(00:00:05) Perhaps the most intense campaigning for the November election is for governor and US senator scores of other offices will be on the ballot to and so we'll for proposed amendments to the state constitution. This noon will let you ask as many questions as time permits about one of those amendments one dealing with horse racing amendment number three on the ballot will read as follows. Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to permit the legislature to authorize on track paramutual betting on horse racing in a manner prescribed by law to help you decide the wisdom of answering yes or no on that on Election Day. We have to well-informed guests in our Studios today. John Farrell is executive director of the Minnesota Racing Association a group, which was formed last April to support the amendment. Jordan Lawrence is Administrative Assistant to the state senate committee, which heard the legislation this path. Session in the legislature John Farrell. Let me ask you first of all before we get to the listeners in their questions. Just what does that word paramutual mean? Anyway, (00:01:17) well roughly translate translated Bob. It's simply among ourselves simple way to look at it is someone who's going to play golf and you get four people on the tee and they all put 50 cents up and the first ball in the hole wins the other three 50 cent pieces. That's roughly what pari-mutuel is it's just among ourselves and at the racetrack the difference is that the racetrack holds the money sells you a ticket. So you prove that you wagered on that individual horse and at the racetrack approximately 85% of the money is paid back to the better is the winning better is and the 15% is retained for paramutual tax overhead. So the racetrack and purses that would be distributed to the to the race to the races to enable the horses to run for a purse. (00:02:16) So it's a winner-take-all situation of the racetrack. (00:02:19) Yes, cause if you if you bet to win you only get the wind money pull. If you bet to place you get the place pull distributed amongst the people that bet on the winning Place horse and on the show horse the same thing the people had bet to place third get the money for from all the people that plate that bet four five six seven and eight. (00:02:45) All right. Why? Why do you support this amendment? Why did what do you think horse racing is going to do for Minnesota? (00:02:50) Well, I've been involved in it since the beginning and I've looked at it simply as an economic issue for the state of Minnesota. I look at it as job creation as an industry and itself the racing industry and as a tourist Attraction for people from the surrounding states and from the two provinces in Canada. We have currently a history of about two days per tourist visiting in Minnesota. I guess. I'd like to see it with horse racing here. I think we could probably at least double that increase our convention business into Minnesota and keep basically keep Minnesota money in Minnesota as opposed to having people leave the state to go to horse racing or other gambling activities if they going to gamble keep it here, but by and large I look at it as an entertainment for the Minnesota in line with all the other major league sports we (00:03:51) have here. Jordan Lawrence, how did you get involved in all of this as a state senate staff member? I am administrative assistant to the committee the general legislation administrative rules committee that was assigned to have hearings on the paramutual Constitutional Amendment last year and we heard them for about a month in February of this year. And I did some research for my Senator on the amendment the Senate I work for opposes the amendment and he wanted to see if there was any evidence to support a case against paramutual gambling and did you find such evidence? Yes. I issued a paper that I presented to the committee last February. And the main points in the report were these that the economic benefits are not as great as me. They may seem on the surface. It will raise little tax revenue. The job creation issue. I believe is is somewhat inflated and then there's going to be social consequences which I think cancel out the economic benefits. It is a regressive tax. So it hits the poor. I believe the evidence shows it will encourage various types of crime and it will also create compulsive gamblers. Well, I'm sure that you two can exchange in a little debate on this as the our Progressive done it before have but we want to give those of you who are listening a chance to ask some questions and make observations if you like as well in the Minneapolis st. Paul area. The telephone number to call is two two seven six thousand two two seven six thousand in Minneapolis and st. Paul in other parts of Minnesota. Number is 1-800-695-1418 hundred six hundred 529700. If you have a question about this Constitutional Amendment on horse racing, and if you're listening in one of the surrounding states and are curious about what might happen if you would have an opportunity to come to Minnesota and bet on the ponies call us directly in the Twin Cities area at area code 612 2276 thousand. I see that we have our first caller ready and waiting. So go ahead you're on the air. (00:06:13) Yeah, I'm calling from st. Louis Park. I'm reminded of to old sayings one is those that play the ponies died broke and the other one was there to we think we're so smart. Remember that horses don't bet on human races. Yeah, I would say that gambling is really not a thing that we have to introduce in the state. There's enough of it sub Rosa without making it legal. (00:06:42) Well, I guess I guess I can answer try and answer a question or make a comment to that in 1923 or whatever. It was. We had people stand up and say the same thing about the liquor problem in our country result was that we had Volstead Act that completely eliminated the marketing of alcoholic beverages in this country and all it did in fact was to grow the underworld element or the illegal trafficking and liquor the people did not continue or do not discontinue drinking the difference was that the tax revenues at the states formally received they no longer received and they realized that they had not solved the problem as such and in 1933. They said look that was a bad idea. Let's put this thing back under government control and if people are going to continue to drink and we have to enforce it in some way why we'll put a tax on it and as a result, they have controlled it as far as horse is not betting on human races. You're right what the difference is that we've never offered to sell them tickets (00:08:02) Jordan Lawrence. Do you have any response to the gentleman? Well, I would simply say that it is perfectly legal to raise horses and Minnesota. The only thing it's illegals. You can't bet on them and I would say that I think it to me. It's rather curious that it is necessary for horse racing to have gambling to be legal gambling that is to be economically viable certainly illegal gambling on football when the Vikings are playing in baseball, but they don't need legal gambling to function. To be economically viable want to get to the phones in the listeners and immediately but I am curious John Farrell. What is the extent of the horse racing industry in Minnesota right now? (00:08:49) Well the racing industry in Minnesota today is quite small. We have about a hundred fifty members in the third but Association about an equal number in the Harness Racing Association and around a hundred I would suspect in the quarter horse racing and they all race their horses out of the state of Minnesota. It's all money that could be going into the Minnesota economy as opposed to the adjoining States the nearest racetracks and spending the Minnesota money down there. So the interest is quite large the thing that keeps the industry at the level it is is that there's no incentive for people to expand the Thoroughbred quarter horse or harness racing industry. In the Minnesota area because there's no place to run the horses. If you got to travel 500 miles that dissuades a lot of people from traveling, you know, and going to see the horses run their own personal horses. I mean, so it came as a result of keeps the industry itself at a very limited level (00:10:01) 14 minutes past the artist take our next listener. Go ahead, please you're on the air. (00:10:05) Hello. I am a question. Does this Constitutional Amendment specifically forbid the use of painkillers on horses with minor injuries before a (00:10:14) race? The amendment merely empowers the state legislature to legalize horse racing paramutual betting on horse racing if the legislature so desires there are a host of specific questions, like the one that you just asked that are that would be answered by a racing commission or by the legislature in the enabling legislation. For example, people ask where will the tracks be built. The correct answer is nobody really knows but we can make some guesses and maybe I should just answer that there would probably be a major track and the Twin City area there would probably be 234 lesser tracks. In other areas of the state where it could be economically where they could be sustained. They have a population or a tour space such as Duluth or Brainerd or Alexandria or Rochester, for example But there are many of those types of specific questions that that we just don't know the answers to yet unless this amendment were to pass and then all of those would be asked and dealt with (00:11:27) if I could make a comment to that the Thoroughbred Association, I think by and large is in favor of having the no medication role such as they have in Illinois and some other states were a horse cannot have any medication within 48 hours or whatever. It's determined by the veterinary people to be the most feasible that we would promote that no medication rule in Minnesota. (00:11:57) We have another listener with a question for you. Go ahead. You're on the (00:12:00) air. Hello. was formerly lived in a state where paramutual betting was legal in Massachusetts and First of all, it's the jobs. It creates our nebulous nature nearly every coffee shop in town has a little greasy little man that comes in and takes up bags second of all the rich do not bet is you'll see if you live in a town that has horse racing the rich do not bet therefore the tax is regressive the reasons that most of the dollars are attracted to it illegal betting our that The Bookies the illegal betting joints give credit the tracks don't and that is very convenient for people who don't want to see the race. They just said home and call someone and are stopped by their coffee shop and place a bet. And also I want to respond to the analogy that between liquor prohibition and racetracks. I don't think you can run a horse race in a speakeasy. I think all other analogies are as well as are inapplicable and it's just it's a weak argument. It's you went to visit a state or a city that had this and were to ask the man on the street you I think you'd find an overwhelming response that it was a negative influence in their lives. I'd like to hear some comment on that. Thank you. (00:13:21) Well, I don't know I guess I'd comment a I'm sorry. I didn't read this report really carefully. I just got across my desk last couple of days somebody, you know and everybody puts out reports number. I saw just the other day was that horse race betting by bookmakers. The number I know is 11% They estimate about 11% of their business is more Race betting and they bet on it or they take the bets as a convenience to their customers who are also betting on the other sports who are primarily been on the other sports projects. So the I guess my my point that I try and make here is that the state will get revenue from people betting that they are not getting now and in the I guess your comment about the jobs are nebulous. Uh, no, I guess if I was one of the people in Minnesota that was unemployed and I heard a facility was going to be opening that was going to offer 1,100 different jobs about 85% of them would be for local people. I guess I'd be very interested in going down and applying for one of those jobs. So, you know, that's the only comments how to make on those (00:14:50) statements I am certainly in agreement with what the caller had to say. I would like to just add some additional comments to the things that he said, I believe strongly that the evidence shows that illegal gambling will increase if we have a legal racetrack. The reasons being this that bookies can offer a better deal than the race the legal racetrack. Can the man correctly pointed out that bookies offer credit. They also offer tax free winnings and they also essentially offer Off Track Betting because you can call up the bookie and place a bet in the the only two places. I'm aware. You can do that in the United States are in New York and Connecticut. I would also we're getting into the economic issues. And I think that this is important to point out the the tax revenue from this is only the paramutual tax will probably yield about eight million dollars. That seems to be the ballpark figure that is tossed around by people on both sides of this issue and people should understand that this represents one fifth of one percent of the state's annual budget of about four billion dollars in this the last biennium the state legislature dealt with a budget shortfall of approximately 700 million dollars. So the the tax revenue that we are talking about here is is minimal at best and I think that it's going to to it will take probably somewhere three to five years to set up a racing commission through the legislature and then to decide where to build the tracks and then too Build them. It will also take a while for the racetracks. This might not happen. But I believe it's going to take a while before they become economically feasible Nebraska's horse racing industry yields tax revenue of approximately 8 million dollars now and that has been around for a number of years that we cannot expect Minnesota's horse race tracks to produce money eight million dollars instantaneously. So this is really no Panacea to this state's budget problems that we're having right now. We'll take another listener with a question for Jordan Lawrence and John Farrell about the pyramids will betting Amendment. Go ahead you're on the air. (00:17:21) I guess that's me. I'd just like to make a comment and ask for comment on that. I guess to me that the talk about job creation is a myth people that talk about how many jobs will be created by some program ignore the fact that that other economic activities always reduced by the money that goes into the new one but the jobs that are lost their go unnoticed. So I just like to hear you. (00:17:50) Well, I guess I guess I don't understand the question. (00:17:53) May I let me I think that this is what the man is trying to say and I wholeheartedly agree. He's basically making an economic argument. That every that the jobs that are created at a horse race track or that are created in secondary industry such as construction and restaurants and hotels are going to create their jobs at the expense of other aspects of Minnesota's economy. There are two prominent Minnesota Economist who oppose horse race gambling and have made this argument and they are dr. Walter Heller who teaches economics at the University of Minnesota and used to work with the Kennedy administration and dr. Seung-wan son who is a senior vice president and chief Economist at Northwestern National Bank in Minneapolis, and they have said that horse racing is essentially rearranging the economic furniture. The reason is this is that even if we have tourists coming into this state and even a large number of them horse racing will not be economically feasible in Minnesota. Unless people who live in Minnesota who don't now gamble going gamble. That means that the money they will spend at the track or the hotel or the restaurant or whatever would have been spent or would have been saved anyway in Minnesota's economy. It would have multiplied and created jobs and other portions of Minnesota's economy. Anyway and would have been taxed Anyway by other forms of Taxation this leads and I agree with this and I think that there for the job creation arguments are somewhat misleading and inflated when they are stated unless you take this the the loss aspect into consideration. They must be discounted. John Farrell, do you have a comment on that? (00:19:49) Well, I guess no I don't have a comment to that as you know, we can go around one subject all day. If we want to I guess the thing that I'm looking at in the thing that we've been talking about constantly is that Minnesota needs to expand its tourism industry and a lot of the income that we see coming from the horse racing industry in this state will be tourist dollars you bring tourists in they have to sleep someplace. They have to eat somewhere. The racetrack does not run without people. It's got to have people feeding the animals and taking care of the grounds and etcetera selling tickets and when people come in from out of state they've got to live in a hotel which does not run by itself. And so we see that in spite of all the Walter Heller's in the sun long songs if I was a guy that didn't have a job I'd be You're interested in knowing that here's something that could probably create 2,500 jobs in our state and a lot of it funded by out-of-state money A and B by money that people in Minnesota are spending out of Minnesota today. So it is money that we are not getting today. It is not being spent on pickup trucks or furniture or whatever. It's money that's being taken out of the state of Minnesota and all were asking is give us an opportunity to keep that money here in Minnesota and bring out State money in (00:21:19) let me let me throw in another illustration of this point because I think that it's important certainly unemployment is a terrible problem in this state and I certainly would not be one to sit here and say let's keep out a new industry and let those people stay out of work with all the traumatic suffering that they go through but I think that the I just want to give an example. That's why I think that the job creation thing is somewhat illusionary. The the motel and hotel association of Minnesota has come out strongly in favor of this amendment for the very reasons that mr. Farrell has been listing and certainly a hotel owner who owns a hotel across the street from a Twin Cities area track will benefit greatly economically by having the track patrons stain the horse breeders who come in from out of town to watch their horses race Etc. But who is going to suffer are the resort owners for example, in northern Minnesota who are located two or three hundred miles away from a track that people will be drawn away from their place to go to the racetrack. This is what I mean when I say that it's rearranging the economic furniture There was a house research statistically came out that showed on the average that 16% of the patrons at a track are from out of state. So I think that this job creation thing I realize it's a sense. Issue, but I think that it's being it's being oversold isn't the argument that you're making. Oh couldn't you say the same thing about other professional sports teams that we have in Minnesota the Vikings the twins about the Guthrie the Minnesota Orchestra the spco and so on that isn't horse racing just one more attraction that people may come for they may come to Northern Minnesota for the Resort's they might also come to the Twin Cities or some other place horse racing does one exclude the other well, I think that's possible. Maybe what we should do then is place the race tracks only in the resort areas. I don't know. I guess the only point that I'm trying to make here is that This economic picture is not quite as simple as we put in a racetrack and everybody benefits from more jobs. I just don't think that that's necessarily the case 28 minutes past the hour talking about the horse racing amendment that will appear on the Minnesota election. Ballot. Jordan Lawrence's with us a member of the Minnesota state senate staff and John Farrell executive director of the Minnesota Racing Association. We're taking your calls in the Minneapolis st. Paul area. The number is two two seven six thousand 2276 thousand and I see that we do have a liner to open now in other parts of Minnesota one 865 to 9700. Our next listener is waiting. Go ahead please you're on the air. (00:24:16) Yes. My name is Timothy Solberg. I'm calling from Oxford College and I was wondering in regard to the amount of Revenue that will be taken in by the state will be the direct and indirect impacts upon the personal income tax rates for the That it's a Minnesota (00:24:32) to my don't believe they'll be any quite frankly is Jordan Lawrence said earlier. It's not the Panacea for all of Minnesota's economic problems. I guess I would take a line from one of the authors of the bill. When one of the opposition Senator said well were it's only going to produce a million dollars and his line was but it's a million dollars more than we have right now. So know it I don't believe it will affect the individual income tax rates the state of Minnesota because that the revenue that's being brought in is not large enough to offset the income tax rates of the (00:25:14) state. Another listener with a question. Go ahead, please you're on the (00:25:19) air. Yes. Mr. Farrell keeps referring back to the liquor in the 1930s. I would like to have him tell us how he would justify the end results of what this liquor experience has brought about Nardin needs now, if comparable to what this bedding would bring about their be a loss of self-esteem because betting requires a loser there be psychological damage there would be a loss of jobs and there would also be effect like a chain reaction on the family members and those who are involved with this partier individual. Would there be enough tax money coming in from this so-called wedding to found to support the upkeep of gamma of Gamblers Anonymous of health centers that would need to be there to available to take care of these people who are absolutely and completely hooked on this type of thing that would deprive their families and their loved ones as a substantial and basic living. Thank you. (00:26:11) Well, I guess I guess I'll only answer your question ma'am. And one way I guess I have as much compassion for my fellow human beings as you obviously have and I don't propose to think that I have the answers to those for those people that get hooked on gambling or whatever, but I think I think one of the things you may be missing here is that at the racetrack itself historically and data that we've seen indicates about 36% of the people at the racetrack actually ever make a bet. I happen to be one of those that never does make a bet now, you know, it's like anything you offer you put somebody in an automobile that's capable of driving a hundred twenty five twenty miles an hour if he drives that car 220 miles an hour. Whose fault is that and if we build highways that you can drive a hundred twenty miles an hour on and somebody drives on that Highway and that automobile whose fault is it? Is it the highway designers is the automobile makers fault, or is it the individual that decided to drive a hundred twenty miles an hour? We can't in spite of some people feeling this way. We can't all be our Brother's Keeper. Everyone is charged. He has his own personal life to lead. He's supposedly intelligent and supposedly he knows right from wrong and not one of us in this whole wide world can take responsibility for someone who refuses to know. What is right and what is wrong and I'm hope that answered you least explains my sentiment on (00:28:07) it. I'd like to make a comment on that. I talked to the head of the National Council of compulsive gambling in New York. And he said that it is it is untrue. It is incorrect to believe that compulsive gamblers are born that way and it doesn't make any difference whether they are whether gambling is legal or not. They'll find access for their gambling. He said to me that their studies and research have shown that the more types of gambling that a state legalized has the more compulsive gamblers. It will get the people would probably be interested to know that there are three States presently that have treatment centers for compulsive gamblers state-funded in Connecticut, New York and in Maryland, and these are funded by revenue from the various gambling taxes that they have in those States the the head of the Maryland study center in Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore said that in a this was published in the September 82 Today magazine that each compulsive Gambler affects the lives of 10 to 17 other people and cost the economy. He spends twice what he what he makes and he cost the state's economy about $40,000 a year. Now. I think that the question could be legitimately asked if these people are such an economic load on a state's economy if they are so devastating to the society, why are 32 states do they have horse race gambling? Why did the voters of Oklahoma vote fifty eight percent a month ago in favor of this and I don't know but the only thing I can say is that I think that the the the problems are diffused. They're spread out throughout the whole population and we have a tornado go through we can look at the ruined homes and we can say this is horrible, but it's like a tornado going. Whole state it spread out over four million people. It's the the results. Just don't slap you in the face the way that some like a natural disaster would We'll take another listener with a question. Go ahead please you're on the air (00:30:57) couple of comments questions. What percent out of 4 million people is 2,500. and talking about disasters and So on and so forth and betting on the ponies just part another decay. And I don't know 58% you know, you're talking about that, you know, sounds like a gamble to me. I don't know. (00:31:39) Well, I guess I guess primarily I'm looking I'm looking really at the horse racing industry in this state as Bob Potter said earlier. It's another attraction for bringing tourists into the state. I guess a measure that perhaps suppose nobody in the state of Minnesota were allowed on the racetrack and we built a racetrack here solely for tourists to come to I guess the question is and I've asked this of other people. Okay, so nobody in Minnesota is going to go down and bet on a horse, but what about Entertainment value if we only allow people from out of state to come in here are the people who are interested in seeing horse racing and are spending Minnesota money in Winnipeg and Omaha and in Chicago and wherever else shall we just say? Okay, everybody from Minnesota that wants to go bet on a horse or wants to go see horse racing. You have to continue going out of state and we are only going to allow tourists in this race track, you know, that's the measure that that's what the arguments are. The arguments are that it's okay. If somebody not from - it's okay if the people from Minnesota go out of state to bet but and become compulsive gamblers or whatever, but we don't want it done in this in our state that's kind of a you know, it's kind of not saying it the way it should be said (00:33:19) 23 minutes before one o'clock. We have more listeners with questions. Go ahead, please you're (00:33:23) next. Yes. I just like to relate a short story of my experience at the track in Massachusetts. I fancy myself as a professional handicapper and study the race quite extensively and few years ago. I was going into the 4th of July weekend with five dollars and twenty five cents in my pocket. I took 25 cents and took a subway ride to Suffolk Downs and the other five dollars started betting on horses and was able to walk away from that track with a hundred and fifty dollars in my pocket and quite a delightful weekend because of it and I think that that and alone is a good reason for wagering in that it offers an individual who wishes to see a sports event to make back the investment of what they've done in that event. I'd also like to state that the official Sports attendance figures show that thoroughbreds attendants. I mean as individuals there's 51 million observing thoroughbred horse racing a year. Whereas in even Major League Baseball, there's only about twenty six million and and football, there's some 51 million. So there are a lot of people that do enjoy this Sport and reap the benefits from it. Thank you. (00:34:50) Alright. Thank you for calling with that observation will take another listener with a question on the horse racing Amendment. Go ahead. You're on the air. (00:34:58) Hi. I'm calling from Otter Tail County. And I don't have any questions but I do have a couple of comments. Although it isn't very likely that a race track would would be built in my area. I certainly would rather have outside tourist the kinds of tourists who would come to the Guthrie Theater or the orchestra or the stadium. Then I would the kinds of people who have money to spend on gambling and as far as not being able to be our Brother's Keeper Of course that is impossible, but on the other hand, we don't want to Pander to the weaknesses of people who aren't strong enough to resist gambling. Thank you. Well put (00:35:37) all right. We'll take another listener. Go ahead, please you're on the air. (00:35:40) Yes. I'd like to comment about mr. Farrell position that the elimination of prohibition was a great Boon to state and federal tax coffers. I think that the logical conclusion From that kind of statement is it what we ought to think about legalizing marijuana that would bring a lot of money in no, I didn't say that we ought to if we really want to bring tourists and then let's say I have complete gambling or not. Why not prostitution or we legalize that and instead of people going out to Nevada where those things are legal? They can do it right here. I just think your analogy about Prohibition is completely off and it's it leads to that type of thinking thank you. (00:36:24) You have any further reaction on the prohibition argument? I'd say I'm glad he made the prohibition analogy of that me (00:36:32) know I guess I'd the point I make is that what the people found out that put probation and was that the industry still survived the liquor industry still survived instead of revenues coming to the states and the federal government. It was going into the pockets of people that weren't paying any taxes. It and we have a large gambling operation going on here in the Twin Cities today and the state of Minnesota is not gettin a nickel out of it and it already exists. You know, (00:37:10) I would I would just like to make one comment. There is that I have heard the comment made that there are huge numbers fleets of are Airlines leaving from Minneapolis to Las Vegas and the other gambling places that there's many many dollars spent on sports betting in the state therefore. Why don't we legalize horse race gambling and I think that that's a non-sequitur. It just doesn't follow we are not talking about legalizing casinos. The amendment would not do that. We are not talking about legalizing sports betting either. I would also add I think a lot of people go to Las Vegas because it's so cold in Minnesota not simply to gamble that we are talking about introducing an entirely different type of gambling into this state even though the one listener said and I agree with this point. You can hide a speakeasy, but I'm unaware of any illegal horse race tracks of people knock on the door and you know, the Untouchables come in with their machine guns or whatever that this is I do not think that this is going to satiate the the appetites for gambling that people in Minnesota of already cultivated it but it's going to give them a new appetite for a different type of gambling (00:38:40) but it's going to but it's going to create revenue for the state of Minnesota Jordan wouldn't you agree with that? But it's hardened wait don't say but is it going to produce revenue for the state of (00:38:49) Minnesota? It will create eight million dollars, which I think Is not worth the trouble now the which is we have a seven hundred million dollar budget shortfall. Now if we are going to have problems with compulsive gamblers if we're going to have problems with crime if we're going to see an increase in illegal gambling if we are more in that more of a in a philosophical offering I think false hope to people that they can get something from nothing down at the track. I don't know if it's really worth it. We are losing a lot of tax revenue to the marijuana in the prostitutes as well. But I don't think that therefore we should legalize them to bring them in. Well, I think in fact with the whole job creation thing, I've worked at the legislature for two years what we need in this state. One of the main things is reform of the workers compensation law to bring factories and businesses back to the state from the other states that I think that that this is a major issue and that if we're talking about jobs And and taxes that horse racing is an anything wouldn't bring in anything like the businesses. Would that would love to return here from Exile. So to speak if we if the legislature would reform the work comp law. (00:40:08) Well, I think Jordan one and I think one of the things that you're missing and some of the listeners that have called in it's obvious that from their comments. They are opposed to gambling but I think what these people are missing is the fact is the entertainment value of horse racing. Now, you can't take an industry that last year Nationwide had something better than a hundred and seventy four million people attending horse racing. You cannot discount the entertainment value of horse racing and if 36 percent of the people that attend the race tracks are the ones that are wagering. This is 64 percent of the people are not wagering on horse racing. They're there for the entertainment value for the sports activity for the you know, watching the pageantry and the tragedy and all the rest of it. Somebody said earlier that the Of the loser the ego deflator Whatever It Is Well, I guess what the listener might forget about it is that there's and there's also a winner, you know, there might be five losers that lose $2 a piece and is one winner that wins the $10 or you know, less the take out what that $10 if he turned around and bought himself whatever you can buy for $10 today a new tie or whatever. He feels pretty good about it. And sure the guys that lost the two dollars they feel badly. But again remember you're only two you're talking about on average thirty six percent of the people that go to the racetrack. Well, they're just let me finish and go there and wager the difference is that you can get 64 percent of the people at the racetrack that can have a days entertainment for a dollar fifty cents or a dollar to park the car dollar a piece of get into the race track. They have a winner every half hour. They don't have to bet on the winner. They pick they can be as excited as anyone else that has wagered on the horses running and they've had a great afternoon and it's family entertainment. If it was not family entertainment, it would not be carried on national television. And I think that's what a lot of people are missing is the entertainment value and tourists will come into this state and they will come for that entertainment value. And I think that's really what we have to look at here. The opponent's wanted throw an awful lot of information out about the gambling side of the thing. Remember my earlier comment. I'm one of those people that doesn't bet on the horses. I'm involved in horse racing, but I'm in there because I like the horses a like to see him run and is sixty-four percent of the people who go to racing obviously feel the same way. So because you have some problems some of the people cannot control themselves have a personality disorder, which is what creates a compulsive gambler. The other 64 percent of the people that want to see horse racing and not gamble. They should be given some consideration in this thing. (00:43:24) John just one question. Why is it that the race tracks aren't built right now for those 64 percent of the people they could go and watch horse races. Now, I don't have any problems of people racing horses. It's just on the bedding on it. (00:43:38) Well, if so, number one, we've had several comments from people calling our office and one of the big things are asking is will it have a place where we can sit down and have dinner have a cocktail and watch the racing inside out of the elements. Can we have business friends come to these facilities, you know and have a nice evenings entertainment. And we said, yes, that's the plan is as we understand it or every racetrack we've been to you. If unless you have a first-class facility. Unless you can be sure that people are going to come to it. And it's it is supported. Let's face it. It's supported by the people who do the betting the people that don't bet the only support they give of it is the dollar entry or dollar-and-a-half, whatever it might be the Pete the people who go to the race track of the ones that pay for the racetrack. The average taxpayer is not going to it's not going to cost him a nickel if somebody never goes to the racetrack it never cost him anything the people of go support it. So, you know, that's the point that I let think a lot of the opponents of this bill are missing is the entertainment value of the facility of the racing. (00:44:53) Alright 11 minutes before they are we've had a quite an exchange here in Jordan Lawrence and John Farrell and we'll have some more listener questions now go ahead please you're on the (00:45:00) air. Thank you. I have a couple of comments to make relative to this horse racing situation, which seems to be emotional rather than logical the first place I grew up in Netanya. Coast and there was there were many evenings at my wife and I enjoyed ourselves had a very good time at Yonkers Raceway arose Moltres. We enjoyed it immensely number two. Somebody made a comment that the rich don't bet. I would like to know just what stone that happens to be engraved in because I totally and wholeheartedly disagree with that number is very relative to the organized crime situations. I get to Grand Island, Nebraska and I get Omaha, Nebraska and frankly it if they're hotbeds of Mafia activity that has escaped me number 4, there is no question about the fact that tracks create jobs create revenue and create an enhancement of Tourism to whatever degree that may be true. It is true to some degree number four. I go to the Guthrie and I go to the Dome and I don't consider myself a type of person that is that somebody wouldn't want in their community. Because I go and enjoy getting $2 to see who's going to win a race and finally relative to the whole overall cost about these terribly poor people who really can't afford it and isn't this a terrible repressive tax on them? Eventually those people go to the Viking games and how much does it cost to buy two tickets? And the beer that gets consumed and the hot dogs and the two dollars for the program. I really don't think that that's much of an argument and I just want to go down and record as saying that I am for one totally wholeheartedly in favor of bringing paramutual racing to the state of Minnesota. Thank you. (00:46:52) All right. Thank you for your observation move on to another listener with a with a question. Perhaps go ahead please you're on the air. (00:46:58) Hi. I'd like to start out with a statement that I disagree with comparing betting with prohibition because I think that's that there just isn't a comparison between the two of the horse-racing isn't in the state and it wasn't outlawed. Prohibition was something that everybody did the other things in Minnesota. We enjoy a relatively organized crime and we spend a lot of money, you know in law enforcing in that to keep an eye out and I think we're succeeding. I believe also that he won't see the organized crime at the tracks and that sort of thing. They'll be in the betting parlors and back rooms behind laundry places and that sort of thing and if you want to attract organized crime, I can't see a better place to start than with a betting operation like that. The question I have is do we in Minnesota want to take that risk? (00:47:55) Well, I guess you decide you're going to take a risk. If someone can tell you what the if you'll pardon the pun the odds are on it occurring let you know tell somebody to develop some figures to show me where organized crime is deeply involved in horse racing and I'll tell you whether I'm willing to take the risk or not quite frankly. I'm a citizen of the state of Minnesota. I work for a living if I thought that this was a negative would have a negative impact on the state of Minnesota. I wouldn't waste my time on it. I think there are more valuable things that I could be doing with my time rather than bringing something to the state of Minnesota, which would be a detriment to our way of life. (00:48:47) We'll take another listener now. Go ahead please you're on the (00:48:50) air. Yes. I would just like to make a few. Ami just wonder how many people would make this the effort to go to Winnipeg if they weren't doing it for pleasure and also for possibly the winning aspect of but I don't think morally that when people go to a horse race that they're going to a horse race just for what they can win out over. I think there's a beautiful sport there that they're observing and I don't think there's anything more beautiful than beautiful race horses. I'm not one who does it and I probably would never be able to do it because I'm not done that category that I would even consider driving to Winnipeg to go and do something like that but I don't see that. It's morally objective if people are gambling for the sake of gambling. They're not going to go to first three sister gamble because there's not that much at stake. I don't think I don't really know but what I'm trying to say is that if it's an entertainment thing and you can bring it in as an entertainment thing and then the down within reason so that people are not going to go just for the sake of gambling for gambling see this. I think the Problems, but I don't think it does from the standpoint of a sport. I think that there are beautiful horses and that's our thing when you open it up and open the door for gambling people have the feeling that they're opening up the door to a lot of other problems and if it is controlled and it does not go beyond the paramutual part of it where it's not a gambling casino type thing. It's not going to go into that and we're not going to get into that area. Then I see no reason why we couldn't at least support it to see what would happen. There's no reason in the world. If it becomes out of our category and become something that we do not want to support why we can't take that law the books of it becomes something that we can't afford later (00:50:35) on. All right. Thank you very much for calling. I'm not sure if if anyone is kept track of how the calls have gone pro and con on this if we could do some the observations people have made what they think about it, but I wonder John Farrell if you have any any poles to indicate what the public feels about this and how the results might go on. (00:50:58) Today, well, we've seen several polls that have been taken the lowest number we saw was 53.9% The highest number we saw was somewhere around 71 or 72 percent in favor of it. I heard the other day one of the radio shows how to call in Thai program and it was something in a four-to-one now, I didn't hear it. I just got that second hand but you know the people I've talked to really have talked about it and they don't know if they've heard me talk about earlier read the literature that we put out. But primarily we're here in an awful lot of the same thing that I'm saying here is it's the entertainment that's an entertainment industry coming into the state. There's no question. It has to create jobs and is no question of tourists will come into the state and spend money and that's that's what we're interested in It's Made its bringing money into the state. Really and the Minnesota Government does not have to invest any money to do (00:52:02) it. Well, we have just a few minutes left. Let's see if we can't get some more listeners on the air. Go ahead, please you're next. (00:52:09) My question is more in the nature of a rhetorical one. And you were just speaking of job. I am wondering how many jobs is this going to provide in the month of December January and February. It seems to me that we really need year-round job for everyone who needs a job not just ones that are more of a seasonal nature and I rather believe that this would be more of a seasonal nature just within the past own few months a new fabric store chain is opening for stores within the Twin Cities area. These will be year-round jobs couldn't of time effort and money. You've been expending on this be much better put to use in attracting business like this to Minnesota. (00:52:56) Well, I guess I'll answer. That quite frankly. I have more time and energy than I have money to attract industry like this in the state of Minnesota. I guess if I was pick a pick a business if I was interested in manufacturing banjos and I saw an opportunity to bring a banjo Manufacturing Company into Minnesota. I would devote an awful lot of time to try and bring that company in here to the state of Minnesota. The fact of the matter is that there are an awful lot of people in Minnesota that want to see horse racing. We are looking at this racing Bill and getting horse racing in here and we're envisioning about a 10-month season. Now before you think that I've gone around the bend a little bit we see six months of flat racing that would be Thoroughbred and quarter horse and other breed racing and then in four months of harness racing at one metropolitan area racetrack that is seems to me to be nine or 10 months of employment, which is about the same that the construction industry has and I feel like if we can create 9 or 10 months employment for someone who is either a unemployed or be underemployed that individual is going to feel pretty good about that and I suspect probably the welfare department and the unemployment compensation office will also feel pretty good about that. (00:54:32) Jordan learns to give you about 30 seconds (00:54:35) to sum up your feelings about this whole thing before we leave (00:54:38) I think many more people in the state would vote against it if they realized how little tax money it's going to bring in I'd say it again estimates are eight million dollars one-fifth of 1% I'm not against more entertainment coming in. I think horse racing is beautiful too. But I say they can build a track right now that doesn't have any bedding along with it. You cannot get the entertainment of horse racing without the problems of the bedding and the gambling. So I would urge people to vote. No on the proposition 3 Constitutional Amendment on paramutual betting this November 2nd. Well gentlemen, it has most certainly been a stimulating and interesting our want to thank you both for coming in Jordan Lawrence a member of the state senate staff and John Farrell executive director of the Minnesota Racing Association.