Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Meeks claims Emanuel kept black leaders out of the White House - Attempts backtrack on affirmative action blowup
Next Post: Crime and punishment
Posted in:
* The Tribune is still trickling out its poll results…
The survey found 47 percent of Chicago voters now back a city-owned casino while 41 percent oppose it. Those numbers are almost the exact opposite of voters’ views in a similar Tribune survey taken in 2003.
The new poll of 721 registered and likely voters in the Feb. 22 mayoral contest found support for a city-owned casino greatest among voters younger than 50. Fully 56 percent of voters ages 18 to 35 favored a city gambling emporium, the same view held by 51 percent of voters 36 to 49. […]
The survey also found a sharp gender gap on the issue. Among men, 56 percent backed a city casino while only 34 percent opposed it. But 46 percent of female voters opposed a casino while 39 percent supported it.
Not exactly resounding support, but not a terribly large opposition, either.
* The numbers against the Wrigley Field renovation plan were stronger, but not as overwhelming as one might’ve thought…
More than half of Chicago voters don’t like the idea of spending future gains in city and county ticket taxes on renovating Wrigley Field, a new Tribune/WGN poll shows. […]
Fully 51 percent said they opposed such a plan, while only 36 percent supported it. Another 13 percent said they had no opinion of the proposal. The opposition was steady across gender, racial, age and income lines.
Discuss.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 4:39 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Meeks claims Emanuel kept black leaders out of the White House - Attempts backtrack on affirmative action blowup
Next Post: Crime and punishment
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
The poll asked’
“The survey found 47 percent of Chicago voters now back a city-owned casino while 41 percent oppose it.”
What a question, and underlying implication. I had no idea that the casino was planned to be owned by government! I would have said NO (even though I am a casino supporter) because you can be sure if the government runs it, it will be a corrupt, and poorly run fiasco.
For those in the know, is this really the plan?
Comment by Cincinnatus Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 8:37 am
“More than half of Chicago voters don’t like the idea of spending future gains in city and county ticket taxes on renovating Wrigley Field, a new Tribune/WGN poll shows. […]”
This is certainly one that benefits from creative question-design for the pollsters. Like this, “Do you support the idea of increasing your city and county ticket taxes on all entertainment venues, even those that have nothing whatsoever to do with professional sports teams, so that you can help minimize the expenses of the multimillionaires who just bought Wrigley Field at a bargain basement price?”
Heh.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 9:39 am
@Cincy -
City-ownership has always been a pre-condition placed on a casino by Mayor Daley.
Daley’s lame duck status has two implications here. Voters who were worried about Daley’s corruption, even just the concentration of power, or that it would be run as HIS casino just like he treated Meigs as HIS airport have much less to fear.
Perhaps more importantly, the City of Chicago’s lobbyists have considerably less clout at the table in the negotiations, if any seat at all…and the fewer people you’ve got to make happy, the easier it is to pass a bill.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 10:11 am
Cub fans fill up Wrigley Field every summer. Chicago people love bad deals.
Comment by Scooby Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 10:32 am
YDD,
While states shed themselves of state ownership of gas stations and liquor stores, Hizzoner Jr. wants to assume ownership of a casino.Yipes! Since good government is such a big gamble in Illinois and Chicago, I guess it makes sense. For the life of me, I cannot even imagine why a bureaucrat would think they could run a casino when the track record says they can barely manage a two car funeral.
Do you think it may be a clever ploy to build the casino and then sell it off like the parking meters?
Comment by Cincinnatus Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 10:36 am
My guess is the city wants to own the casino in order to reap the profits. The way the bill is written a private company (Harrahs / Penn) would run the casino. So in effect they have pre-privatized it.
What I think they should do is just give Chicago the authority to tax the casino over and above what the state does.
Comment by Been There Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 10:51 am
OK, how about we put the Casino inside a newly renovated Wrigley Field? Call it the Harry Caray Casino.
Instead of saying “double down” at the blackjack table, you’d say “let’s play two.” When snake eyes comes up, it’d be called “Cubs” not craps. Cocktail waitresses dressed like Marla Collins, dealers wearing Cubs uniforms, it could be a great theme park for adults.
Plus it would give Sox fans another reason to feel inferior to Cubs fans. I think it’s a win-win all the way around.
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 11:02 am
Ernie Banks at Lou Mitchell’s endorsing, and having breakfast with,
Rahm. best Ernie line ” and Rahm was a dancer so he stays in shape” which prompted the Fox anchor to say, “he was a dancer? we’ll have to check on that.” Sox fans watch with interest.
Comment by amalia Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 11:08 am
Was it ever spelled out where it was city-owned and run by a separate entity, as in put the license out to bid and the most responsive bidder gets a 5-year license? If that is the case I am ok, I would rather have the city own it than the state only for the reason that the city would derive more revenue from it. If it is city operated, look out for a casino that loses money year after year.
Comment by Jim Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 11:10 am
More…
Instead of lemons on the slot machines, it would be a picture of Steve Bartman. On the roulette wheel, you’d have a triple zero spot to reflect the 100+ years the Cubs have gone without a title. If you win at the casino, you must wait until next year to be paid.
This really is a good idea.
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 11:10 am
==…because you can be sure if the government runs it, it will be a corrupt, and poorly run fiasco.==
What’s the point of that simplistic nonsense? I bet you don’t spout that stuff when you’re in need of a fireman or cop, or drive on roads, or eat, drink water or take prescription drugs in the confidence that it won’t kill you, and on and on and on….
I’m surprised, in the current economic environment and with the Cubs lousy team, that there’s that much support for a Wrigley deal.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 11:12 am
wordslinger,
Government being in the business of public service doesn’t necessarily make it a good fit with commercial gaming. We can barely manage a park, let a lone something like a casino with a million moving parts, all of which are potential targets for the corrupt. I think Jim is on the right track.
Comment by Cincinnatus Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 11:23 am
OH, OH,
If Chicago runs the casino, does that mean Rahm will have to wear garters on his shirt sleeves, and maybe an embroidered vest? NOW I have a reason to support it!
Comment by Cincinnatus Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 11:25 am
Here is what the gaming bill (SB737) says about a Chicago casino. The city SHALL contract out the day to day operations.
Section 1-13. Duties of the Authority. It shall be the duty of the Authority, as a casino licensee under the Illinois Gambling Act, to promote and maintain a casino in the City. The
Authority shall construct, equip, and maintain grounds, buildings, and facilities for that purpose. The Authority shall contract with a casino operator licensee to manage and operate
the casino and in no event shall the Authority or City manage or operate the casino. The Authority may contract with other third parties in order to fulfill its purpose.
Comment by Been There Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 11:52 am
Cincy, the idea of government ownership is to maximize return to the taxpayers. Running it would be contracted out.
If you want to search for corruption in Illinois casino history, look no further to the original licenses. They were awarded for a song to clout-heavy private networks, who turned around and issued IPOs making fortunes that could have been realized by the state treasury. Gee, no one saw that coming.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 12:31 pm
wordslinger,
I have a hard time justifying government ownership of a 100% consumer-driven entity. If Michelle Obama were out to get ‘em, we could promote Chicago as a McDonald’s franchisee. They’d probably make more money. This casino ain’t a parking lot.
Comment by Cincinnatus Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 12:41 pm
Cincy, the Lottery pays off pretty well for the state.
Which brings me to a great holiday gift idea for Cap Fax readers:
“KINGS The True Story of Chicago’s Policy Kings and Numbers Racketeers An Informal History by Nathan Thompson.”
Absolutely fascinating account of the original Lottery, the South Side policy wheel, in which the black gangsters reinvested their winnings into the community and opened banks, car dealerships and drug stores.
Sam Giancanna made his bones by murdering his way into the business and taking it over. It was a cash cow for The Outfit before the state started the lottery.
Lot of quotes from Ted “Double Duty” Radcliffe, a Negro Leagues great who was part of PK Wrigley’s weird “College of Coaches” back in the 60s.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 1:45 pm
–best Ernie line ” and Rahm was a dancer so he stays in shape” which prompted the Fox anchor to say, “he was a dancer? we’ll have to check on that.” Sox fans watch with interest.–
Amalia, I’m not sure what you’re trying to say, but from my airport gate reading and TV viewing, Baryshinkov and Nureyev did as well as Frank Sinatra.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 3:38 pm