ShareThis Page
Letters to the Editor

Casino politics

| Tuesday, Dec. 19, 2006

Personally, I couldn't care less which filthy rich company gets the license to become even more filthy rich by winning Pittsburgh's casino license. What I do care about is the impact this decision will have on Pennsylvania taxpayers.

Let's not play games anymore: There will be a new arena built in Pittsburgh in the near future. Mellon Arena has reached the end of its usefulness. The only question left is who will pay for the arena.

Of the companies bidding on a casino license, only Isle of Capri Casinos Inc. has committed private funding to build this arena. The other companies will be forced into Gov. Rendell's flawed Plan B.

This isn't a hockey issue. The casinos were offered as an opportunity to lower property taxes for Pennsylvania residents.

Plan B will cost taxpayers upfront money for construction, money that was promised to lower property taxes. If the Penguins leave, who do you think will have to foot the bill for their $4 million per year contribution to a new $300 million arena• Why hasn't anyone else spent the 10 minutes to figure this out?

If someone other than Isle of Capri Casinos wins this license, the bank accounts of our politicians and those of the Gaming Control Board should be monitored for the next 10 years.

Todd Hollman

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me