To gamble or not to gamble? The state's question
I can remember being 11 years old in 1981 when my dad took me to the county line to teach me a lesson about gambling.
He told me to look at the sheet from the local bookie and find the three most attractive point spreads for the upcoming NFL games. I don’t remember all of them, but I’m pretty sure the Raiders were one of them.
He had me use my own $10 I had “earned” from doing work around the house. He told me I could win $60 if I picked all three games correctly but lose the $10 if I lost.
He meant well. Giving my $10 away would sting, and I’d be less likely to throw money away with gambling in the future.
Of course I won.
The good news is I never got addicted, despite the occasional trip to Greenetrack or Philadelphia, Miss., when I got a little older.
It could have easily gone the other way, however.
The State’s Issue
Once again, for what seems to be the 30th straight year, the Alabama Legislature introduced a gambling bill only to see it wither away in the last two weeks of the session.
Granted, there are a few legislators who are philosophically opposed to gambling in all forms. However, this is not why the gambling bill dies every year. The gambling bill dies every year because everyone wants a piece of the pie, and it simply can’t be spread that thin.
Legislators either want a gambling site in their district or want some of the revenue generated to go to a certain project or program. Some won’t support the bill if revenue is allocated to a program they oppose.
This hit home in Houston County in 2009 when developer Ronnie Gilley attempted to build a Branson-style complex in the southern end of the county, funded by gambling. The associated legislation was halted by an FBI raid of sorts that resulted in the arrest of senators, lobbyists and magnates. The FBI alleged votes were being bought by a massive bribery scheme headed up by those who stood to benefit the most.
Despite Gilley pleading guilty to the scheme, his testimony in court was not enough to convince a jury that any real bribery took place. The only legislator to wind up serving time was former Elba senator Terry Spicer, who was caught up in an unrelated bribery case due to the testimony of a lobbyist trying to reduce his sentence in the gambling bribery case.
The Houston County location, by the way, remains active as a legal bingo facility, a way to keep the location alive until Alabama ultimately approves legalized gambling.
The gambling debate, especially at that time, was boiling. Proponents of legalized gambling passionately argued Alabama was falling behind other states that already had legalized gambling for many years. They said residents were crossing state lines to buy lottery tickets, and that was money not being retained here. They said people should be free to do what they wanted, whether that meant buying a lottery ticket or pulling the arm of a slot machine.
Their lives. Their money.
Opponents said gambling is a losing proposition from the beginning. Some opposed gambling for religious reasons. Others said the social costs outweighed the revenue gained.
I covered dueling rallies on the State Capitol grounds when emotions were at their highest. The two dueling groups clashed in a cacophony of screaming and shouting at each other. It looked like a scene from a John Grisham book-turned-movie.
At some point, when someone can figure out how to appease enough legislators, a gambling bill will pass here.
But should it? Will this be a good thing or a bad thing for the state?
On Religious Grounds
Many — but not all — conservative Christians oppose gambling in all forms because they believe it is Biblically forbidden, or at least violates Biblical principles.
They argue that gambling violates scriptural commands against greed and covetousness (Exodus 20:17; Luke 12:15). They cite Proverbs 13:11 (“Wealth gained hastily will dwindle, but whoever gathers little by little will increase it”) to assert that gambling seeks quick riches without honest labor, which conflicts with the work ethic in Proverbs 28:19 and 2 Thessalonians 3:10 (“If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat”).
Further, they argue that all resources are from God, and spending those resources on gambling is a misuse of those resources that could be spent on more useful things.
As recently as 2017, the Southern Baptist Convention approved a resolution opposing gambling in all forms and referring to it as sin.
Other Christians, however, view gambling as an extension of free will, where individuals can responsibly use their resources—time, money, and talents—as they see fit, provided it doesn’t harm others or go to excess.
They would be part of the “all things in moderation” group who would not see gambling a few dollars any worse than overspending on a sweater or any other item.
They say lots were cast to choose Matthias as the disciple to replace Judas, following prayer to God.
On Ethical Grounds
Many citizens support the right to gamble on ethical grounds. They prioritize individual liberty and autonomy.
They support the right of adults to engage in the activities they choose.
Some, however, oppose gambling on ethical grounds. They believe the harm to society overrides the personal choice argument. They also reject the argument that gambling doesn’t cause harm to others. A pot of chips raked in by the winner of a poker hand contains chips lost by others at the table.
They believe gambling short-circuits the values of work, effort and diligence that are important in character development.
On Financial Grounds
If or when Alabama passes a gambling bill, this will be the arena in which it is argued.
Do the benefits outweigh the harm?
Almost every state has some form of gambling. Even Alabama had dog track betting for many years. Today, you can wager real money on online fantasy sports. And of course you can go to “casinos” on land owned by Native Americans.
But proponents of gambling expansion in the state want more. They want a lottery. They want real sports betting. They want casinos with expanded types of gambling in different parts of the state (including Houston County), even if that means giving the Native American casinos full-fledged gambling (poker, craps, roulette, blackjack, etc.).
The argument is that Alabama needs the revenue. Alabama has a low tax burden compared to many other states, while expenses for the same level of services continue to rise.
A 2020 study from the Governor’s Study Commission on gambling estimated Alabama could raise around $700 million with a lottery and other forms of legalized gambling. That’s a lot of additional revenue when compared against Alabama’s total general fund budget of less than $4 billion. It’s still a significant amount even if you add the Education Trust Fund budget of around $9 billion.
The $700 million number is the one proponents trumpet in lobbying efforts around the state.
But this is far from a net number.
Even the commission’s own report suggests the state would lose about $130 million in sales tax because residents would choose to spend money on gambling instead of items that generate sales tax.
So, we’re already down to $570 million.
Then there are social costs. This is difficult to pin down, but some sort of problem gambling help network will need to be established at government cost. This is necessary because there will be problem gamblers.
Lots of problem gamblers.
An older study of legalized gambling in Wisconsin determined Wisconsin gained about $326 million annually in revenue but lost about $307 million due to problem gambling costs.
More findings from more recent studies:
A study from Northwestern University estimated that every dollar spent on gambling resulted in $2 that was not invested for the future. The study also looked at the cost of bank account overdrafts and credit card interest.
A study from economists tied to UCLA and USC found that legalized online sports betting increases the chance of a bankruptcy by 25 to 30 percent and affects low-income households more.
An Oregon study concluded that legalized gambling equated to a 9 percent increase in domestic violence.
Individual liberty arguments are understandable, and we have certainly legalized a lot of things that obviously have detrimental impacts on society (tobacco, alcohol, etc.).
But if Alabama thinks it will solve its revenue shortcomings through legalized gambling, the numbers appear to show otherwise.