Lang Gets Gambling Victory...For Now

State Rep. Lou Lang has rolled the dice again in his efforts to expand gambling in Illinois and he may have a winning throw after more than 20 years of trying.

Lang (D-Skokie) finally saw a bill to create four casinos in the state pass through both chambers of the Legislature last week. But it may be a short-term victory as the bill faces an uncertain future on the governor’s desk.

Specifically, the legislation would put four more casinos in the state, including one possibly in Chicago. Slot machines would also be permitted at both Chicago airports and at the horse racetracks.

Currently, the closest casino for North Shore residents is the Grand Victoria Casino in Elgin. is scheduled to open this summer in Des Plaines, putting to use the last of the state's 10 casino licenses now available.

Advocates have noted that expanding gambling could bring in as much as $1 billion annually for the financially troubled state, while opponents have asked how much good the bill will really do for residents of Illinois.

What Lang’s constituents will get out of this package? The lawmaker says what is good for everyone in Illinois will also benefit the people who have been sending him to the state capital of Springfield since 1987.

“Anything that improves the job climate in the state is good for everyone in the state, including the people of Skokie,” Lang said. “When you put more people to work, you are getting more taxes.”

So this could be seen as a major triumph for Lang, but he is far from celebrating.

“I’ll feel a little better once it is signed,” he said. “But I did feel a measure of satisfaction. It is a lesson to me that if you work on something that is important to you--[and] are you willing to work hard on it for a long time--you can make it happen.”

, knows the prospects of the bill actually becoming law still remains in doubt as Gov. Pat Quinn has expressed reluctance about signing the measure. The governor has labeled it “top heavy,” leaving the door open that he may reject the legislation outright or use his amendatory veto power to have the bill revised.

The second option is under Article IV, Section 9 (e) of the state's Constitution.

Quinn has almost two months to act on the legislation, but has indicated he will make a decision very quickly. 

Lang said he is prepared to talk with Quinn about objectionable parts of the measure, but the state House representative would not do so very happily.

“When I started working on gaming 20 years ago and I started to craft legislation, I didn’t think we should legislate gaming in pieces,” he said.  “The items in the bill are very carefully crafted and negotiated, and there isn’t a line in that bill I am not that proud of.”

Lang added that his support for gambling focused on the jobs that casinos would provide, citing the boom for cities such as Joliet and Elgin.

“At its core, this is a bill about economic development. It will do great things and
it will put a lot of people to work,” the Democratic lawmaker said.

While Lang did have many supporters for the bill–perhaps most
importantly Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel–there remains a sizable and vocal
group of opponents who do not want to see Quinn sign the gambling measure.

“You can’t gamble your way to prosperity when money is spent on gambling, which is basically slot machines, which are 80 to 90 percent of the revenues to gambling facilities,” said John Kindt, a professor at the University of Illinois' College of Business.

“You are not creating jobs because people just put money in the machines and the owners just dust off the machines. That is money that is not being spent on cars, computers or consumer goods and even on the necessities of life such as food and clothing,” added Kindt, a staunch opponent of gambling who has debated Lang many times on the issue.  

Noting the large income tax hike enacted earlier this year in Illinois, the professor said: “People should ask about why we just had a 66 percent tax increase on businesses and people, and the taxes on casinos and gambling facilities keep going down.”

Other opponents to the bill are crime-fighting organizations and the homes of casinos, such as .

"The almost unbelievable number of new gambling activities provided by the bill will enable the always ingenious Crime Syndicate to seek out myriad ways to enrich itself by getting into the legal gambling business," J.R. Davis, the chairman of the Chicago Crime Commission, said in a statement.

"It is unclear what regulatory provisions will be put in place to oversee the overwhelming number of new gambling activities," he noted. "To date, the Crime Syndicate has been kept out of legal gambling in Illinois through the unflinching efforts of the current Illinois Gaming Board."

But not everyone thinks criminal incursion is inevitable because of the presence of gambling.

“Typically, crime does increase after a casino opens because it attracts new people. So it takes time for a community to adjust but crime does come down,” said Chris Roberts, the director of hospitality leadership at the DePaul University's College of Commerce.

“The newness factor wears off, and law enforcement adjusts to the traffic flows and learns how to shift to the behavior of the people,” he said.

So now the matter is in the hands of Quinn. Will Lang get the victory he has sought for so long or will it be another hurdle for him to overcome?

Regardless, Lang notes the gaming legislation is not going to be a cure-all for a state with more than $10 billion in red ink.

“This bill is not going to solve all the fiscal problems of Illinois,” he said.  “However, there is no other piece of legislation that will do as much to add jobs and do what we can to save the horse racing industry. This bill is about creating jobs and saving jobs.”

In another major piece of legislation that passed through the Legislature last week, Lang said he opposed a bill that would give electricity provider ComEd a 2.5 percent rate hike in exchange for creating jobs and improving the power company’s infrastructure. Quinn has indicated he will veto the bill.

“I thought it was a real close call,” Lang said. “They were offering quite a bit in terms of the smart grid.

"The problem with the bill was that there were guaranteed rate increases with no real oversight over the ICC. Because ComEd was asking for ratepayers to invest into the smart grid system, it seems appropriate to have the ICC oversee the rate increases because they represent the taxpayers,” he said, referring to the Illinois Commerce Commission.

Be sure to check back later this week as Patch gets a one-on-one interview with Lou Lang.