"'Together we can' has somehow morphed into 'place your bets here,' as casino gambling now threatens to become Governor Deval Patrick's signature issue. One can understand why: The lure of hundreds of millions of new state dollars would make any free-spending pol salivate. Yet the whole thing is an illusion, a combination of wishful thinking and bad economics.

I don't say this because of some moral compunction. I once played bingo in a church hall. And since I don't want to be thought a hypocrite, I've fallen down that slippery slope of believing that if people want to play slots or spin a roulette wheel, then they should be allowed to. And frankly, unless you've never bet in a sports pool, bought a lottery ticket, or taken a bus ride to Foxwoods, you're in the same position as me. As the old joke goes, we know what kind of people we are. Now we're just haggling over price.

And the price certainly seems right. The governor estimates three new casinos will bring in between $1.5 billion and $2 billion a year. In turn, the state hopes to collect as much as $900 million in upfront fees and possibly another $450 million annually - perhaps $5.4 billion over 10 years. Think of it as a sales tax, a stunningly high one that skims off one-third of the casinos' revenues. It sounds great, but there's a fatal flaw: Massachusetts thinks its casinos will have a monopoly. In fact, it will be just one of many competitors.

Start with this observation: Our capacity to gamble is not unlimited. In fact, it appears we already may be close to it. That explains why lottery sales are stagnant and why, despite heavy advertising, gaming revenues at the five existing New England casinos grew less than 2 percent (after inflation) from 2005 to 2006. (Indeed, imagine the outcry if the governor said that his scheme depended on persuading people who never gamble to now pick up the habit!)"

Get the Story:
Tom Keane: Bad Bet (The Boston Globe 11/11)