LOGIN MPPI NOT A MEMBER? REGISTER

FOR PRESS MPPI CONTACT US MPPI SUPPORT

Study: Question 7 Claims Grossly Exaggerated

Nonpartisan analysis finds economic, education, and fiscal claims are overstated

Economic & Fiscal Policy, Gambling

PRESS RELEASES

OCTOBER 10, 2012 pdf PDF VERSION Bookmark and Share

ROCKVILLE, MD A new study from the nonpartisan Maryland Public Policy Institute casts doubt on the economic and fiscal arguments in support of Question 7, the referendum to expand gambling in Maryland.  The economic impact study, entitled  An Economic Analysis of the Proposed Expansion of Gaming in Maryland, finds that claims by Question 7 supporters of increased education funding, job growth, and revenues are largely overstated and in some cases false.

Key findings in the study include:

 

 

 

 

  “This objective analysis debunks many of the most attractive arguments for Question 7, particularly that a ‘Yes’ vote will significantly improve state revenues and benefit Maryland public education,” said Christopher Summers, president of the Maryland Public Policy Institute. “The lack of guarantees for increased education funding, the region's saturated gaming landscape, the absence of comparative advantages of a National Harbor casino, the faulty assumptions behind a similar 2008 referendum, and tax breaks for casino operators are just a few of the findings that should give voters healthy skepticism about the credibility of Question 7 and its supposed benefits.”

To read the full report, click here pdf

Related Links

An Economic Analysis of the Proposed Expansion of Gaming in Maryland
Legalizing Video Slot Gaming in Maryland: A Business Analysis
Video Slot Gaming in Maryland: Weighing the Costs and Benefits