PROPOSED: Harrah's/Narragansett Casino

[runawayjim]

I haven't been to Mohegan's for about 1 1/2 - 2 years and there was a poker parlor off to the side, not on the main floor. If you drove into the bottom level of the 3 or 4 level attached garage and walked in the main large room you'd turned right and walked about 1-2 minutes and the room was on your right. I don't know if it was the Summer or Winter entrance or whatever, but it was near the staircase you had to take to get upstairs to check your cards for daily prizes.

yes, that's the poker room that was closed. foxwoods still had one when mohegan closed theirs, but i'm pretty sure (and i could be wrong as i don't go to foxwoods ever) that they closed theirs as well.

[Liamlunchtray]

So will us "non-native" people (non-native in quotes because last time I checked, I was born on this continent) recieve amends from the tribe for all the gambling addiction they will be feeding? Using something that has so many socially reprehensible traits to right some wrong that someone centuries ago wrought on the tribe just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. If we're talking about righting wrongs, frankly I'd rather see a federal cash pay out to right the wrong, then we can all get on with our lives as one American people, not us and them, perpetrators and victims.

When it comes to this casino, the Harrahgansetts are a business, plain and simple and should be treated as such. Or maybe as a gay person I can open a casino to right the wrongs perpetuated against my people.

So this is all getting pretty OT, but....

I don't think casinos are a good idea, and I agree that they can cause an awful lot of social harm. However I feel that because the Indian Tribes have sovereign nation status, the State Government really should not have a say in matters such as gaming, smoke shops etc... The major difference between Native Americans and all of the other groups that have been horribly mistreated in the US over the years is that essentially the entire country was stolen from them. And then we did it again. And again..... I know that amends in general becomes a very sticky subject when it comes to opressed groups, but when you look at all of the wealth that has been physically stolen from the Indians over the years, it's only right that we let them open a casino or smoke shop and make some cash. If there was some other enterprise that was as lucretive, I would certainly support that too. Unfortunately vice is where all the easy money is.

That being said, I'm sure that a Gay casino would be a helluva lot more fun to go to than an Indian Casino

[yossarian]

So will us "non-native" people (non-native in quotes because last time I checked, I was born on this continent) recieve amends from the tribe for all the gambling addiction they will be feeding? Using something that has so many socially reprehensible traits to right some wrong that someone centuries ago wrought on the tribe just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. If we're talking about righting wrongs, frankly I'd rather see a federal cash pay out to right the wrong, then we can all get on with our lives as one American people, not us and them, perpetrators and victims.

When it comes to this casino, the Harrahgansetts are a business, plain and simple and should be treated as such. Or maybe as a gay person I can open a casino to right the wrongs perpetuated against my people.

As I said before, I am undecided on the ballot question but I think the moral opposition or social ills argument is the weakest ground for opposing the ballot measure. R.I. already derives a tremendous amount of revenue from gambling. Furthermore, the forms of gambling which our state presently relies upon (Keno, Lottery, Scratch Tickets, Lincoln Park, Jai Lai) are played largely, though not exclusively, by those who can least afford it. There are plenty of studies that show that lotteries act as an extremely regressive (albeit voluntary) tax on the poor. In contrast, a casino while still drawing on poor folks and the elderly will also attract a much broader and wealthier demographic (whose money I have no qualms about taking). So if anything, a casino seems less objectionable than a lottery or keno on social ills/moral grounds.

Therefore, I don

[Cotuit]

Therefore, I don

[MichaelQ]

I also think the "moral ills" argument is weak. After all, among many other social malfunctions, we have legalized prostitution in this state.

Why I will vote no on Question 1 is that I disagree with the basic concept that we should build a building to lower our property taxes. The main reason our property taxes are high is because of government mismanagement at both the state and municipal levels, not because we don't have enough "big buildings with lots of employees" that will pay taxes (though that would slightly help on many fronts). I fear that if the casino is built, then our civic leaders won't have as great an incentive (i.e., pressure from taxpayers) to stop their ridiculous spending habits. It's not just the casino that I despise. It's the idea that when you have a rotting tree, you cut off the leaves rather than dig it up by the roots. Our government spending is the rotting tree and rather than dig it up by the roots with better financial management, we're gonna cut off the leaves and build a casino.

That said, if Harrah's agreed to, I don't know, partially fund a commuter rail system linking our suburban cities to Providence (even if one of its stops was at the casino's front door) and the MBTA, I might be on board.

[jencoleslaw]

Article was written by the poster.

-Cotuit

Cleaning Up at the Casino

Ledyard, Connecticut

The casino is alive with the sound of change dropping, wheels spinning, dice throwing, card cutting, curses muttering.

[runawayjim]

i can't imagine the anger in someone who rips a urinal off the wall... a paper towel dispenser is much easier (not speaking from experience).

where'd you find that?

[Cotuit]

Is that the article you wrote Jen?

[jencoleslaw]

Is that the article you wrote Jen?

Yeah. I wrote it right after i came back from PDX in 94--we were away when the casino was being built in the X's hometown, so when we got back, we drove down early early one sunday morning and i met this woman in the bathroom and "interviewed" her. Needless to say, casinos are not my thing and i haven't been back since. The childbridegroom and i stayed in atlantic city on our way back from nuptuals and it really reminded me how much i am not suited to casino life. I took some good pics---i'll see if i can get them up on my site and link em.

[Cotuit]

Yeah. I wrote it

I just wanted to note that, so another mod doesn't stumble across it and try to punish you for posting articles in full.

[Statesman]

I will vote no on question 1 for the sole fact that I cannot as a native RHode Islander allow a private company to have a deal enshrined in my state's Constitution. To me, that is even more important than the "moral" issues, and the property taxes, and "giving back" to the Narragansetts.

If the ballot question was based around an open bid policy to figure out the deal for whatever casino was to be built, I would give it a yes vote. But not under these circumstances: I love my RI Constitution too much to let that happen.

I support the General Assembly becuase they gave the people the choice to vote on this issue. But the extraneous stuff...uh-uh.

[Recchia]

So I went to Foxwoods for the first time (to gamble) on Saturday night. What a sad place it is. Underneath all the glamour, nice shops, flashy signs, it really is depressing. People sleeping in their cars, people pissing money away into slot machines waiting for a big break, people drunk out of their mind stumbling around wasting money...it really is depressing. I blew $30 in about an hour and then called it a night before I pissed my income down the drain.

A friend of a friend is an EMT in that area of Connecticutt, he said there are 5-6 suicides at Foxwoods each month, mostly people killing themselves in their cars in the parking lots, presumably after losing big time.

I'd be all for a casino if it wasn't such a breeder of bad behavior. Then yet, its no different from anything else that serves addiction, like bars and McDonalds...

[runawayjim]

So I went to Foxwoods for the first time (to gamble) on Saturday night. What a sad place it is. Underneath all the glamour, nice shops, flashy signs, it really is depressing. People sleeping in their cars, people pissing money away into slot machines waiting for a big break, people drunk out of their mind stumbling around wasting money...it really is depressing. I blew $30 in about an hour and then called it a night before I pissed my income down the drain.

A friend of a friend is an EMT in that area of Connecticutt, he said there are 5-6 suicides at Foxwoods each month, mostly people killing themselves in their cars in the parking lots, presumably after losing big time.

i don't find much glamour at foxwoods... it's not as classy as mohegan if you ask me, especially on a completely superficial level looking at the building.

i usually give myself $20 and go and gamble it. it doesn't take long to go through it and even if you put all your winnings into a separate cup, i find it difficult to not put more quarters in thinking "this could be the one".

I'd be all for a casino if it wasn't such a breeder of bad behavior. Then yet, its no different from anything else that serves addiction, like bars and McDonalds...

and dunkin donuts?

[Gusterfell]

i usually give myself $20 and go and gamble it. it doesn't take long to go through it and even if you put all your winnings into a separate cup, i find it difficult to not put more quarters in thinking "this could be the one".

I'll do exactly that a few times a year. It can be fun, but only rarely do I win. It's sad though when it becomes an addiction. I once came across a sullen-looking man in the Foxwoods parking lot. Supposedly he had lost over $10,000, and was trying to bum a ride to Mohegan Sun to "win it back."

[Frankie811]

I just noticed that the Narragansetts are sponsering the Oct 21 Waterfire. Wow! They're really pulling out all the stops, not to mention the state-wide bus tour.

[Mij]

I just noticed that the Narragansetts are sponsering the Oct 21 Waterfire. Wow! They're really pulling out all the stops, not to mention the state-wide bus tour.

I hope it snows...

[runawayjim]

I hope it snows...

wouldn't that be funny...

[Cotuit]

wouldn't that be funny...

That would rock for so many reasons.

[jencoleslaw]

I just noticed that the Narragansetts are sponsering the Oct 21 Waterfire. Wow! They're really pulling out all the stops, not to mention the state-wide bus tour.

are they changing the name to "fire water?"

i know, tasteless, but i couldn't help it. those new ads on TV are so horrible, i expect the chief to have one tear going down his face a la the littering campaign from the 70's.

there is no reason on this green and asphalt covered earth that we should have a consititional amendment for this c-d thing. Regardless of how one feels about the societal ills of casinos, or the relative financial boost it may or may not have/give, putting it in the constitution is simply dangerous.

[Cotuit]

putting it in the constitution is simply dangerous.

That's why we need a UN Transitional Authority to come in and help us govern ourselves until we learn how.

[chaz200]

are they changing the name to "fire water?"

i know, tasteless, but i couldn't help it. those new ads on TV are so horrible, i expect the chief to have one tear going down his face a la the littering campaign from the 70's.

there is no reason on this green and asphalt covered earth that we should have a consititional amendment for this c-d thing. Regardless of how one feels about the societal ills of casinos, or the relative financial boost it may or may not have/give, putting it in the constitution is simply dangerous.

Out constitution stipulates that only the state can run "lotteries" Therefore in order for anyone else to do so requires amending the constitution, I beleive.

[jencoleslaw]

Out constitution stipulates that only the state can run "lotteries" Therefore in order for anyone else to do so requires amending the constitution, I beleive.

i understand that, but naming the tribe, and the city is unnecessary. and the management company may not be named, but most certainly is IMPLIED.

[runawayjim]

i don't remember what CT went through to get the casinos. before those 2, there were not any in CT, not even state run places like lincoln park and newport grand. there were a couple jai-alai places in milford and bridgeport, but no casinos. there was also some off-track betting type places, but no slots.

CT was also able to deny another casino from being built in bridgeport and i know the 2 that exist now had to fight for existence.

if RI wants to amend the constitution to allow casinos, they should amend it allowing for a bidding process with 1 casino to be built... that with the best deal for the state and the whole deal should be laid out for everyone in teh state to see, not just the government. maybe even let the people of the state vote on which one they think is best. but this amendment should not be put into our constitution. i don't care if the indians were forced out of their homeland and discriminated against. if they think their reservation services aren't good enough, they should send their kids to regular public schools and hospitals.

[KRC]

CT was more like a victim of the casinos' development there. It was the granting of the Mashantucket Pequots sovereign nation that started it all for them. There a political change was more or less one of the sparks starting it. In our case, its more like a development of a casino is trying to spark political change. It's a complete opposite and one I can't live with. I'm definately voting no on this one.

[chaz200]

i don't remember what CT went through to get the casinos. before those 2, there were not any in CT, not even state run places like lincoln park and newport grand. there were a couple jai-alai places in milford and bridgeport, but no casinos. there was also some off-track betting type places, but no slots.

CT was also able to deny another casino from being built in bridgeport and i know the 2 that exist now had to fight for existence.

if RI wants to amend the constitution to allow casinos, they should amend it allowing for a bidding process with 1 casino to be built... that with the best deal for the state and the whole deal should be laid out for everyone in teh state to see, not just the government. maybe even let the people of the state vote on which one they think is best. but this amendment should not be put into our constitution. i don't care if the indians were forced out of their homeland and discriminated against. if they think their reservation services aren't good enough, they should send their kids to regular public schools and hospitals.

The Indian Gaming Act and the Pequots sovereign lands is what allowed Foxwoods to be built without much say by the state. The Narragansetts do not have sovereign land, they have settlement land that was given to them because of a deal that stripped them of their tribal lands. The settlement land grant stipulates that the land is not sovereign and is governed by the laws of the State of RI. The whole Chaffee amendment to the Indian Gaming Act is what the Narragansetts have been fighting and losing. Because they can't build a casino under the Indian Gaming Act they are asking the people of Rhode Island to allow them to do so under the laws of Rhode Island. In order to do this the Constitution needs to be amended so that an entity other than the state can run a "Lottery." Narrowing the amendment to the Narragansetts limits other entities from trying to establish other casinos in the state.

This isn't an erosion of our constitution it is democracy in action. This isn't a referendum on gambling because we already have 2 casinos in the state; this is a referendum on whether we will allow the Narragansetts to build a casino as a revenue source for their tribe. Remember the constitution can only be amended by the people therefore the checks and balances will prevent the "slippery slope" alluded to.

The bottom line is the Narragansetts cannot build a casino without a Constitutional amendment. One amendment could be to allow anyone to open a casino and set up a gaming commission but in this case the amendment offered is limited in scope to prevent casino projects from popping up all over the state. The amendment is narrow in scope to allow the Narragansetts to build without opening up our state to all comers.

Keep in mind that there is nothing preventing the state from doing what has been mentioned here several times. The state can decide to build a full casino and bid it out and work out a deal with any company it desires. There is nothing preventing that except that wherever they build it the people of the municipality will need to approve it (This was a previous amendment to the constitution that nobody seemed to object to.)

The heart of the matter is this is not a state run casino but a private casino owned by the Narragansetts, the questions is should they be able to have one and if so the constitution needs to be amended to allow it.