Reply to Will Question 7 fund Md Schools? by increasing casinos?

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Will Question 7 fund Md Schools? by increasing casinos?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]If the casino were to be built in downtown Bethesda, would you vote for Question 7?[/quote]

Why dabble in "if/then's"?  A casino will not be built in MoCo.  It will be built in National Harbor,and PG needs the stimulus such a casino would provide in terms of both short term (construction) and long term jobs.  Are they great jobs in the long term?  Of course not.  Fact is, though, that Q7 will keep MD $$ here in MD.  So what if it's "only" $100 or so million, and so what if it just supplants what is already spent on education rather than an addition.  It's still $100 million MORE than the state of MD had before![/quote]

Longterm it may reduce $ from gambling, because of the lowering of the state's share, and it might hurt PG's prospects for better development, not to mention that gambling does have social costs.  We can do a lot better.[/quote]

[b]I don't follow your argument about the lowering of the state's share over the longterm.  Is there wording in the referendum that specifically states that will happen, or is it conjecture on your part?[/b]  I agree that gmbling has social costs and that's why I voted against gambling when it first came up.  The casinos already exist in MD.  Yes, an additional one would be built in PG should Q7 pass and yes table games are an addition.  I believe the social costs of the additional casino and of adding table games is most likely miniscule compared to the benefit of the increased revenue to the state.[/quote]

The central piece of Question 7 is that it provides tax breaks to the existing casinos of up to 27%. The reasoning was to offset loss of income from a new competitor in PG. Also the measure allows for the state to pay for costs associated with development of PG casino (for road improvements and infrastructure), not the developer of the casino. And there is nothing stating that PG casino must hire Maryland workers. I'm not necessarily against letting table games in, or opening up a new casino - but I don't think this was the best deal MD could get. We let gambling into MD, let's be smart about how we mange its growth.
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics