Column: Odds look good for non-Indian gaming in Minnesota

Monday, May 2, 2011  

"This week, gambling has been in the news again because the majority down at the Capitol, having put itself in the untenable position of balancing the state’s budget without taking in any new tax revenue, is looking at expanding gambling.

It’s a fascinating battle both morally and politically.

For starters, the Republican Party’s platform takes a stand against gambling. But some of the party’s leading voices have advocated expanding gambling and one, former Auditor Pat Anderson, has even signed on as a pro-gambling lobbyist.

Apparently party platforms don’t mean much.

Politically, the issue may be stickier. The idea of privately run and state-taxed gambling horrifies Minnesota’s existing gaming industry which is centered on 18 tribally owned casinos.

The tribes and their employees have been crying foul over the idea of facing competition from private gambling entrepreneurs. But their position is not particularly strong, because the casinos do provide jobs but do not share any of their revenues with the state. This is a sore point with some Minnesotans."

Get the Story:
Dave Churchill: Odds favor gambling expansion in Minnesota (The Austin Daily Herald 4/29)

Related Stories:
Opinion: Minnesota tribes trying to keep gaming monopoly (4/29)
Shakopee Tribe considers liquor sales amid casino debate (4/28)
Minnesota tribes oppose bid to allow non-Indian gaming (4/27)
Minnesota Indian Gaming Association off to State Capitol (4/26)
Marge Anderson: Expanded gaming will harm Minnesota tribes (4/6)
Editorial: Joint tribal-state casino a better idea for Minnesota (3/29)
Opinion: There's definitely room for more gaming in Minnesota (3/28)
Column: Breaking the monopoly of tribal gaming in Minnesota (3/25)
Editorial: It's time to renegotiate casino compacts in Minnesota (3/8)
MPR: Minnesota tribes oppose expansion of non-Indian gaming (2/24)