I fully agree with your Oct. 25 editorial that Marylanders should vote down Question 7 on expanding gambling in Maryland, but I would add two reasons the otherwise on-target editorial ignored or paid insufficient attention to:
First, major revenues from the proposed National Harbor site of a new casino would go out-of-state (with, as you correctly noted, major corporate tax breaks as well not only there but to corporate owners at other gaming sites as well — none of which is a Maryland-based corporation);
Second, Question 7 totally ignores the predicted increased incidence of gambling addiction locally and its longterm cost to our state.
Even if I supported the idea of state-legalized gambling in principle, I would oppose it in any case where the state gives such gambling licenses to out-of-state (and even out-of-country) corporations and, on top of that, gives them extra tax breaks to encourage their entry into this lucrative business that offers no productive return for Maryland or its citizens. At the very least, these corporations should have to pay full state taxes for the privilege of opening lucrative businesses in Maryland that draw millions of dollars from our citizens.
LaurelCopyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun