Tourism, Case Study Example

In an era when it has become all too clear that economic stability may unexpectedly and drastically shift, we are obligated to examine how we can best provide for our own state’s financial welfare.  Economics is a complex arena, but the fundamental realities, particularly as they concern our citizens, do not change, and education and jobs are the cornerstones of a sound, responsible state’s policy.  This being the case, we as elected officials are obligated to encourage whatever may legally and effectively produce jobs and revenue, which then may be used for the public good as a whole.  We must promote industry and agriculture, but we also have a potential market not yet tapped, and too important to ignore: legalized gaming.

In terms of direct and significant gains to our state, the benefits are impressive, and proof of those benefits exists elsewhere in the nation.  First of all, it must be remembered that legalized gaming, unlike many other development projects for state economic growth, offers relatively immediate returns.  It is noted, for example, that those states entering the gaming markets recently, in the 1990s, enjoyed rapid boosts to their economies.  While Nevada consistently generates the most gaming income, it is striking to observe that relative newcomer Illinois lags behind Nevada only by a fraction of percentage: 18.5, as compared to Nevada’s 18.7 (Cordes, Ebel, & Gravelle, 2005,  p. 167).  Then, and by no means a minor consideration, there is the growth boost to the economy as construction commences, and thousands of jobs are created to build the casinos and hotels, as well as the jobs required to staff them.  The advantages here are virtually exponential; our citizens have access to a wider employment market, they can make better lives for themselves and their families, and the state budget gains in substantial tax income.

Then, with legalized gaming in place, our state has a virtually unlimited discretion in how the income is to be distributed or spent.  Those states currently reaping the benefits of legal gambling emphatically demonstrate the array of opportunities.  New Jersey, for example, employs 90 percent of its gaming revenue for mental and physical health service, while Missouri devotes all of its gaming income to education (Cordes, Ebel, & Gravelle, 2005,  p. 167).  With the additional revenue from gaming and the adjacent tourism it generates, we effectively have a large-scale source of funds requiring minimal investment, and one only marginally subject to the outside influences, such as climate change and retail market instabilities, that challenge other industries.

There is no escaping the fact, of course, that many citizens resist legal gaming, and usually because of understandable fears regarding potential criminality associated with it, and an equally large concern based on the morality of the gaming itself.   Unfortunately, those most strenuously opposed to legal gaming are compelled to rely on an argument that actually does a disservice to the people of our state.  Legal gaming is, of course, a choice made from free will, so opposition then must portray gambling as so evil and destructive, no citizen can be trusted to be exposed to it.  The moral wrong of gaming, opposition holds, is so powerful that the people must be protected from themselves, and this translate into a great irony: for the cause of morality, moral decision-making is denied the people (Evans, 1999, p. 17).  This approach not only demeans the people of our state in an assumption of moral weakness, it ignores the reality of other moral choices currently in place and accepted as viable industries.  We permit legal drinking of alcohol, for instance, because we trust that our citizens will drink responsibly.  When they fail to do so, we then have laws in place yo deal with the transgressions, so the legality of drinking is by no means an encouragement of reckless drinking.  The same holds true for legal gaming.  We as a state should offer it, just as we carefully monitor it for signs of abuse, and regulate its activities in a responsible manner.  Then, as was dramatically made evident during this nation’s years of alcohol prohibition, legally denying the people access to a thing does not make that thing disappear; rather, it promotes illegal, and often dangerous, forms of it.  In the most basic terms then, legalizing gaming in our state will translate to consistent and high revenues for the state budget; jobs for our citizens; and a state ideology that expresses both  trust in the judgment of its people and a commitment to properly maintaining the industry itself.

References

Cordes, Joseph J., Ebel, Robert D., & Gravelle, Jane.  (2005).  Encyclopedia of Taxation and Tax Policy.  Washington D.C.: The Urban Institute.

Evans, Rod.  (1999).  Legalized Gambling: For and Against.  Peru: Open Court Publishing.