bit I'm not sure that it should have been managed well with the full report. Senator Hutchinson Can you just let it lay there right now. Don't you have some responsibility to stand up and say look academic freedom exists at the universities and legislatures not in trampling that I mean this issue has been raised and now people are running away from it should you step in and clear it. Well I think it will take care of itself. You know we have we have a lot of other problems with state and rates of so stations you know so it's a.

Good story. The researcher we've had the president talk about laying off people because of budget cuts and you know we've we get I think again serious problems at the state and stations we've got a serious problem in it Gordon Eaton spoke out is that what you're saying. Well I'm suggesting we've we've got a board of regents that have been appointed that have gotten a gun in the direction of limiting it a role but raising by raising entrance requirements. And I guess that should have been expected that you're going to have a decline somewhat in the role but when you raise the standards I personally I think that was are all moot. But but that's the direction they're going and I think it's going to cause problems. I'm exceptionally stories that I have to cut off this is gushing right here because we're getting into an interesting area and we just are on time thank you very much for being our guest today Senator Hutchinson

representative strong arm for Mike Glover and Jane Norman from Morgan. She has take one next. Good night. Major funding for Iowa prize was provided by friends of Iowa Public Television.