Boston Herald

Letters to the Editor
Boston Herald
One Herald Square
P.O. Box 2096
Boston, MA 02106—2096

Dear Letters to the Editor:

Don Feder’s Jan. 18 column regarding the gaming industry takes the cake for being one of the most poorly researched diatribes I’ve ever read. It is quite obvious that Mr. Feder has done no serious research on the subject (unless you count the skewed and unfounded “research” taken directly from anti—gaming zealots) and bases his strong opinions on no facts whatsoever. I might suggest he employ a little more intellectual honesty before he tries writing about the industry again.

Contrary to what Mr. Feder proclaims, Dr. Howard Shaffer, director of the Harvard Medical School Division on Addiction and author of Estimating the Prevalence of Disordered Gambling Behavior in the United States and Canada: A Meta—Analysis, does not feel that the availability of gambling in and of itself is a sufficient explanation for the increased rate of gambling disorders. He suggests that there is a complex set of factors that may contribute to higher prevalence rates, including increased social acceptance, few messages about potential risks and an increasing desire to participate in risk—taking activities. Additionally, newer research on problem gambling has focused on specific populations that have a higher rate of risk than the general population, such as alcoholics, drug dependents, manic depressants or prisoners, for example. According to Dr. Shaffer, all these factors “may have created misleading perceptions of increasing rates of disordered gambling.”

Let me remind Mr. Feder that, while he is entitled to his own opinion, he is not privileged to his own set of facts regarding problem gamblers, which he apparently thinks he is, as evident by his reference to 7 percent of adults “who have lied, cheated,” etc. This is a prime example of someone making up figures to support his preconceived theories. He does this again in his reference to half a trillion dollars being wagered annually on gambling, or 6 percent of the GNP. This is a blatant, erroneous manipulation of numbers. The truth is, Americans spent $47 billion in 1996 on all types of gambling (lotteries, charitable bingo, pari—mutuels, casinos, etc.) That is less than 0.6 percent of the GNP, far below the 6 percent Mr. Feder claims.

Mr. Feder’s distorted use of information is also apparent in his reference to a California professor’s claim of a possible link between suicides and gambling. Dr. David Phillips’ research openly states that his findings “suggest but do not prove that gamblers experience abnormally high risks of suicide.” Not surprisingly, however, Mr. Feder has been quick to jump to his own conclusions. The fact is that Dr. Phillips’ study admits there are a number of other factors that could contribute to increased suicide levels.

Dr. Phillips’ conclusions are also inconsistent with a recent study conducted by the Center for Disease Control, which, in August 1997, found that suicide rates vary considerably among states and regions. The CDC report found that Hawaii and Utah, states with no legalized gaming, had higher suicide rates than Connecticut, Illinois and New Jersey, all states with a large influx of gaming. In fact, New Jersey had the 2nd lowest suicide rate in the nation, even with the existence of casinos for 20 years. The study found that Western regions of the United States, such as Nevada and Wyoming (which has no casinos) were found to have higher suicide rates for reasons linked to isolation, migration and a growing population. In fact, an examination of Nevada found that Las Vegas had a lower suicide rate than rural areas of the state. This study seems to indicate that the presence of casino gaming cannot be correlated with high suicide rates.

The gaming—entertainment industry is aware of the problems that exist in the area of problem gambling, and it is most certainly addressing these issues in a variety of proactive ways, such as the creation of the National Center for Responsible Gaming, which provides grants to independent institutions (like Harvard) to conduct research on problem gambling. It is important that those who have difficulties gambling responsibly receive help and those who enjoy the activity without problems do so in an environment free of recrimination. Our efforts are not unlike organizations that extend assistance to individuals who abuse credit cards. These people deserve help, but their problems should not be blamed on the credit system, nor should those who use credit cards responsibly be penalized due to the problems of a limited number of people who cannot use the cards responsibly.

Mr. Feders’ lack of knowledge about the gaming industry makes him unqualified to draw the uneducated conclusions that he does in his column. The fact of the matter is that in most every community where gaming has been introduced, there has been a surge in retail sales and tax revenues, a market decline in public assistance, such as welfare, food stamp and Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) programs and a gradual decrease in crime rates.

I would be the first to agree that gaming is not right for every community — it is not a magic economic silver bullet. However, if it is made part of a carefully crafted economic development plan, gaming can help revitalize communities and allow them to prosper.

Sincerely,

Frank J. Fahrenkopf, Jr.