Elmer Smith | Expanded gambling in Pa.? You can bet on it

Philadelphia Daily News, December 1, 2006

BILL DeWEESE'S gambling-expansion trial balloon was barely airborne before Ed Rendell deflated it with one well-aimed arrow.

The proposal by state Rep. DeWeese to put blackjack poker and (you'll pardon the expression) craps into the game fell faster than a poker player's chip stack when Rendell pledged Wednesday that it "probably" would not happen "during my watch."

The operative word there was "probably." The governor is too much of a gambler to call it a sure thing. And he's too much of a realist to believe that his heroic gesture is anything more than a thumb in the dike.

Because moderation is no virtue in gaming. It might be a virtue in gambling. But gaming and gambling are two different things.

Gambling is what we do when we show up with our stacks of quarters. Gaming is what is done to us by an industry and, increasingly, by the governments that make the odds we take.

DeWeese's proposal, which is still under construction, would allow all 14 licensees to become eligible for table games even though only two of them have even been selected and only one is operating.

The rationale is as old as gaming. We have to protect ourselves, DeWeese reasons, from states such as West Virginia that are considering expanding from slot machines to full casino gambling. If you asked the folks in West Virginia, they'd tell you they have no choice but to consider expansion because we are.

That's what keeps the big wheel turning. Gaming is a self-perpetuating industry whose metastatic growth is guaranteed by the mutual greed of the gamers and the gamed.

It's how we got into the game in the first place. We started to cast a wistful glance toward Atlantic City where Pennsylvanians were taking billions in potential revenue to be buried at sea.

We needed to protect ourselves from Delaware, which had already converted its failing race tracks into "racinos." Now the new national addiction, Texas Hold'em, has us looking over our shoulders.

We've seen it before. Missouri, an early entrant into the riverboat gambling business, was raking it in with both hands until Illinois got into the game. East St. Louis, Ill., just across the Mississippi from St. Louis, decided not to adopt the $500-per-loser limit. Folks flocked across the river.

Iowa banked $7.3 million in taxes and $1.9 million for its gamblers assistance fund until Illinois got into the game. The next year, two Iowa riverboats set sail for the state of Mississippi's limitless games so fast you could water-ski behind them.

So, Ed Rendell is the voice of moderation for now. But, remember, Rendell was way ahead of the trend on this one. He was the mayor who pushed riverboat gaming here - even though residents were disinterested.

He managed to sell it in the state when voters statewide were only mildly interested. Even as he opposed DeWeese's overture yesterday, he was preparing to sign an amendment that would keep the liquor flowing free and freely to slots customers.

He argues that casinos really aren't interested in getting their patrons drunk as an inducement to gamble irresponsibly. He says he just wants to keep our casinos competitive with Atlantic City, where the liquor flows freely.

Which brings us back to the point. Sometime in the future, whether it's five years or 10, they will introduce table games in Pennsylvania. The rationale will be the same one Rendell used to justify loosening the liquor restrictions.

Poker, blackjack and craps will come in at the same time. Sports books will follow shortly thereafter. Next will be aggressive sales campaigns in which the state lures us in with overblown testimonials from "winners."

Sky's the limit. It's the only way to make this risky business a sure thing.