#macasino

SPRINGFIELD, Mass. (WWLP) – Casinos will be allowed to move forward in Massachusetts, after ballot Question 3, an effort to repeal the state’s 2011 casino law, has been rejected by voters.

With 61% of precincts reporting, the “no” side on Question 3 was leading with 59% of the vote to the “yes” side’s 41%.

Tonight’s vote is a victory for MGM’s proposal to build an $800 million resort casino in Springfield’s South End. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission awarded MGM the sole western Massachusetts gaming license back in June. The stakes were high for more companies than just MGM, however. Penn National has already begun construction on the state’s only slots parlor at the Plainridge Racecourse in Plainville, and Wynn Resorts’ Everett casino plan received the sole casino license in eastern Massachusetts.

In the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, voters will have the opportunity to vote on four ballot initiatives on November 4th. Here's a rundown of them and my endorsements:

Question 1: Eliminating Gas Tax Indexing Currently, the gas tax in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts from the State is 26.5 cents/gallon, and that tax will automatically be adjusted up by the Consumer Price Index every year with no vote of the legislature or input from the people. This ballot initiative seeks to eliminate this automatic tax hike, and require the legislature to take action and be held accountable by the people to increase the gas tax.

Endorsement: YES – Higher gas taxes are essentially a regressive tax that hurt the poor and middle class the most. When forced to pay more for gas, the poor and middle class must cut spending elsewhere or take on debt. This hurts the overall economy. Additionally, higher gas taxes in the Commonwealth will provide greater incentive for individuals to fuel up across the state line in New Hampshire where gas costs significantly less due to the lower taxation.

Question 2: Expanding the Beverage Container Deposit Law At present, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts requires a 5-cent per container deposit on some beverages. This ballot initiative would not only expand the bill to include any non-alcohol, non-carbonated beverage, but would increase the bottle deposit amount automatically every 5-years without any vote of the legislature. Additionally, people who recycle bottles/cans via curbside recycling or via recycling bins would not get back their deposit. The only way to get the deposit money back is by returning the bottles/cans to the store they were purchased at. 

Endorsement: NO – The bottle deposit system is an antiquated system that was intended to increase recycling and eliminate litter decades ago, before people had easy access to recycling at home, work, and via public recycling bins. The bottle deposit system again amounts to a regressive tax that hurts the lowest-income earners the most. A better initiative would be to expand curbside recycling availability in the Commonwealth. Additionally, expanded bottle deposits will make grocery shopping outside of the Commonwealth more attractive since states like New Hampshire do not have these deposit requirements.

Question 3: Expanding Prohibitions on Gaming The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, like Connecticut and Rhode Island, has legalized casino gaming and will open up three casinos across the State in the next few years. This ballot initiative would repeal the legalization of casino gaming and prevent the opening of casinos in the State.

Endorsement: NO – The Commonwealth has already granted licenses to open three casinos across the State and held public/open meetings where documentation was provided in advance and input taken from the people. The casinos that are planned will bring thousands of permanent new jobs to the Commonwealth, create temporary construction jobs, and add much-needed lodging space in the greater Boston area. Additionally, the Commonwealth will get more revenue to fund infrastructure improvements and education from having casinos, and businesses in the Commonwealth will see increased tourist traffic as the casinos will attract people from out of State and even out of the country.

Question 4: Earned Sick Time for Employees At present, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts does not require employers to provide paid sick leave for employees. Many employers offer paid sick leave as an employee benefit in their compensation packages, however. This ballot initiative would require employees to get 1 hour of paid sick time for every 30 hours worked.

There is no place in Massachusetts law that says “you can’t gamble on the internet.”  That being said, there are old but applicable state laws that clearly indicate that gambling on the internet for Massachusetts residents is illegal.

In the past, the state has shut down illegal lottery machines, video poker, sports betting and sweepstakes.  The suppression of gambling lies within the domain of the police power of the Commonwealth, and the exercise of this power, which began nearly three centuries ago, has been governed by statutes of State wide application. (See Commonwealth v. Wolbarst, 319 Mass. 291 (1946) for historical review of Ch. 271 whereby the Legislature has enacted a complete and comprehensive statutory system designed to eliminate “the evil of gambling”) 

Public sentiment has obviously changed in regards to the criminalization of gambling.  In 2011, the state enacted Chapter 23K, and created the Massachusetts Gaming Commission (MGC) to capture casino and gaming revenue lost to surrounding states.  Additionally, the MGC is looking at ways to develop online gaming regulations that can attract home gamers. 

To start, a gamer or operator of gaming in Massachusetts should review Chapter 271 and 23K to avoid criminal fines and possible jail sentences.  Ch. 271, s. 16A states that someone who knowingly organizes, supervises, manages or finances at least four persons to assist in illegal lotteries, can be punished for up to fifteen years or fined not more than $10,000.00.  Ch. 23K, s. 37 outlaws operating any game or gaming device in violation of said chapter and can be punishable by 5 years of imprisonment or a fine not to exceed $100,000.00. A “game or gaming device” is defined very broadly so these statutes read together basically prohibit internet gaming.  Gaming is defined as “dealing, operating, carrying on, conducting, maintaining, or exposing any game for pay. “  The Attorney General’s Office will also likely interpret “Gaming Device” to include software run for purposes of internet gaming.

So what makes social gaming like “Candy Crush” legal?  The essential elements of a lottery are the payment of a price and the possibility of winning a prize, depending upon hazard or chance.  A game like Candy Crush would be illegal in Massachusetts if you had to pay to play and there was a possibility of winning a prize of some value.  Proceeding to a new level or opening up bonus weapons are merely for entertainment purposes and therefore not a prize.  Additionally, there is no requirement to spend any money to play Candy Crush.

In the next blog post, I'll explain the misconceptions of the "skill v. chance" argument.

Contact us anytime at 617.398.3400 or visit McGeesLaw.com for more information.