Casino Discord Delays Land-based Debate
| February 1, 2010 The Senate this week will consider a gambling bill meant in part to help Indiana combat competition from casinos expected to open in Ohio in the next couple years. But the bill lacks most of the recommendations made last year by a gaming study committee created for the express purpose of determining what changes would be best for the state’s gambling industry. In fact, the legislation — authored by Sen. Ron Alting, R-Lafayette — has a provision authorizing advanced deposit wagering for horse racing, an issue that the study committee never even discussed. That didn’t escape Sen. Earline Rogers, D-Gary, a member of the Appropriations Committee that debated and approved the bill last week. Rogers is seeking authority for one of the two gambling boats in Gary (which are both owned by the same company and managed essentially as one casino) to rebuild as a land-based casino at a major interstate interchange in Lake County. She also supports letting other Indiana riverboats move inland as well. That was also something the gaming study committee said would help Hoosier casinos compete. But although those provisions were in this year’s gambling bill as it was originally introduced, the Senate Appropriations Committee amended them out. “It appears as though we are trying to aid the horse racing industry which I support,” Rogers said. “We are aiding French Lick, which I absolutely support. But I think this is a setback as it relates to the construction of inland casinos.” Committee Chairman Luke Kenley, R-Noblesville, said that because the gambling industry couldn’t agree on the land-based provision, he wanted it out of the bill. The problem, though, is that the gambling industry will likely never agree on this issue. That’s in part because two casinos — Hollywood in Lawrenceburg and Horseshoe Hammond in Lake County — recently replaced their riverboats with large, barge-like structures that greatly expanded their gambling capacity and their revenue, while still following state rules for being navigable. Those companies think it would be unfair to let their competitors rebuild under dramatically different rules. In other words, they’re protecting their turf, as all privately-held firms would be expected to do. But that’s also why lawmakers should consider looking past the casino industry’s divisions on the legislation — if the legislative goal is to put Indiana’s gambling operations in a better position to compete. I thought Rogers really said it best during last week’s meeting: “We are the policy makers,” she said. “They are the investors. And we ought to make policy based on what we feel is best for Indiana.” |
