Is Pennsylvania reaching a gambling overkill

The future looks uncertain with regard to the ambitions about gambling revenues in the state of Pennsylvania, as it plans for further gaming expansion.

There are questions looming about the new development: that is, whether it affect — and if so, how much — the Keystone State budget.

The budget projections for 2018–19 are optimistic. However, the state’s fiscal fortunes do not induce much optimism.

There was an important development last week that could further worry the budgeting authorities. The Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board did not receive any bids for the sixth of up to ten mini-casino licenses that it was planning to award.

As an article in Thursday’s Mirror described the situation, the gaming board found itself amid “uncharted waters.”

The article explained that the lack of bids would trigger a process outlined in the gambling-expansion law enacted last October.

The gaming board now has the discretion to decide whether a new and more expanded round of auctions is in the best interest of the commonwealth.

While a new round might not be in the best interests of individuals who jeopardise their financial future by losing money at slot machines or gaming tables, such an additional round is necessary if the state is to have a chance to meet or exceed gambling revenue projections, some of which were injected into this year’s state spending package that runs through June 30.

Gambling saturation remains a very real concern for Pennsylvania, not only regarding the existing casinos and those being planned, but also in regard to how much money the state lottery might lose as a result of players opting for casino play rather than lottery tickets.

It is also no secret that casinos in states surrounding Pennsylvania are luring players from this state; Pennsylvania residents also dole out millions of dollars at casinos in Las Vegas each year.

And, as we have noted in past editorials, gambling money is not limitless. Sooner or later, players are faced with the realisation that they must scale back their play or risk financial trouble.

The delay in awarding the sixth mini-casino’s license means a temporary, unwanted challenge to state government’s attempt to assemble a reasonable, balanced 2018–19 spending package.

However, the bigger, longer-term concern is gambling saturation — the losing scenario towards which the state is moving quickly.

Wednesday’s lack of bids for the sixth mini-casino should be acknowledged as a warning sign.

If there are similar problems with the four other authorised “mini” licenses beyond the problem sixth one, state leaders might have to rethink their current view of gambling as an unfailing budget crutch.