Not a chance

A National Gambling Impact Study had revealed such unsettling consequences that the commission conducting it called for a pause in gambling expansion. The study found that 15 million Americans were "at-risk gamblers," 2.5 million were "pathological gamblers," and pathological gambling occurred proportionately more often among the young, less educated, and poor. It led to destructive and criminal behaviors affecting families and communities, and played a part in some 2 million divorces. About 1 in 5 compulsive gamblers attempts suicide, and the actual suicide rate is higher than for victims of any other type of addiction.

Another study found that 25 to 40 percent of revenues in casinos came from people with some form of addiction, and estimated the economic impact of problem gamblers to be $13,200 per problem gambler per year.

While gambling is presented today as simply "another entertainment option," opponents say, people are becoming more aware of its economic and social costs.

In Maryland, civic and religious groups are fighting the governor's proposals to put slot machines at racetracks. Kevin McGhee, a pastor in Laurel, Md., and president of the local clergy association, says, "Every study we've looked at shows that within 25 miles of these slot- machine venues, the problems of addiction escalate dramatically."

His group and some local African-American churches "are fighting this quite aggressively," he says. "Maryland already has a lottery that was supposed to be once a week and has evolved into many times a day."

The governor faces a huge budget deficit, but opponents says the slots won't solve the problem any more than the lottery has.

"It's political expedience to use gambling rather than taxation," Mr. McGhee adds. "We've said people need more courage. We're trying to help them find their moral backbone."

Most troubling to many people is the role of state governments. States were the regulators and law enforcers of gambling until they shifted - starting with New Hampshire in 1964 - to running and promoting state lotteries.

(Fahrenkopf calls this "the real seminal event in changing America's perception of gambling. How could gambling be morally wrong if state government was doing it?" )

Robert Goodman, a professor at Hampshire College who has done economic studies on gambling, contends the state's role conflicts with its primary concern for the welfare of citizens.

"Each time government has a shortfall in revenues and tries to raise it by getting people to gamble more, that raises serious issues," he says.

Most surveys show this shifts the burden of paying for public services to lower-income residents. While Gallup found that about the same percentage of people from each income group play the lottery, the average amount gambled by those with incomes under $20,000 was two to five times that of higher income groups.

And heavy state promotion of the lottery can be manipulative. Dr. Goodman recalls, "The Illinois lottery would have billboards in poor black neighborhoods saying, 'This is your ticket out.'"

Lance Dodes, a Boston psychiatrist who heads a gambling treatment center, says the advent of the lottery has dramatically changed the profile of compulsive gamblers. "A problem that used to apply only to men is now an equal opportunity event," he says. Many young people are getting hooked on campuses, too.

"We talk about people becoming addicted to gambling, but essentially, governments have become addicted to these revenues; and it will never be enough," Goodman cautions.

Don Feeny, research director of the Minnesota State Lottery, agrees it can't fill the role of taxation. In his state, the lottery funds less than 2 percent of the budget.

"Can it ever raise the money taxation does? Absolutely not. Can it do it as efficiently? No." But, he adds, the public seems to prefer a lottery to taxation.

While the antigambling forces had many victories in 2003, Mr. Grey says they're going to be short-lived unless "we raise a real army."

He'll keep traveling the country to buck up local coalitions, as he's been doing since his initial battle against riverboat gambling in Galena, Ill., in 1992. He argues the case from the standpoint of "social morality:"

"It's not good economics, it's not good public policy, and it's not good for the quality of life," he says. "Any society that preys on the pathology of some people to support education or another good cause, that's not just."

Page: 1 | 2