IBJNews

Indiana lawmakers unlikely to consider casino aid

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A key state legislator doesn't expect the General Assembly to make many changes to Indiana's casino laws during its upcoming session.

Lawmakers had lengthy debates in this year's session over bills aimed at boosting Indiana's casinos as they face greater competition from neighboring states, but they turned down most of those proposals.

New House Public Policy Committee Chairman Tom Dermody, R-LaPorte, said Thursday he's working to learn about the casino issues and expects debate on any major changes to wait until the 2015 session.

House Speaker Brian Bosma named Dermody the committee chairman last month following the resignation of Rep. Bill Davis of Portland, who became Gov. Mike Pence's director of community and rural affairs.

Gambling issues expected to be on hold include considering again whether to allow live table games such as blackjack and roulette at the two horse track casinos near Indianapolis, where only electronic versions of those games are now allowed, The Herald Bulletin reported.

"I think that discussion will be for future sessions after this next one," Dermody said.

Bosma and Davis largely opposed many of the casino proposals as an unwarranted expansion of gambling.

Dermody said he expected to talk with Pence about casino issues but believed the governor's opposition to gambling expansion included additional table games.

Mike Smith, president of the Casino Association of Indiana, said he expected few gambling bills would be considered during the legislative session that begins in early January, partly because the General Assembly will only be meeting until mid-March.

Dermody's district is near the Blue Chip casino in Michigan City, which Smith said he believed made Dermody more receptive to the casino industry's concerns.

"I think from an industry standpoint he's a very open individual and it's going to be good to have someone of his character in that position," Smith said.

This year's debate over reducing taxes on the 13 Indiana casinos and allowing the live table games at the horse track casinos came as the state anticipates a 15 percent drop in casino tax collections during the coming years. State officials blame the decline in part on the opening of new casinos in Ohio, Michigan and Illinois taking business away from the Indiana sites.

Smith said 2015 might be the right time for a broad look at Indiana's casino regulations.

"We are facing some troubling times right now," he said. "For the future of the industry, we need to look at the whole tax model."

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Not an expansion of gaming
    Seems to me with the Governor wanting to eliminate business property taxes that legislators are going to have to find a new revenue source to replace $1 BILLION. I would think helping our casinos make up this shortfall is a no-brainer. I know, I know...that's wishfull thinking that they could make a sound decision.
  • What's the Diff?
    I'm not sure how a live game is any different than an electronic one. And I agree that I would rather see a human being earning a paycheck than a machine made in China. I suppose Bosma thinks this is not a really sensitive political issue and a way he can throw a bone to the anti-gambling folks who vote for him.
  • expansion?
    The casinos in Anderson and Shelbyville already have blackjack and roulette games. This so called expansion of gambling would allow the facilities to replace a few electronic machines with games that are run by live dealers. Personally I'd rather support a live dealer who is earning a paycheck than a machine.
  • Seriously
    Does Bosma ever make a coherent argument based on economic factors and logic? Okay, so it's expansion of gambling. What makes that "unwarranted"," especially in light of other states' gambling successes? For heaven's sake, Vegas attracts tourists to a desert in the middle of nowhere.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.

ADVERTISEMENT