Label slapping
by Lloyd Levenson
November 1, 2008
Name
something that nobody wants, but almost everybody wears, even though it rarely
fits. The answer is a...
Here is a riddle: Name
something that nobody wants, but almost everybody wears, even though it rarely
fits. The answer: a label.
Sometimes
we try to label others, often with success. Democratic presidential candidate
Michael Dukakis was branded with the “L” word in his unsuccessful 1988
campaign.
He used to say: “If I had a dollar
for every time you (Republican
candidate George H.W. Bush) called me a liberal, I could afford one of your tax
breaks.”
At
other times, however, the labels do not stick. Some people have tried to brand
New Jersey’s regulators as “anti-gaming.” In
fact, New Jersey is about as anti-gaming as Detroit is
anti-automobile.
This,
of course, brings up a serious question: What does it actually mean to be
anti-gaming or pro-gaming? Surely, if you want to attack every legal craps
table in North America with an ax –like a latter-
day Eliot Ness – or if you want to put one-arm handcuffs around
one-arm slot machines, then you might fairly be labeled as in the anti-casino
camp.
But
not many people take such extreme positions today. Even compulsive gambling
experts do not seek abolition. They propose proper funding, responsible gaming
practices and effective treatment.
Does
someone who seeks effective regulation that promotes public confidence deserve
an anti-gaming label? It would be fairer and more logical to label such a
person “pro-gaming.”
Why?
Because he has clearly come down on the side of promoting public confidence in
casinos. That confidence is the key ingredient behind the industry’s expansion
and behind Wall Street’s willingness (despite present turmoil in the capital
markets) to fund that expansion.
The
other side of this question is: What does it really mean to be pro-gaming? I
firmly believe that the enlightened, experienced leaders of New Jersey’s two regulatory agencies are
pro-gaming. That does not mean, by any stretch of the imagination, that they
roll over to grant any request that comes their way.
Indeed,
they do not. They ask hard questions. They want to make sure that what they do
is in the public interest. Quite often, they must say no.
Still,
they are pro-gaming because they make every effort to understand why the
request is being made. They go to great lengths to appreciate what the industry
requires before it will invest in Atlantic
City. They are fully cognizant of the need to be
transparent and consistent in their decisions.
I have
stated before, and will state again that New Jersey is the reason why so many people around the
world have confidence in the casino industry.
So,
what does it mean to be pro-casino? Here are the necessary ingredients. You
must be on the side of honesty and integrity. You must recognize that
regulators are not your enemy, and that some level of regulation is
required.
What
does it mean to be anti-gaming? It means being on the side of secrecy, of
putting politics above the public interest.
I am
proud to be from New Jersey
and to have played a part in the building of this industry’s reputation. Even
when a decision does not go my way, I recognize that my client received a fair
hearing. I recognize that regulators have a job to do, and they do it
well.
Interestingly,
as the current economic downturn deepens, and the numbers coming from most
casino jurisdictions show varying levels of decline, Atlantic City has taken a beating in the
media. But, when you ask the people who really understand the system what they
think about the future of Atlantic
City, they are downright
optimistic.
For
example, Spectrum Gaming Group – an independent research firm that has helped
government agencies around the world to do their job better – remains rather
sanguine about the Atlantic City
market, which is their home base.
They
believe that, when the
capital markets get back on course, investors will return to a market that is
stable, where the tax rate is manageable and where regulators understand the
big picture. Does that mean that Spectrum or others who think that way are pro-
Atlantic City?
No, it just means that they
understand what it takes for a private industry and government agencies to
share a common goal. I am in that group as well. Call us pro-common sense. That
is a label that just might stick.
|