If you oppose horse racing, vote no on Question 1
If you oppose horse racing and vote in Massachusetts, you should vote no on Question 1 (“Massachusetts Authorization of a Second Slots Location”) this November.
Ballotpedia provides the following summary information on Question 1:
Question 1 would give the Massachusetts Gaming Commission the ability to issue an additional slots-only license, also known as a category 2 license, to an establishment or proposed establishment that is attached to a horse-racing facility. Plainridge Park Casino holds the only slots parlor license. The targeted location for the additional parlor is Suffolk Downs.
Both Plainridge Park Casino and Suffolk Downs have horse-racing tracks.
Proponents include the following in their argument in favor of the proposed law in the Massachusetts 2016 Ballot Questions Information for Voters packet mailed by the state Secretary of the Commonwealth to voters:
About $1 of every $5 collected [from the existing Plainridge Park slots parlor] goes to our State’s horse racing industry, sustaining jobs at racetracks and breeding farms. A second slots parlor, together with the existing parlor, will assure [through tens of millions of dollars in slots revenue] that the long tradition of horse racing in Massachusetts survives while bringing thousands of new jobs to Massachusetts.
The opponents’ arguments against the proposed law focus on economic and special interest concerns. They do not mention the awfulness of horse racing.
If you don’t want to support Massachusetts’ long and morally outrageous tradition of horse racing, vote no on Question 1.