Advertisement

Previous   Next

Should the Kansas Legislature allow the development of major casinos and slot machines at horse and dog tracks?

Asked at downtown post office, 645 Vt. on March 27, 2007

Browse the archives

Photo of Ryan Desemo

“I personally think gambling is a waste of time. But if the opportunity is there for the state to make money and people still want to spend money on it, then I say go for it.”

Photo of Carrie Neighbors

“Yes, absolutely. It’s a big moneymaker, and the state really needs the money right now.”

Photo of Garrett Harper

“Yes. People are gambling anyway, and it brings in good money for the state. Maybe they’ll lower our taxes.”

Photo of Pam Brown

“I have no problem with it. I don’t see why they shouldn’t.”

Comments

Kuku_Kansas 7 years, 4 months ago

The neighboring states all legalize gambling, which means Kansas residents must travel to: - Missouri - Oklahoma - Iowa

Even if it's only $1 dollar lost by Kansas to another state, it's still $1 too much.

0

craigers 7 years, 4 months ago

Yes and use the money first to fix the universities that have all those maintenance issues. Problem solved!!!

0

vinividivici 7 years, 4 months ago

Personally, I think casinos are a fun place to spend a few bucks now and then. Unfortunately, too many people develop a gambling addiction. I like the fact that Kansas has opted to not make money off of its residents' downfalls in theory, but the fact remains they ARE going elsewhere to gamble and Kansas is the state that pays the tab when our residents go under financially. I say build and use the extra money to fund treatment programs for gambling and other addictions.

0

Aileen Dingus 7 years, 4 months ago

Absolutely not. Legalized gambling doesn't solve any money issues, just ask Atlantic City.

0

BigDog 7 years, 4 months ago

Let me start by saying I am NOT opposed to gambling or casinos. I am opposed to the legislation that the Kansas House passed for several reasons.

First, this legislation has the state of Kansas owning the casinos. No other state has ever owned casinos. Owning the casinos and regulating them also can cause issues.

Second, this legislation was written by the casino industry. The state of Kansas is screwing themselves on this one. The state will receive on 22% of the profits from the casinos. That may sound like a lot of money but currently the lowest any other state receives now is 30% with some states receiving up to 50% of the casino profits.

And finally, when the state allowed bingo it was done through a vote of the people. When the lottery and pull tab games were added allowed in the state it was by a vote of the people. All these were done by amendments to the state constitution. The House would not pass the legislation that would have allowed for a vote of the people because I believe most citizens of Kansas don't want the state owning casinos.

I support having destination casinos in Kansas, I don't support the state owning casinos. I really don't like idea of casino industry writing such important legislation. The idea of Kansas owning casinos and then having management by casino groups (like Harrah's) come in and get 78% of the profits is poor legislation.

0

Fishman 7 years, 4 months ago

Atlantic City is a pit. Just was there a few days ago to see the NJ Korean War Veterans Memorial because my aunt sculpted one of the pieces. I was appalled at how trashy the city is. Not to mention dangerous. My wife and I watched one guy getting mugged by about 10 other guys on a street corner. Not much I could do but get the hell out of Dodge! If you want a mini Atlantic City and the crime etc that goes with it then go for it. I hope Kansas is above the all mighty dollar. It has to end somewhere.

0

imastinker 7 years, 4 months ago

I don't want the state owning casinos either - is that what it really says?

0

BigDog 7 years, 4 months ago

imastinker - Yes it would have the state of Kansas owning the casinos.

0

dizzy_from_your_spin 7 years, 4 months ago

Gambling is just the latest, temporary fix for all the State's problems: more revenue.

At first, the money will be great and the bureaucrats will find new ways to spend it in new programs and entitlements; pretty soon the money will taper off and they'll be looking for another easy, temporary fix.

0

Ceallach 7 years, 4 months ago

I don't have enough money to put any of it on a game that I may not win, therefore, casinos, slots, hold no lure to me. I'm just not sure it will help the state.

Haven't other states complained that they did not receive the amount of benefits originally promised when they allowed casinos, slots, etc.? I may be misremembering but I thought schools, social programs, etc., in other states claimed that the gain wasn't worth the pain. Does anyone else remember hearing that?

0

whistlestop75 7 years, 4 months ago

Marion I agree with you...It sounds to me the days of the "moral" majority that has held Kansas down in the Legislature is losing it's foothold...THANK GOODNESS! Now maybe issues like stem cell legislature has a chance to pass and people can really be helped by those who make the laws! If you have ever gone to any of the casinos...Topeka, Kansas City, or even Oklahoma just over the Kansas line, you will see a varity of players...young and old alike...the other thing you will notice is the number of Kansas tags in the parking lot AND the counties they are from! What a joke if you think you are going to prevent gambling addicts from gambling IF you don't build them in Kansas...THEY travel...

0

vinividivici 7 years, 4 months ago

whistlestop: "What a joke if you think you are going to prevent gambling addicts from gambling IF you don't build them in Kansas...THEY travel..."

I hope you weren't making refrence to my previous comment: "I like the fact that Kansas has opted to not make money off of its residents' downfalls in theory, but the fact remains they ARE going elsewhere to gamble and Kansas is the state that pays the tab when our residents go under financially. I say build and use the extra money to fund treatment programs for gambling and other addictions."

0

sunflower_sue 7 years, 4 months ago

No. insert long windy paragraph here

0

sgtwolverine 7 years, 4 months ago

Remember: whatever revenue a government has, it won't be enough. When there is more revenue, there will be more hands looking to take it and spend it anywhere. So it's all well and good to bring in casinos to raise revenue, but ignore all the idealistic "this'll really help [good thing]" ideas. It won't be that good.

Detroit put up three casinos because people were crossing the river to gamble in Windsor. It hasn't been the end of the world (the city was a mess already...), but it really hasn't solved much of anything.

0

whistlestop75 7 years, 4 months ago

vinividivici,

After the first couple of years the money won't go to fund gambling addicts...history with the parole system and community corrections shows "out of sight, out of mind". Did you read the article on non-funding of community corrections addiction treatment for parolees? Statistics from the Department of Corrections shows funding was zero in the last several years. Who foots the bills then? Local Government and what the people in the community can afford on their property taxes. Whatever is written in to fund addiction in the gaming bill will be looked at for a couple of years...after that it will take public pressure to keep it in place. Gambling is here, so I agree...let the state take a share...but don't count on the money for counseling when it doesn't happen for the number of prisoners who are paroled early for whatever reason...

0

badger 7 years, 4 months ago

I have no problem with the presence of gaming establishments in any state, myself. It's occasionally fun to take a little disposable income in and play for a bit.

I tend to think the twin notions of state-owned gaming establishments and the state getting only 22% of the profits is less than ideal, though. Sure, 22% of the gross would be fine, but 22% of the net? Who's getting the rest, then?

Oh, and it took ten guys to mug one guy in Atlantic City? Man, those East Coast types are a bunch of wimps. Here in Austin, one guy can mug two or three guys at once, and even in Kansas it only takes two guys to beat up a college professor.

0

vinividivici 7 years, 4 months ago

Marion, alas. You befuddle me. What does a children's cancer ward have to do with an addiction? Absolutely nothing. Just you attempting to pull at your faithful reader's heart strings to agree with you as opposed to stating the facts.

Addiction is characterized by the repeated use of substances or behaviors despite clear evidence of its use being unsafe or detrimental to the person and/or those around them. A person can be addicted to cocaine, alcohol, sex, cutting one's self, and- holy s***---you ready for this one??-----GAMBLING!?!?!? How is that possible? Because they are addicted to that rush you get when you hit it big. They feel it a little everytime they win some, and they crave it when they don't, so they keep on going and going.

It may not seem as big a deal to you as somethings, but it really hurts the families when all the money is gone because daddy lost too many hands of poker and you've got to eat at the LINK tonite.

0

jonas 7 years, 4 months ago

Who cares. Slot machines and card tables don't hurt anybody. Though, they may allow people to hurt themselves. But those people will find a way to hurt themselves, irregardless. Let's just let them.

0

vinividivici 7 years, 4 months ago

Whistlestop brings up a very good point that "Whatever is written in to fund addiction in the gaming bill will be looked at for a couple of years...after that it will take public pressure to keep it in place." Our system is flawed in a large part to societies lack of awareness and empathy, as well as a lack of motivation to change things they don't view as affecting them directly. Why don't we all get over ourselves?

0

Uhlrick_Hetfield_III 7 years, 4 months ago

Gambling to fund the state is the harshest and most regressive tax you could pass. The social costs on the poor are enormous with foreclosures and broken families.

Government taking the place of organized crime is never a good thing.

0

Flap Doodle 7 years, 4 months ago

Cane toad races, it's the new thing.

0

vinividivici 7 years, 4 months ago

GAMBLING IS NOT A DISEASE!!!!!!! It's an addiction. I'm finding a new site where people who know how to read and like active discussions and enjoy developing their opinion. Knowledge is power and there's no way you can ever know it all. It's nice that humans are so advanced and intelligent that they can pool knowledge together and come up with the best situation for all involved.

I heard good things about this site, but I prefer a little more openmindedness and good old fashioned respect for EVERYONE.

Peace Out

0

Janet Lowther 7 years, 4 months ago

Gambling is a great idea!

Tax the innumerate!

Let the stupid pay!

0

Jace 7 years, 4 months ago

I'd rather see the state of Kansas get its money from gambling/gamblers than trying to squeeze it out of the rest of us by charging a higher toll on the KTP.....or charging a toll where one currently does not exist!

0

paladin 7 years, 4 months ago

Went to the casino just the one time. As the little woman and I were walking across the parking lot, after a frenzied and fitful spate of gambling abandon, she suddenly turned into a pillar of salt. Haven't been back. No need.

0

karolynk 7 years, 4 months ago

Can Kansans elect anymore stupid legislators than what they have already? Concealed weapons, casinos, putting Kline back into office. Really now. What's next? Putting coal-fired plants in to send all the electricity to Colorado and all the pollution to Kansas. Why don't you just suck the Arkansas River dry while you're at it.

0

paladin 7 years, 4 months ago

I think that addiction can be addicting. AA can be somewhat cultish. Probably better than getting loaded, however. Gambling probably can be addicting, too. Like any "vice". We, as a society, cannot, and should not, attempt to protect people from themselves, their vices or their behavior, if it doesn't harm others or their children. They should, ultimately, be individually responsible for their actions. If they are not, they will lose, sooner or later, everything of value that they have, including their children. This has always been the case. But, we cannot force them to be "good" and "decent", responsible, people if they are unwilling to be so. Might as well profit from their foibles and direct the profit toward the greater good.

0

BorderRat 7 years, 4 months ago

Can we get a State run "Chicken Ranch" also. I bet that would make money hand over fist so to speak.

0

beatrice 7 years, 4 months ago

Heck no! What is next -- Sunday liquor sales?!? I see plenty of God smiting in the near future if the people of Kansas allow this.

My bet is, if you put the government in charge of casinos, I'll give you two to one odds that they mess it up and possibly don't even turn a profit. Will they also be in charge of the brothels?

By the way, did anyone notice that badger came out of hibernation? Welcome back badger!

0

jonas 7 years, 4 months ago

Or. . . it's not, and you are wrong.

0

Flap Doodle 7 years, 4 months ago

I watched a cane toad crawl along the edge of a straight razor....

0

Ceallach 7 years, 4 months ago

Is it just a coincidence that the guy holding the toad was named Bob?

0

Ceallach 7 years, 4 months ago

Ewwww, snap! What an unsettling mental image that conjures up!!!

0

donsalsbury 7 years, 4 months ago

The fact that we're even discussing this, and that it's passed one house in the legislature, is evidence enough that God has already turned away from us.

But I'm not here to talk about God. I'm here to talk about the fact that the money we stand to gain from this is a fallacy. The money spent in Kansas casinos and slots will be spent somewhere else if we don't build them. Sure some people will buy gas in Lawrence and drive to KCMO or an indian casino to gamble, but many more will just buy food for their kids, or plasma TVs, or bigger homes.

Or maybe the state can do something really productive, like try to get its residents out of debt so more disposable income is available for investing in the state, starting new businesses, etc...

0

Flap Doodle 7 years, 4 months ago

Thanks, D_U, there's a nightmare for the future.

0

beatrice 7 years, 4 months ago

jonas: "Or. . . it's not, and you are wrong."

LOL -- What a great response! Short, snappy, to the point -- well done! It fits perfectly today with Sue's "insert long windy paragraph here"

I say no to gambling -- but I don't mind if you say yes. Just because some can't handle it doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed for those who can. Second-hand gambling might make you broke, but it won't kill you.

0

Linda Aikins 7 years, 4 months ago

Hi B!!! Welcome back!!!

Wow, Bob, that is one big horny toad!

0

Crispian Paul 7 years, 4 months ago

Yes, so long as the profits are used for the good of the community and not simply to fill someone's pockets.

0

sunflower_sue 7 years, 4 months ago

Das, I'm just wondering why that young girl with the toad is prematurely gray???

0

jonas 7 years, 4 months ago

Probably from that same dose of radioactive sludge that turned the frog that shade of neon green. Maybe this is set in Chernobyl.

0

james bush 7 years, 4 months ago

Only if smoking is allowed!!!!!!!!!!

0

Christine Pennewell Davis 7 years, 4 months ago

it is all about personal choice. Go or do not go to a casino. Lawrence and douglas county will not get a casino for several reasons, choice is the biggest.

0

Christine Pennewell Davis 7 years, 4 months ago

Oh yeah mini vegas just east of town...... cool and we would get rid of the ugly trash left behind by farmland.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.