"After years of wrangling, Massachusetts is poised to enter the casino gambling business; pending legislation would allow for three licensed casinos and one slot parlor, with the state taking a 25 percent cut of daily casino revenues and 40 percent from slots. If there is a more exploitative means of raising government revenue, I can't think of one, but I don't oppose the bill on moral grounds. The state shouldn't be empowered to protect us from our own poor judgment, bad habits and compulsions, especially since the effort to do so (however futile) always involves deprivations of liberty.

But I do oppose the gambling bill, partly on libertarian grounds. Gambling should be legalized, or at least decriminalized, online and in real life, not usurped by public/private partnerships. Let the market, not the legislature, dictate the number of casinos statewide, subject to the land use regulations imposed on shopping centers, stadiums and other large commercial enterprises. The state shouldn't be in the business of gambling, in league with a few favored developers or Indian tribes who preside over state sanctioned monopolies which seem likely to employ at least a few legislators: The state senate reduced a proposed five year ban on working in the industry after leaving office to a one year ban (surreally explaining that a lengthy ban reflected mistrust of legislators that enactment of the ban would only exacerbate.) The gambling bill is not a libertarian initiative: it's crony capitalism, tainted by the self-righteous racism that pervades the regulation of Indian tribes and legalized Indian gaming."

Get the Story:
Wendy Kaminer: Gambling, Racism, and Crony Capitalism (The Atlantic 10/4)