A casino in Nassau would have human costs

Two years ago, when New York State legalized recreational marijuana use, then-Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo’s news release blared:

“Tax Collection Projected to Reach $350 Million Annually.” 

Consideration of human costs was secondary. It was, first and foremost, all about the state creating a new cash cow — or cash “pot” in that instance — to replenish its perpetually overdrawn financial coffers.

I'm concerned it's happening again with the push for a casino at the Nassau Hub. County Executive Bruce Blakeman sees dollar signs and plunges into an agreement with a major gambling operation, with little to no advance input from affected communities and populations, or from the citizenry as a whole — and, as far as we can tell, little due diligence in examining the effects of casinos on communities, vulnerable populations, and the common good.

Government dependence on self-destructive behaviors as sources of revenue inevitably moves from public authorities allowing such behaviors to promoting them — something we have already seen with gambling.

Years ago, when the state decided to get into the gambling business with lotteries and off-track betting, the rationale was that people were going to gamble anyway. So, better the state collect their losses and put the revenue toward public services than have it go into the pockets of organized crime.

But in short order the state, not satisfied with redirecting existing gambling revenue into government coffers, decided to try to increase its take by advertising lotteries and OTB — encouraging people who had not been wagering previously to begin doing so, and those already gambling to bet more.

Now the county proposes to put a casino in the midst of communities most vulnerable to gambling addiction — directly adjacent to two colleges — when studies have shown that young people ages 18 to 24 have among the highest rates of gambling problems. It also would be in close proximity to economically disadvantaged populations particularly susceptible to the lures, and personal devastation, of excessive gambling.

A singular focus on revenue enhancement is not only shortsighted, it is misleading.

Having lived in Nassau County my entire life, I know that increases in government revenue do not, as a rule, lessen the burden on taxpayers, as Blakeman suggests this latest gambit will. More money in government coffers invariably means new spending ventures. It virtually never results in tax relief for Nassau’s beleaguered homeowners.

Indeed, if the experience of other communities with casinos — like Springfield, Massachusetts or Henderson, Nevada — is indicative, Nassau homeowners are likely to see not a decrease in their property taxes, but a decline in their property values, negatively impacting everything from their ability to plan and finance their children’s education, to their retirement savings and investments. 

Moreover, consider the various social pathologies associated with the kind of gambling addictions a big casino is likely to bring: deeper levels of poverty, higher crime rates, increased mental health crises and needs, rising alcohol and drug abuse, family breakdown, and domestic violence. All of that will require stepped-up government intervention. There go the “revenue enhancements” the county executive touts as public benefits to be delivered by centering Nassau’s “hub” around a profiteering big-casino operation.

Nassau County legislators must do their due diligence before voting on this proposal, considering not only potential revenue for the county government but also financial costs in terms of increased public service needs — and most critically, human costs in terms of the potentially destructive impact on our communities, our vulnerable populations, and the common good.