Skip to main content
Log in/Register
  • Home
  • Contact Us
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Search form

American Gaming Association

  • Industry Resources
    • Research
    • Video Library
    • Beyond The Casino Floor
    • State Information
    • FAQ
    • The Real Deal
    • Careers in Gaming
    • Third-Party Experts
    • Helpful Links
    • AGA CARD
  • Government Affairs
    • Priority Issues
    • Other Current Issues
    • Regulatory Reform
    • AGA Online Poker Headquarters
    • Industry Day in Washington
    • AGA PAC
    • Request Federal Issues Updates
  • Social Responsibility
    • All In Campaign Headquarters
    • Responsible Gaming
    • Diversity
  • Events and Programs
    • Global Gaming Expo
    • G2E Asia
    • G2E Webinar Series
    • Responsible Gaming Education Week
    • Industry Day in Washington
    • Gaming Hall of Fame
    • Communications Awards
    • Diverse Vendor of the Year Awards
    • Global Gaming Women
  • Newsroom
    • Latest News
    • Press Releases
    • Speeches and Testimony
    • Op-Eds
    • Letters to the Editor
    • AGA SmartBrief
    • Newsletters
  • About the AGA
    • Membership
    • Leadership
    • Annual Report
    • Contact Us

You are here

Home
Printer-friendly version Send by email

Duluth News Tribune

April 11, 2011

Dear Editor,

It’s important your readers are aware that Justin Krych used out-dated and faulty research to support his argument against gambling in Minnesota in his recent editorial. While the American Gaming Association (AGA) does not take a position on expanded gambling, we feel compelled to point out that new research has proven time and time again that the information he cites is false.

Since commercial casino gambling was first legalized in Nevada in 1931, it has expanded to 22 states, where nearly two-thirds (64 percent) of those living in gaming communities say casinos have had a positive impact. Minnesota’s neighbor, Iowa, knows the benefits of gaming well. Last year, for the seventh time since 1989, Iowans voted overwhelmingly to continue casino operations in the state.

If the arguments posed by Krych were true, states like Iowa would be centers of depravity instead of home to successful communities that have come to see casinos as valuable community partners.  Elected officials and civic leaders in U.S. gaming communities know the real impact of our business—with the benefit of hindsight, 75 percent say they would vote to allow casinos if they could do it all over again. They welcome the additional tax revenue, jobs, secondary economic development, and contributions to community and charitable organizations. This reality is far different from the picture Krych and the gaming opponents he cites would prefer to paint, but it is reality all the same.

Even with the introduction of gaming in new states and jurisdictions, it’s settled science that the prevalence rate of pathological gambling hasn’t changed in more than 30 years, holding steady at 1 percent of all adult Americans. Nonetheless, our industry takes problem gambling seriously. We have implemented responsible gaming programs at casinos across the country and contributed millions of dollars to fund independent, peer-reviewed research on disordered gambling. We don’t want problem gamblers at our casinos – period. 

Sincerely,

Frank J. Fahrenkopf, Jr.
President and CEO
American Gaming Association

Affiliated Websites

Visit the NCRG Webiste

Visit the NCRG Website

Visit the G2E Website

The G2E Asia Website

Visit the G2E Asia Website

The Global Gaming Women Website

Visit the GGW Website

Find a Career in the Industry

Find a Career in the Industry

© 2013 American Gaming Association.

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Contact Us
  • Home