Testimony from Congressman Roscoe G. Bartlett
Member of Congress, Maryland's Sixth Congressional District
Regarding Slots Gambling

As an elected official and more importantly a Marylander, I would like to take this opportunity to voice my concerns and opposition over the proposals of adding slots' gambling as a state revenue source. While the projected additional revenue numbers are alluring, slot gambling does not come without serious costs to our state -both monetary and human.

As you will hear from many today armed with statistics both for and against these proposals, I would like you to consider the following questions:

What will be the human price of expanding gambling in our state? Will slots just postpone the inevitable hard choices? Will an initial bump in revenues from slots allow for lower taxes or lead to higher taxes on Marylanders in the future?

I sympathize with your dilemma. I grapple with tough spending questions every day. It is much easier to say "Yes" to more spending than "No." Also, I acknowledge the difference between the state and federal budget processes. But in each case, we have no pot of gold that we can dip into for our wants and wishes. Slots' gambling is no pot of gold. Based upon the experience from other states, Marylanders will pay with higher taxes in the future and a lower quality of life if slots are adopted. These negative impacts exact a price that is higher and unacceptable compared to any benefits from slots revenues.

Like the federal government, our state has a spending problem, not a taxing problem. So, why of all the proposed tax increases that are being proposed during this special session do I feel moved to make a statement about this one?

First, this proposal is a bait and switch tax increase on all Marylanders. It represents taking money from one group and giving it to another -voluntarily or not. If slots' gambling is passed, the state will become dependent upon an anticipated revenue level. The experience of other states with slots indicates that in future years, if the revenue dips, the short fall will be covered by higher taxes.
Second, this proposal is regressive. Slots' gambling is targeted to those at the bottom rung of our society's ladder in terms of income and education. It is ironic that programs sought to help the poor should be funded by them.

Third, and most importantly, it will feed the gambling addictions which tear families apart and destroy the lives of individuals. It is perverted logic that we would tempt people with state- sanctioned gambling and then institute state programs to help people recover from the damage inflicted by that gambling. I am confounded by the logic that a body so concerned with the addiction to tobacco would pass legislation that promotes another destructive addiction.
Again, I sympathize with your budget woes but as a fellow Marylander and one who has the honor of representing the people of the Sixth District of Maryland, I implore you. Do not pass slots gambling. The cost is too high.