Archive for Monday, January 6, 1992


January 6, 1992


To the editor:

I found your Jan. 2 editorial "Casinos for Kansas" to be very misleading. First, while location is normally an important aspect in real estate, the same does not hold true for gambling. Many successful Indian bingo and gambling establishments in other states are in very remote areas, but attendance does not diminish because of location. Check out the buses that travel from Kansas City, St. Louis and Wichita to these remote locations night after night after night.

Yes, gambling proponents and state officials do need to survey the situation much more carefully, and if they do their homework, they will find that leaping into a casino venture will not "be an embarrassment and at worst a terrible financial disaster." Had you done your homework, you would know there are many successful Indian bingo and gambling ventures in Oklahoma and other states that are very profitable to the tribes that operate them. But NOT to the states they are held in.

Kansas is fortunate to have a governor that is willing to work with the tribes and make gambling ventures not only profitable for the tribes but for the state of Kansas as well. Perhaps additional revenues to the state of Kansas from gambling ventures with the tribes will make it even less likely that, "Legislators unlikely to raise state taxes during '92 session," as your Jan. 2 front page headline reads. It's not a solution to the state's shortage of revenue, but what other venture does Kansas have where they will increase their revenue with little or no capital outlay?

Should you decide that casino operations won't break even in the state of Kansas on remote reservations, the tribes of Oklahoma and other states thank you, Kansas, for the economic development dollars you sent our way.

Becky L. Whitetree,

Box 103.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.