I’ve said before that regardless of what you hear from gambling proponents about the potential for expanded gambling to help with the current budget deficit, you should not expect anything this biennium. I’m glad to see that I’m not the only one saying such things.
John Heleman of the state comptroller’s office said the most popular gambling options being discussed in the Legislature would not provide much revenue over the next two to three years because of the time that would be required to put them in place and start generating revenue.
Proposals to legalize resort casinos and allow slot machines at horse and dog racetracks have been gaining momentum in Texas as projections on the state’s budget shortfall next year continue to climb, with some experts predicting the deficit may reach $18 billion.
But Heleman told the House Licensing and Administrative Procedures Committee that increased gaming shouldn’t be seen as a quick cure.
“You won’t get any money the first year, and it is very likely you will get a small amount the second year,” he said, noting that lawmakers would first have to pass gambling legislation next year and then have voters approve a constitutional amendment in November of 2011.
Next would come rules and regulations for whatever gambling options are approved, and then the state would have to issue licenses to racetrack operators installing slot machines or corporations building resort casinos. Two Indian tribes in Texas also want authority to operate casinos in the state.
“It could be a couple of years before any money comes in,” Heleman said.
None of this is an argument against gambling per se. Expanded gambling does not need to bring in short term returns to be a good investment for Texas, if you believe it to be so. But a big part of the pitch for more gambling is that exactly that it can help close the budget gap, and that’s simply not going to happen. (That message has not sunk in yet. I have an email in my box from Friday that State Rep. Solomon Ortiz, Jr sent to his constituents about attending that House Committee on Licensing & Administrative Procedures that talks about the deficit and the need to “look at new ways of providing revenue to the state”, without mentioning the fact that these revenues are unlikely to be there this biennium.) Let’s be honest about this so that when and if there is a constitutional amendment on the ballot for it, we know just what it is we’re voting on.