Increasing number of Mich. casinos a gamble

---

Tweet

A proposal to construct several casinos in Michigan aims to roll the dice for education but ultimately will bust with poor execution and planning.

With enough signatures, voters will have the opportunity in November to take up a measure backed by the “Michigan Is Yours” organization to allow the construction of up to seven new casinos in the state. Members of the organization say taxes imposed on casino wagers would help fund the state’s failed Michigan Promise Scholarship.

What does it say about our state when we fund education ­— our future generations — through gambling?
Should the proposal pass, the electorate is betting casinos will be the state’s magic bullet to solve part of the education budget crisis. Ideally, Michigan will be seen as a place of entertainment and thriving school districts all within the foreground of the state’s natural beauty.

But take off the rose-colored glasses for a moment.

Although casinos provide jobs within communities and attract people across state lines, their business model — considered “predatory” by some — targets those already facing economic difficulty. Benton Harbor, Detroit, Flint, Lansing, Muskegon, Romulus and the Detroit Metro Airport all are under consideration for these new establishments.

Each of the seven areas in Michigan has seen brighter days before the economic downturn. When a person does not have an expansive income, he or she might see a casino as an opportunity to “get rich quick,” but that is not how casinos operate. After all, they are just like any other business with management at the helm of paying employees and making a profit.

Should the proposal pass, it seems as though a dollar spent at the casino will not go far enough. Too many questions go unanswered. How would that one dollar be split among the house, the state, the Promise scholarship and every other entity?

Besides deficits within education, the state has enough on its plate of budget crises. Assuming the state is able to turn a surplus in five, 10 or even 20 years, additional and permanent establishments can outlast what is a temporary budgeting problem.

Picture, for instance, a new casino at the edge of MSU’s campus or one outside your hometown. Not only will they draw a crowd, but 20 years from now, will the casinos still feed money to the state and local communities as they had prior to the downturn? Lady luck might not be on your side when the state rebounds.

If voters approve, the Promise might appear to ride on the backs of high rollers and not the state’s population as a whole. If the scholarship is to be funded, Michigan should tax the state as a whole ­— not target a specific demographic living within numerous communities.

Come November, voters should consider alternative methods to fund our future.

---