Sacramento Bee

Dear Ms. Reilly:

You have done your readers a disservice by publishing Swanee Hunt’s commentary “Rolling the Dice on Children” and perpetuating misinformation about gaming and pathological gambling.

In her column, Hunt makes numerous misstatements about the prevalence of pathological gambling among youths. The fact is, youth prevalence rates are much lower than Hunt purports. Evidence in a study of college-aged gambling in Missouri shows rates of problem gambling in that age group to be similar to if not lower than adult prevalence, estimated at 1 percent. Research conducted for the state of Nevada found comparable rates among adolescents. Moreover, according to a meta-analysis conducted in 1997 by Harvard Medical School’s Division on Addictions, the rate of pathological gambling among youths has not changed in the past two decades. A University of Minnesota study of youth gambling corroborates Harvard’s findings and suggests the rate may have actually fallen over time.

Even with constant prevalence rates, several states nationwide are conducting programs to educate youths about the risks of problem gambling; more research by Hunt would have uncovered those efforts. In Louisiana and Indiana, middle-school aged children are learning the odds of gaming through a Harvard-developed curriculum geared to help them make informed decisions about gambling as adults. A program in Missouri also is educating youths about risks as well as raising awareness of the effects of disordered gambling. Youth-based programs in Ohio and Kentucky are emphasizing that underage gambling is illegal.

Independent research also should have put to rest charges that gaming affects local crime rates. The National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago, in research conducted in 1999 for the National Gambling Impact Study Commission (NGISC), could not link casino gaming and crime. Further examination by the General Accounting Office (GAO) confirmed these findings. A 2000 study by the Public Sector Gaming Study Commission also found no correlation between gaming and local crime rates. Further, a National Institute of Justice study echoed those conclusions that same year, reporting that “casinos do not appear to have any general or dramatic effect on crime.”

Hunt’s conjecture about the economic effects of gaming on communities is contradicted by federally funded research. A report by the National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academy of Sciences for the NGISC found that “[g]ambling appears to have net economic benefits for economically depressed communities.” Research by NORC also concluded that communities with gaming also experience decreases of 12 percent to 17 percent in welfare payments, unemployment rates and unemployment insurance. Additionally, NORC determined the annual cost of gaming on society to be a small fraction of the annual cost of alcohol abuse and heart disease.

While Hunt is entitled to her opinion on these matters, it is obvious she has not assessed the evidence objectively. Your readers deserve commentary with less hearsay and more facts.

Sincerely,

Frank J. Fahrenkopf, Jr.
President and CEO