Download
1 / 12
120 likes | 325 Views
The Evolution of Legalized Gambling in Mississippi. Introduction.
E N D
Introduction • To allow for limited gambling on riverboats traveling on the Mississippi river, in 1990 the Mississippi legislature passed two laws allowing for gaming in counties bordering the Mississippi River and the counties along the gulf coast. • However, the results of the policy change become different from the original purpose of the legislation. • Why and How? • Paper explains it through the advocacy coalition framework.
Intention of the policy • The intent of the legislation was to provide a small to modest boost to the deteriorating tourism industry of Mississippi river communities. • State Senator Bob Dearing of Natchez: “Original bill was introduced to allow gaming on riverboats ‘under way, making way’ on the Mississippi river”
Results of the policy • Large industry with 30 casinos that ranks second in the country in total square feet gaming space. • Economic impact: total gaming revenue over $2.7 billion in 2002. • Tax collection from gambling industry about 10 percent of total tax revenues collected by the state.
Initial economic situation • Tourism industry was just about gone and economic conditions deteriorating. The example of Tunica County (in 1992): • The nation’s poorest county, with about 53% of residents living in poverty; • 2,000 jobs available and unemployment rate 13.6%; • Per capita income $9,900 and 51.2 % of residents received food stamps.
Economic situation now • Communities with casinos have experienced rapid and dramatic growth in employment, housing starts and retail sales; The example of Tunica County (in 2001): • Economic prosperity, • 16,600 jobs available and unemployment rate 3.7%; • Per capita income $20,200 and 14.8 % of residents received food stamps
Policy process • Without lobbing and considering the cultural climate of Mississippi, how did gambling become legalized and grow to its current status? • The policy process is explained by applying the advocacy coalition framework in a nontraditional manner – by describing how advocacy groups failed to oppose gambling.
Legislative process • Bill was assigned to the Finance Committee in 1990; • Made it out of the committee and passed the Senate; • Then went to the House and was assigned to the Ways and Means committee; • Ways and Means committee makes an important change to the legislation – it removes the words ‘under way, making way’, thus opening the door to Las Vegas style and size casinos; • The bill passes both the House and the Senate with a few members realizing the implications.
Advocacy Coalition Network • The bill should have never passed because normally, the Mississippi Baptist convention (MBC) was able to defeat any gaming proposal. • The MBC is a powerful advocacy group which involves hundreds of Baptist churches. • During the 1990 session the MBC was organized and focused on defeating the lottery and therefore missed the gambling bill. • It was not a failed attempt by the MBC to influence policy, moreover, it was the lack of an attempt to influence the policy by the MBC that allowed for gambling’s legislation.
Advocacy Coalition Network (Cont.) • With the emergence of the gaming industry, a strong coalition dedicated to maintaining and promoting the position of gaming emerged; • The members of the coalition include the Mississippi Gaming Association (MGA) along with state legislators and local officials representing gaming localities.
Advocacy Coalition Network (Cont.) • The MGA uses public awareness campaigns and political means to advance their position; • Because of the state’s economic dependence on gaming, legislatures are unwilling to put forth policy that would unravel the industry; • The economic impact (tax revenues) is also the reason why local officials are intended to support the favorable gaming policy.
Conclusion • The gaming advocacy coalition has secured their position in the state’s political realm and thus successfully influences gaming policy. • The opposition to gaming exists but has been limited and fairly ineffective; • Casinos continue to enjoy a favorable political environment and state enjoys the tax revenues generated by the casinos.
