Gambling in Dodge City

[Bubba]

It needs to be tied into other area attractions as well, target the retired people with money that travel in their RV's, they could stay at the yet to be finished Horse Thief Resevoir, gamble at the casino, see Boot Hill, see a concert at the SEC. The SEC and the casino working together could bring more hotels, as the people come to visit, would bring the Chili's and Friday's and Braum's. Creating more jobs and attracting legal citizen's to come live and work. etc. etc.

[TexKan]

I think you are very right Detector......... I think that the money that is already in place in Dodge is scared to death they will get downgraded and upstaged by some real money. Which is what will happen if legal gaming comes in. The powers that be will shift and ya know what the ones who assess are gettin kissed now will have to dance and kiss ass to stay where they are. They won't be so "self made" anymore. There will be new money and bigger money in town.......... they of course would much rather maintain the status quo - so thier mountain doesn't get toppled. It's just hard for me to believe that those in power would actually tell the citizens of dodge that they should let this opportunity go by cause some idiot might become addicted. They sure didn't worry bout your lifestyle or heritage when they welcomed illegals to your town and coddled the employers that brought them in by the trainload. Yeah they are real concerned bout your town............. but the truth is they are more worried bout thier money.

[Made in the USA]

I have to side with Texie, Detector, and Bubba! I have been to many small towns that have legalized casino gambling, and I have not found what you are raving about, Mike. We are talking ONE (1) casino, not the Las Vegas Strip, here!! In every instance, a destination casino has produced distinct advantages. Keep our money working here, not in surrounding States. Enough of our local money goes to Mexico now!!

[booger]

Dam, Bubba you just hit it out of the park.

[Jolly Rancher]

Originally Posted by Bubba

If gambling is such an economic negative, how did Cripple Creek, Co turn from a virtual ghost town to a thriving community thanks to gambling.

They didn't have 2 packing houses and 40% (guesstimate) illegals with drugs.

I do think the crime rate will rise. As will the need for more social services. The poor will get poorer. I wonder if the casinos will take the vision card and all the cash assistance.

[Detector]

It seems some have already decided the future of Dodge City.

Taken from an article in the Globe about the new revised proposal for the SEC from Global Entertainment.

Source: REGISTER USER ACCOUNT

The revised proposal sparked a series of questions from the board and the audience, which touched on topics ranging from the proposed location for the complex to programming for Hispanic residents.


Later, Dodge City Commissioner Jim Lembright wondered what the company would do to attract Hispanic residents to events at the complex.

"I think it's critical, absolutely critical," he said.

Sad. Simply sad...

[Mike B.]

TexKan,

Folks, Being real honest, I do realize my conservative views and convictions are not well accepted. I know I stand in the minority. I can handle that. I've been real honest with myself researching gambling and I cast judgement upon no-one.

I have never said that we could stop crime if we had no gambling. We will always have crime. I just believe, as history points out, that gambling breeds crime. Communities that welcome gambling also welcome an increase in crime. Recent history in communities ranging from Atlantic City to Deadwood, South Dakota, to the Mississippi Gulf Coast indicates that the sheer number of crimes skyrockets in an area once gambling is permitted. Much of this is attributed to the newly created gambling addicts who, in desperation, turn to crime to finance their addiction.

Gambling is driven by and subsists on greed. For this reason, the activity is morally bankrupt from its very foundation. Gambling is also an activity which exploits the vulnerable — the young, the old, and those susceptible to addictive behaviors. Further, gambling entices the financially disadvantaged classes with the unrealistic hope of escape from poverty through instant riches, thus ultimately worsening the plight of our poorest citizens. Also, gambling undermines the work ethic. It is based on the premise of something for nothing, a concept that sanctions idleness rather than industriousness, slothfulness instead of initiative.

I can give all the stats and figures again as I have in past posts. If you don't believe me then trust history. It always repeats itself. Dodge City will experience increased crime just like other gambling communities.

[Mike B.]

I realize not every one who enter a casino becomes a gambling addict, but some do. The majority will enjoy themselves and have abit of fun. But overall our community, our society, we will have a larger price to pay than any amount of money lost at the tables.

I guess this is where I say, "We can agree to disagree."

Anyways, we have quite away to go before this issue comes to a vote in Ford County.

[Made in the USA]

Mike, I can see your point, and understand your thoughts on this, also. Thirty years ago in Dodge City, I might agree with you. At that time Dodge City was a nice, small town in which to raise your kids and enjoy a nice peaceful life away from the problems of the big cities. However, since the arrival of the large packers and the problems associated with them, I think we need to look at something with economic income that doesn't involve the problems associated with the influx of workers associated with the packers. I have lived in very large cities, where the problems and the environment was alot less than what is in DC today. If my kids were not grown and gone, I would not stay in this area. However, my kids grew up and escaped this mess. They all live in larger cities with gambling there, or nearby, and they have much less problems than we have here in DC. Their towns are nice, their taxes are much less, their residents are friendlier, and they have many perks available that we don't have presently in DC. The reason that I moved to DC almost 40 years ago, was because of the benefits of the small town environment. If I had to make that choice today, I would not be here. The only reasons that I remain here now, is because I have a business established here, and all of my friends live here.

I admit, I have not been for the SEC since day 1. The Civic Center, IMO, can handle anything willing to come to DC at the present time. However, with a destination casino in DC, I think the SEC complex would work out great. With a hotel, convention center, etc, I think it would draw a large group of people for Conventions, Seminars, Shows, Sports Venues, Concerts, and so forth. I know when I am looking to attend a conference or convention, I look to see what is available to do in the area. At the present, If I were looking to attend a convention in DC, and saw what is available to do in the area, I probably would not attend! Since the ruling is that we "will build" the SEC, I think we need something like a casino to draw people to the area in order to help pay for our expenses.

[lurker]

It's politics and connections:

Former leaders influenced measure

By Chris Green

Harris News Service


TOPEKA - When historic legislation passed this past week to expand gambling in the state, it had help from some former high-ranking state officials.

Three past House speakers were among proponents working behind the scenes this session to help advance a bill allowing four new destination casinos and racetrack slot machines.

Foremost among them was former House Speaker Doug Mays, R-Topeka, who critics say helped engineer procedural moves that brought the gambling debate to the House floor.

Mays, who could not be reached by phone for comment, officially left his post in January after four years as speaker. He began lobbying this session for Kansans for Economic Growth, a Galena group working to bring a casino to southeast Kansas.

Robin Jennison, who led the House in 1999 and 2000, successfully lobbied this session for Boot Hill Gaming, which wants to bring a casino to Dodge City.

In addition, former House Speaker Tim Shallenburger, who led the House from 1995 to 1998, didn't officially lobby the Legislature but he did visit the Statehouse on several occasions.

Shallenburger said the owners of his employer, a Baxter Springs bank, support allowing southeast Kansans to decide whether they want a casino and see gaming as a way to fuel economic development.

All three former speakers once opposed or showed little enthusiasm for expanded gambling during their terms in office. But they've changed their tunes somewhat since stepping down.

Unlike many other states, Kansas doesn't require former state officials to wait before becoming a paid lobbyist.

The passage of this year's gambling bill ended 15 years of legislative failures to expand gaming in the state and is expected to bring $200 million annually to the state. The measure could bring casinos to Dodge City, the Kansas City area, southeast and south-central Kansas and slots to dog and horse race tracks in Kansas City, Frontenac and Wichita.

A gambling bill opponent, Rep. Brenda Landwehr, R-Wichita, said the former speakers had considerable sway over the successful push for gambling this session.

"I think there were some legislators that they could approach easier than other lobbyists had been able to," Landwehr said. "Their knowledge in how to maneuver the process was probably more important. The biggest thing in this gambling bill was the lack of respect for process, because every procedural rule was broken."

Other legislators, however, aren't so sure.

Despite opponents' claims to the contrary, Rep. Clay Aurand, R-Courtland, said gambling lobbyists didn't write the bill that is now set to become law.

A leader of the push for expanded gambling, Aurand said the proposal was drafted by a bipartisan group of legislators in consultation with the governor's office.

In addition, Rep. Kevin Yoder, R-Overland Park, said the former speakers' influence was more advisory in nature.

"I don't know how much influence they had on the process," said Yoder, a Hutchinson native who supported the gambling bill. "They are well-liked individuals who garner a tremendous amount of respect from their fellow legislators. I think their opinions do have an impact on legislation in the Capitol."

Stacked deck?

Among the former speakers, it's Mays' successful turn at lobbying for gaming that has cost him with some of his former supporters.

House Federal and State Affairs Committee Chairman Arlen Siegfreid, R-Olathe, said he'd always had tremendous respect for Mays.

While serving as speaker, Siegfreid said Mays took a "strong and principled stand" against gaming, seeing it as something that could hurt people and damage the state's economy.

Seeing Mays push a gambling interest after leaving office disappointed him, Siegfreid said.

"I lost a great deal of that respect," Siegfreid said. "I considered him a friend. I was really disappointed."

Particularly infuriating for the chamber's anti-gambling conservatives is their view that Mays helped engineer a backdoor way to force a vote on gambling over the objections of House Speaker Melvin Neufeld, R-Ingalls.

With Siegfreid's committee still studying the gambling bills, another House committee amended an elections measure so it would deal with gambling. Once passed, that gave gambling proponents a bill to amend with their plan.

Landwehr said gambling backers then made an attempt to force Neufeld into a vote on gambling at Mays' urging. Neufeld ultimately allowed several gambling proposals to come to the floor, including a bill extending the lottery, which was amended to carry the gaming plan.

"I think it was disrespectful to backdoor a sitting speaker like that," Landwehr said.

In a written statement, Neufeld said the efforts of Mays and the other former speakers were only part of the reason gambling passed this session.

"Former speakers know the rules and procedures much better than most other lobbyists. But it was more than just them working against me. There was the governor, the Senate president and 37 other gambling lobbyists working to get a gaming bill passed this session that would allow state-owned casinos to be built.

"And at times, it felt like I and other concerned members of the House Republicans Caucus were working against a stacked deck," Neufeld said.

But others, including Jennison and Shallenburger, defend Mays' and their own efforts.

Jennison said that it was the realities facing the state that prompted him, Shallenburger and Mays to see things differently.

A proliferation of casinos on the state's borders made it clear that Kansas couldn't keep out gambling-related problems even if the state continued to reject casinos, Jennison said.

"That's what changed my mind, Tim's mind and Doug's mind," Jennison said.

Case-in-point, Shallenburger says, is southeast Kansas, where he and Mays both grew up and where 12 casinos sit just across the state line, drawing in Kansas residents and their dollars.

The state sees nothing when its residents leave the state to gamble and Shallenburger said expansion of gambling would simply "stop the bleeding" and likely benefit the state and economic development in the long run.

Shallenburger said the restrictions in the bill limit the locations of gambling, while still giving them an opportunity to do something they want to do.

"I think those who fear Kansas has taken a giant step toward evil are totally off-base," Shallenburger said.

Effective advocates

The controversial nature of the gaming issue does mean that Mays has probably sparked some anger, Shallenburger said, but that comes with the territory.

"There are people that are opposed to any expansions that are probably upset with him," Shallenburger said. "But he has decided that he is going to work in government relations and I think he was very effective."

However, Landwehr said she believed that Mays has lost the ear of many in the Legislature from now on because of his efforts.

Mays better have a good job lined up with the gambling firm he's represented because "there's a lot of legislators that will not be giving lobbyist Doug Mays the time of day," Landwehr said.

Although the gambling carries a provision requiring that legislators must be out of office for five years before they can have a direct or indirect financial interest in gaming, Siegfreid said he didn't think it would apply to any of Mays' lobbying activities.

?Kansas also doesn't approve to be moving in the direction of limiting the time a state officials must be out-of-office before trying to influence legislative decisions as a paid lobbyist.??

Although legislators discussed a bill imposing a two-year ban on lobbying for state officials leaving office beginning in 2008, the measure stalled in a Senate committee.

And Yoder said he didn't think that Mays had more influence than any other "normal lobbyist" on legislative action.

"After retiring from public service, he decided he wanted to represent clients in the Legislature - that's normal and respectable," Yoder said. "I don't think he carries any undue weight or influence than any other former legislator, other than the fact that he's respected by his fellow colleagues."

03/31/2007; 02:27:29 AM

At the end of any future gaming day we will see the money go to Topeka (please note that DC & Ford Co. won't even get to collect "Why Not Dodge?" or any other Sales Tax on gaming revenue) but we will be left with the mess.