Casinos a last resort for capital plan
Word is that state senators will talk Monday about authorizing three new casinos -- this time, with the billions in expected revenue being earmarked to bail out Chicago-area transit and upgrade badly deteriorating highways across the state.
If this seems like familiar territory, that's because it is. In every recent session, legislators have flirted with gambling expansion. Each time, the idea has eventually died for lack of support from one corner or another.
Indeed, ample reasons exist to view gambling expansion warily even now.
While casino-expansion architects say three new casinos would bring in $1.5 billion, which could be leveraged to launch a $10 billion capital program, revenue projections do not always pan out. In this case, casino developers may not be as enthusiastic as lawmakers expect about expanding in a state that they think taxes casinos excessively.
In addition, state history instructs us that big-ticket revenue items don't always solve problems as advertised in advance. Many Illinoisans recall, for instance, that a state lottery was meant to ensure adequate and reliable school funding for the long haul. It didn't.
State history also tells us that lawmakers and governors can scarcely resist the temptation to assemble a capital program -- which Illinois badly needs now for transit, schools, highways and bridges -- without larding it up with projects that please certain constituents but do not belong on the priority list.
Beyond that, there are more logical revenue streams for a major statewide capital initiative -- revenue streams more directly tied to those of us who use the highways, put wear and tear on them and would benefit from a program that shores up both roads and transit. Sure, raising the motor fuel tax or again hiking license fees would be unpopular, but either would represent a more direct link to the work needed.
Having said all of that, however, we are not inexorably opposed to casino expansion if, in the end, that's the only way that a disciplined and well-managed capital program can be done.
On the positive side, building a big Chicago casino would mean that out-of-state tourists would join us Illinoisans in footing the bill for infrastructure improvements. The idea of letting existing casinos expand would help offset a Chicago casino's potential erosion of the suburban operations' customer base. Finally, the revenue projections being mentioned for three new casinos would -- if it were to materialize -- go a long way toward establishing the state match so badly needed to make Illinois eligible for large sums of federal transportation money.
Casino expansion is hardly the ideal means to raise money for essential needs; given all the factors at work in Illinois, legislators may nonetheless take it as the last resort.