Michigan Votes Forum

Introduced in the House on May 1, 2003, to authorize the placement of 500 (or more) video lottery machines (slot machines) at each of seven Michigan horse racetracks (referred to as "racinos"), and in any new tracks. The bill includes regulations, licensure and tax provisions, and penalties. The state would get 40 percent of the net revenue from the new gambling. Of this, the first $90 million would be divided equally between the school aid fund, an agricultural enhancement fund proposed by the bill, and Detroit. After the first $90 million is divided, 70 percent of the remainder would go to the school aid fund and to the agricultural enhancement fund

The vote was 61 in favor, 42 opposed and 6 not voting

(House Roll Call 173 at House Journal 43)

Click here to view bill details.

the Republicans voting for this increased gambling should be voted out next year - period. Any decent candidate running on this issue alone could probably have a serious shot at beating them in the primary.
T

The last thing this state needs is more gambling!

Senator Clark-Coleman's statement, in which Senator Cropsey concurred, is as follows: I toyed with the idea of whether or not I needed to get up here and speak, and for that reason, I did not prepare any remarks. I'm going to speak from my heart. The people of my district sent me up here to work on their behalf. Their behalf means to work for the children, which is my passion, and to work for families in strengthening those families. They did not send me up here to create a mechanism to destroy families and to destroy children. There is no way that I can sit still and watch this state become a Las Vegas. That is not why I moved to Michigan. My parents moved to Michigan because they thought it was a great environment to raise families. I still believe that. I did not support the casinos when they opened in the city of Detroit. I don't support the racinos as they spread throughout our entire state. Where does it end? When does it end? When will we finally say that enough is enough? Who do you think will be using these racinos and casinos? It won't be the wealthy. It will be the poor people who are looking for a miracle. They are looking for someone to pull them out of where they are. And guess what? They will be spending the money that will take care of their food and their homes and their house and all of those things. There is not many times that I stand up here and agree with the other side of the aisle, but guess what? Several of the members are right on target with this one; certainly, the Senator from the 29th District. This is destruction of our families, and I know that the ones who will suffer the most are the children. Those children whose mothers or fathers go to the casinos, to the racinos, and spend rent money and food money, they will spend that money at the sacrifice of those children. Now we can sit here and say this will create jobs or this will be good for my district or this will help my district to survive. A poor district will be a poor district, regardless of whether you have casinos and racinos, because guess what? That district is going to get poorer because the people who are supporting that district can't afford to support those racinos and those casinos. It boggles my mind how people can justify in their minds that this is the right thing to do. It is the wrong thing to do. I am embarrassed to be a Senator at this time and to stand here and hear Senators say it's the right thing to do. It is not. It is not. It is a disgrace. It is a disgrace to the people in the state of Michigan who have entrusted us to speak on their behalf. This is not speaking on their behalf, and I'm here to tell you that we will all live to regret this. I won't because I'm going to be voting "no" on it. Guess what? I'm encouraging those who have the guts to stand up and do the right thing and represent your districts, the people who have sent you here. Stand up against all the interests out there who are encouraging you to do this. Stand up and do the right thing, and do the right thing to create and strengthen families and children. I know you're going to vote the way you came in here prepared to vote, but I'm saying to you to give it another thought, and vote on behalf of our families and our children.

Senator Kuiper's statement is as follows: I want my colleagues to know that in my short tenure here in the Legislature, there have been few times I have been as disgusted with the process as I am today. Early Tuesday morning, I got up for a run, and that was about quarter to six in the morning. I was getting ready, doing some stretching, and I like to watch the news at that time in the morning. On that particular morning, they were running an ad that was being paid for by the community of mental health here in Michigan. The ad was about a young woman who had just about lost everything she had because of her addiction to gambling. She was unable to buy her small daughter presents for Christmas, and then on the bottom, it scrolled these words: "Have trouble with gambling? Need help? Call our hotline." It struck me as odd that here we are having a debate here in Michigan about expanding gambling options when, at the same time, we recognize very clearly that this behavior can wreck lives and wreck families. So while we continue to pay to run these ads on television, we continue to expand gaming options for people--no doubt, people who are really struggling with an addiction to gambling--and we do it under the guise that it is going to help our state budget, or in this case, that it's going to help the agriculture industry keep from going under. I would just like to remind people in this chamber that we've expanded gambling a number of times in this state not only with the creation of the lottery, but with the three casinos in Detroit, and 19, 20, or 21 Indian casinos, with Kenos and now with racinos. None of those things have had the impact we are looking for in getting us out of a budget crisis. For us to think that the expansion of gambling through racinos is going to be the cure that we need, I don't think that is going to happen. I would hope that later this morning or this afternoon as we vote on this that there will be the votes to kill it. I'm not hopeful of that, but miracles do happen. In the event that racinos are passed in Michigan, I only wish that I had put an amendment on the bill that said we really do need to change our signs at the border from what they currently state: "Welcome to Michigan" to "Welcome to Michigan--the Las Vegas of the Midwest." Unfortunately, that's what we're becoming.

Senator George's statement is as follows: In intend to vote "no" on this legislation, and it's simply because I think it's a bad bet for our state. The cost will just outweigh the benefits. You've heard some of the previous speakers mention the cost of gambling addiction. Gambling addiction has many symptoms. It can lead to crime, to suicide, divorce, depression, hopelessness and homelessness, and drug addiction. It's an inevitable consequence of the expansion of gambling. From 3 to 5 percent of all adults who gamble become addicted to gambling. It's a progressive illness that takes time to develop. The first phase usually has the individual having a winning event. They go to a casino innocently enough, and they have a good time. It's a positive experience for them, but after that, they seek to recapture that experience, and they enter a losing phase. And, of course, over time all slot machines pay out less than the customer puts in, and the longer you play, the more you will lose. So the losing phase is the main proactive phase of the illness, and as the losing progresses, it leads to a desperation phase where these individuals will begin pouring more and more of their hard-earned money into the slot machines. It leads to, as you've heard, broken homes and loss of families, divorce, suicide, and depression. It is a serious consequence, and I believe the cost outweighs the benefits. We've heard that we need to rescue or help the horse racing industry. If this is the answer, why not use that logic for all our woes? Our hospitals complain about Medicaid reimbursement, so why not put slot machines in the hospital cafeterias? We've cut university funding, so why not put them in the student centers? Why just the logic for the racetracks; why limit it there? I think our forefathers--who are in the portraits around us--who started this state 167 years ago would be disappointed to see that we're in such a state of desperation that we need to expand gambling to base our future on random chance and random events, and that's the way we are going to propose to balancing our state budget. I think they would be very disappointed with the way the direction of the state has turned. I believe that our desire to fill the treasury has outweighed our common sense and that this will be a bad bet because the cost will outweigh the benefit.

Senator Jelinek's statement is as follows: This gaming package was borne out of a frustration of the second-largest industry in Michigan, an honorable industry, a good industry, and an industry that is crying for help. We are stooping to the level of preying on our citizens' livelihood to help this industry survive. We should be finding honorable methods to maintain an honorable industry. We do it for many other industries, but for agriculture we offer this, one of the very smallest state budgets for support, for a very important industry. This bill is the wrong method to maintain agriculture. I urge a "no" vote and a better way to support our second-largest industry, not gaming and peril to our citizenry. I hope that we have a "no" vote.

Senator Cassis' statement is as follows: As an almost eight-year legislator, I, in good conscience, have consistently been opposed to and voted against the proliferation of gaming and gambling in Michigan. The ever-increasing propensity to expand gaming and gambling most certainly is not the answer to improving Michigan's economy or to producing more jobs. Nor does gaming contribute to our quality of life, the health and psychological, emotional, social well-being of our people, our communities, and our state.

Senator Hardiman's statement is as follows: I rise to speak in opposition to House Bill No. 4610. We've all heard many things about this bill. There have been a lot of developments recently and many changes, but none of these are sufficient to cause me to support this legislation. House Bill No. 4610 strains to have us consider this new gambling activity as just a modest extension of the existing lottery. In Article 1, the legislature supposedly determines these gains are part of the lottery and not under the gaming control and revenue act. There is also supposedly not an amendment to the initiated law which provided for the three Detroit casinos. House Bill No. 4610 says that it is not the Legislature's intent to amend these statutes, but I don't see the difference. On page 82 of the substitute, we see that these racetrack facilities can have 500 video lottery machines with the possibility to apply for more. I don't know about other districts, but when I observe the lottery establishments in Grand Rapids, I surely don't see 500 machines. These are casinos, not the lottery. There is more to say about the specific language of House Bill No. 4610, but even these miss the main point. I oppose House Bill No. 4610 because I oppose the expansion of gambling in our state. Just because there are existing casinos or the state lottery does not mean we must continue to allow more and more outlets for serious gambling. Make no mistake about it, House Bill 4610 sets a goal of aggressive new escalation of gambling in Michigan. Section 62 of the bill states that all licensees under the act shall assist the board in maximizing video lottery revenues. They will be required to do so as a condition of licensure. Where do we think these maximum revenues will come from? A little over a month ago, this Senate adopted Senate Resolution No. 226. This established April as Financial Literacy for Youth Month. A few of its provisions are worth repeating: "Financial literacy encourages greater economic self-sufficiency, higher level of homeownership, and enhanced retirement security, particularly among low- and moderate-income citizens." That resolution said financial literacy was a serious matter, and parents, schools, businesses, and community organizations should observe the month--this month of April--with appropriate programs and activities. How can we ask others to teach our young people financial literacy and the message of personal responsibility when we pass a bill with the message that more gambling is better? How can we stand before our constituents and say we are fulfilling our fiscal responsibility for the state budget when we place our trust in a scheme of gambling and easy payoffs that won't even be realized for this fiscal year or perhaps the next? Most of all, how can we stand before the voters and say it is good to have more gambling when we know the downside in financial ruin, family strife, and personal tragedy that will afflict many? Page 34 of the bill says the lottery gaming control board shall take actions necessary to implement and conduct video lottery in accordance with this act and the welfare of the people of this state. We can make a far better contribution to the welfare of the people of Michigan by rejecting House Bill No. 4610. I urge members to cast a "nay" vote on this legislation.

Senator Birkholz's statement is as follows: Is it a casino? Is it a racino? A horse by another name, whatever you call it, it is a casino, and it is more gambling in this state. It's a whole lot more gambling in this state if this legislation becomes law. The problems are documented. Many of you have read the studies, and you know that the problems associated with gambling in communities are not positive. What happens to families who get involved in this is not a positive influence. Many of them do become addicted gamblers. In the past several years, as I've gone throughout my district discussing this issue with people--and, believe me, it's not my first choice of issues to discuss--I've learned of many families who have had problems with addicted gamblers in their family membership. You know what? They hide it. They're embarrassed. They're ashamed, and they work within their family confines to pay off those debts and try to help that person recuperate because they are truly sick. They don't tell anybody. They don't share it. They are so ashamed. I think the numbers truly do not reflect the people who are in our communities. Just last week at church, a neighbor came up to me, some good friends for many years. Our children went to school together. One of the couple members is already retired, took early retirement, and the other one was going to retire within two years--very good jobs, a quality life. I just learned Sunday their house is being repossessed because they'd started gambling. It's sickening, and this is not going to help it. We have a wonderful state with a lot of natural resources that we all try and steward. Part of our natural resources in this state is the quality of the people in it and the quality of our communities. If you truly believe in quality communities and you truly want to help raise helpful, intact quality families that do their best, this is not the way to do it. Towns littered with casinos, or whatever we call them, it's not a quality lifestyle and it's certainly not a quality place to bring up a family. I hope you will vote "no."

Senator McManus' statement is as follows: I rise today in support of House Bill No. 4610. I wish that the chamber would ask themselves two questions. Does this bill create jobs? Can I vote for this bill in good conscience? Now I believe that the answer to those questions is a resounding "yes." The legislation opponents call the racino package is actually the agriculture enhancement package. It's properly called that because of its original design. This bill's principal purpose was to enhance agriculture in the state of Michigan. Agriculture is the second-largest industry in Michigan, and I certainly hope that the changes to eliminate agriculture interests in this legislation will be addressed in the conference committee. The horse racing industry and its trickle down effects employ an estimated 26,000 people here in Michigan. This number is down from 50,000 before casinos. A primary focus of this legislation was to save farm jobs when almost daily we receive news of additional layoffs here in the state of Michigan. Ladies and gentlemen, we may disagree on whether gambling and gaming is immoral, but let it be clear that it is not illegal in recognized establishments. It's a simple fact that the two largest gaming entities in Michigan are the state itself and Native American tribes. If any of you truly think gaming revenue isn't worth its moral costs, where's the bill to eliminate Keno and the state lottery? You can not pick and choose which gaming is moral and which is not. Back in July of last year, 33 members of the Senate voted to expand gaming; only one voted against Senate Bill No. 270, which put pull tabs and Keno in numerous bars and restaurants throughout Michigan. That, ladies and gentlemen, is real expansion in gaming. Gaming has taken place legally at Michigan racetracks for more than 50 years. This is not an expansion of locations. This proposal would simply equip tracks with some modern-day tools of gaming that have been legally used both by the state and Native American casinos. The last time I checked, I was a conservative. I still consider myself a conservative. In fact, I think I was ranked fairly high in that particular group, yet I plan to vote for this legislation because I believe that there is room in the conservative tent for different viewpoints on this very issue. This is not about gambling. This is about revenue to the state. This is about jobs. This is about the horse racing industry. And though the bills may have changed, this legislation is about agriculture enhancement. So ask yourself, "Can I truly turn away agriculture jobs and much needed revenue?" I cannot do that in good conscience. We need job growth, and we need revenue. I will be supporting this package, and I would ask that you deeply support this.

Senator Patterson's statement is as follows: I don't support gambling. I'm not satisfied with this bill--House Bill No. 4610. This is not, however, a vote on the elimination of gaming or gambling. If it was, it would be an easier vote for most of us in this body. But as this substitute has been amended, there is the possibility that we could really make a considerable improvement in the current state of gaming and gambling addiction that is the status quo. As a lawyer who is an optimist, I am looking to improve the status quo, not complain about the current condition. One of my colleagues, the Senator from the 30th District, properly cast this in terms of part of a process. I deeply respect not only my colleagues and their opinions, but the process. The process, the legislative process, calls upon us to consider, sincerely contemplate, deliberate, and take definitive action, always with the goal to improving the condition of our citizens and our state. The action we are taking now, at this moment, is one of process. It is not a final decision. This bill was acted upon by our colleagues in the House. It came to this chamber approximately one year ago. It was sent to committee, as is part of our process, but finally it had to be discharged from that committee, which is part of our process. So today, I hope to continue the process in pursuit of my goal to improve the condition of our state and our citizenry. We could have left this bill to die a lingering death of inaction in a committee, with a majority of the body never having had an opportunity to participate in the deliberative process. I'm glad that we've had the good fortune of being able to reason together, to deliberate, and to act on this substitute with a series of amendments coming from across the entire breadth and width of this chamber. It is my responsibility to be part of this process, to do my due diligence. I'm not voting on the substance today, but I'm voting on the legislative process and hoping it will continue.

what about the children who dream of following in dad and moms footsteps and want to race horses, or be farmers----are those children not in your thoughts as you vote-----probably not

so what your saying is that you'd rather the indians take our gambling money rather than the department of agriculture.

Sen. McManus, you say "the last time you checked, you were a conservative" -- this vote clearly shows you are not. Expanding gambling - harming our families and society...yeah, good job.

Sen. Patterson, you say "you don't support gambling"??? You think your "yes" vote was to reduce gambling? Man, these guys have been in Lansing way too long.

I was disappointed by Senator McManus' support and comments pertaining to this bill... "But Sen. Michelle McManus (R-Lake Leelanau) said, "Maybe we disagree whether gambling and gaming is immoral, but it is legal." And the Legislature "cannot pick and choose which (form of gambling) is moral and which is not" when 33 senators voted to expand the lottery in Keno and pull-tab games, she said." I have been encouraged in the past by her position on abortion. However, it appears by her comments on the Racino Bill that the pro-choice arguments are wearing her down.

Sounds a bit like John Kerry...he was against it before he voted for it?

This was nothing but a political ploy as it will be passed once the state budget is balanced. In the mean time race tracks are struggling and we are losing the revenue that we could be getting if slot machines and video poker were allowed at the tracks. To vote no on this is anti- business and anti- revenue.

There are those of us that are anti-gambling. There are those of us who do not think that it is good public policy to finance education and other programs with such.