Crazy Fun Video Night: WHITNEY!

'Cuz I know you can't get enough! :-D

What's the Big Deal About Casino Gambling?

OK, so I get sh*t all the time about it these days. What am I, "Ms. Radical Homosexual Femi-Enviro-Nazi Leftist Socialism-loving Progressive", doing in a state that depends on the "horribly regressive habit" of casino gambling? Aren't casinos supposed to be evil in my book?

Not necessarily.

I was thinking about it this morning when I read Steve Friess' well reasoned Philadelphia Inquirer op-ed in favor of Wynn Resorts' new Philadelphia casino plan. And while I don't really like what I consider the unfortunate "liberal elite" right-wing framing, I otherwise dig what "The Friesster" is saying about the reality of casino gambling today.

But what's really behind the objections is the East Coast liberal elite's instinctive propensity to react badly to gambling. For some reason, the fact that the vast majority of casino-goers have no trouble keeping their spending within reason escapes these critics, who also tend to believe that poor people are stupid, defenseless, and without willpower.

Gambling is regressive, they claim, rarely noting that the lottery already exists in Pennsylvania. Lotteries create no jobs and require no infrastructure or capital investment. Casinos, by contrast, are actual physical spaces focused on customer service.

To play in a casino, one must make an effort to go somewhere and enter a controlled, adults-only environment. Taking a go at the lottery requires nothing more than a trip to the corner store. Even if you buy the notion that poor folks are idiots who are incapable of controlling the urge to bet with their milk money, isn't it better to separate gambling from the places where people actually buy milk?

Casino-goers are suckers, gambling foes always say. And yet, after many years covering the business in Las Vegas, I have yet to meet a patron who is unaware that the odds are against him. Most gamblers expect to lose; if they break even or win, they're pleasantly surprised.

Most players see gambling not as investment, but as entertainment - which is why your Aunt Fern goes to the church for bingo night. Nobody ever suggests people are suckers for spending big bucks at an Eagles game, so why the judgment of folks who define a good time as a few hours at a blackjack table?

The irony of criticisms to the effect that Wynn will create something "cheesy" is that his record of accomplishment in design is the strongest argument in his favor. This is a man batting a thousand in creating places with class and beauty. It's unlikely that he would put his reputation behind something lousy for a quick buck.

As you all know quite well by now, I'm not a fan of Steve Wynn's far right economic theories and political philosophy. However, I do LOVE his casinos... And I do agree that it's unfair to criticize him for "preying after the poor" when he's clearly after a more well-heeled set of customers.

And stepping back to the larger question of casino gambling, I have to object to all the "holier-than-thou" arguments about casinos being thieves and casino-goers being greedy fools. Most players these days know that casino gaming is entertainment, plain and simple. Occasionally I might hear my dad or another visiting family member or a friend complain about "tight slots", but they know they can't make a living off the casinos.

And ultimately, this comes down to the question of free will, consumer choice, and civil liberties. Do we really want to use the force of local, state, and or (gawd, I hope it never comes to this!) federal government to tell people what they are and are not allowed to do on their free time?

I especially find some of these anti-casino cries hypocritical when the same folks don't object to lotteries. Lotteries are gambling, too... But unlike casinos, they don't provide as many jobs and economic opportunities.

But anyway, back to casinos. I'm always irritated when the religious right tries to shove its "moral values" down our thorats in telling us what we can and can not do (determined by how they interpret The Bible). However, I'm equally irritated when I hear progressives try to make the case that gambling is some viral disease that infects people, and we somehow must enforce bans to prevent people from catching it.

Gambling is ultimately a choice. One can choose to play, and one can choose not to. Kids have video games and arcades, and adults have video poker, slot machines, table games, and sports betting. And seriously, what's the difference between those "video games" at Dave & Buster's and casino slot machines? One accepts tickets and offers prizes... While the other accepts tickets and offers prizes.

I guess this is my "libertarian streak" coming out. Whatever. I just don't understand those on the right and the left who want to criminalize fun. And ultimately, that's what we all need to remember about casinos. They're operating to provide a fun experience to players, NOT to offer "free money" or "prey after unknowing victims". It's a business. Period.

And while I don't think it's ultimately smart for Nevada for solely rely upon casinos for financial survival, it's foolish to deny that they're an essential part of our economy that won't be disappearing any time soon. And for other states that are now legalizing casino gaming, all they need to do is look at how we handle gaming in Nevada to realize that it isn't scary, it isn't some "one way ticket to hell", and everyone will be fine.

NV-03: Dina's Choice

So what will it be? We now have more details on the costs and benefits of the health care bill.

The bill would reduce the deficit by $130 billion in the first ten years, and potentially by $1.2 trillion in the second ten years (though CBO always warns that projections into the second decade are extremely unpredictable).

According to the source, CBO finds that the bill reduces annual growth in Medicare expenditures by 1.4 percentage points per year, extending Medicare's solvency by at least 9 years.

And, in a small, but significant improvement over the Senate bill, the combined package will expand health insurance coverage to 32 million Americans, as opposed to the Senate bill's 31 million.

The one difference Republicans will point to? The bill's about $100 billion more expensive than its predecessor. The price tag is fully covered, but will cost $940 billion over a decade. That's likely a reflection of changes to the bill, such as enhanced subsidies and closing the Medicare Part D donut hole. But it does exceed President Obama's arbitrary price of "around $900 billion", which he issued back in September, and which Congress treated as a hard ceiling.

OK, so the bill costs $940 billion over the next decade. However, it will ultimately reduce the deficit by $130 billion in the next decade and extend coverage to 32 million more Americans while making health care more affordable to more people. What's not to like?

Well, we still have to ask Dina Titus that.

As Democratic Rep. Dina Titus faces a challenging health care vote, how she eventually sells her position to voters could be as important to her political future as whether she votes yes or no.

House Democrats are nervous about voting for a bill that polls show majorities of Americans do not support. Yet Democrats are equally worried about heading into re-election campaigns without accomplishing health care reform after a year spent debating the issue.

For Titus, the internal debate could be heard last week during a tele-town hall meeting with more than 3,000 voters in her Henderson district.

To one caller, Ken, who supports health care reform, saying he is a small-business owner who recently had to discontinue coverage for his workers because of rising premiums, Titus assured him, “I support reform.”

To another, Frank, who was concerned about the costs of the bill, Titus insisted that she wanted to see Congress “tightening their belts” too and was not about to greenlight the bill until she had fully reviewed it. (The final version has yet to be presented to members of Congress.)

“I just don’t believe it’s responsible to commit until you see the bill in front of you,” Titus told him.

Well, now she can have the bill and the CBO score in front of her. She needs to make a decision and make it soon. Even though The New York Times suggests Dina has already made her decision, she herself is not saying anything yet. But if we were to assume that "The Grey Lady of Journalism" is correct and Dina ultimately votes for health care reform one more time, what can she do to defend herself against "the angry mob" of teabaggers out to call her "SOCIALIST!"? Here's a helpful hint: Explain what health care reform does.

The challenge for Titus and other Democrats, if they choose to vote yes, will be articulating their reasons for supporting the legislation in a 30-second sound bite that can withstand the attacks expected from the opposition: ObamaCare. Government takeover. Rationing.

Last week, former Rep. Marjorie Margolies Mezvinsky, who as a freshman from Pennsylvania cast a deciding vote in 1994 on Clinton’s budget package, offered a cautionary tale. She told The New York Times that she had distilled an explanation of her support into a four-minute sound bite. But her opponents could explain their criticisms in 30 seconds. She lost.

White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer said the reason Democrats “didn’t have a 30-second answer in ’94 is they failed to pass health care.” He said he could imagine a candidate making “a very compelling case in 30 seconds or less of all the benefits they delivered and the fact that they took on the insurers to do it.”

Titus knows the difference between having to explain oneself and lobbing attacks. She has been on both sides of that equation — as a veteran state senator who had to answer for past votes and as a challenger in 2008 to the incumbent Republican lawmaker she eventually ousted.

A vote for health care would allow her, while on the campaign trail, to take a page from Obama’s book, reaching for the human faces that can tell the story of health care reform — Nevadans who have been dropped by their insurance companies or had their insurance premiums raised to unaffordable levels.

[Cook Political Report Analyst David] Wasserman believes that if the bill is passed, Democrats will enjoy a brief victory lap then immediately “pivot to the economy” — the top issue on voters’ minds.

This is quite true. As I said back in January when things were really looking bleak, Democrats need not be afraid of doing the right thing... And explaining it as such.

Look, most Nevadans want health care reform. We're not afraid of "the r word". We would have liked a public option in the package, but hopefully it won't be long before this is revisited. We obviously don't like the current state of affairs and want a health care system that works.

This is what Dina Titus needs to remember. She needs to remember how she won in 2008. She needs to remember why her supporters (us!) worked so hard for her back then. She needs to remember that voters like elected officials who get stuff done, not ones who sit around and do nothing.

Thankfully, Dina's not one to sit around and do nothing. And she's someone who knows Nevada politics forward and back. And she understands the costs of inaction on health care.

This is all she needs to remember. This bill may not be perfect, but it makes plenty of progress in making health care more affordable and more accessible to more people. And by voting for it and explaining it well, she won't really be taking the kind of risk that the Republicans claim she would.

After all, if health care reform were really as "toxic" as the GOP claims it is, why are they working so hard to block it?

Casinos: Rumjungle at M-Bay Files for Chapter 11, Encore's Switch Beach Club Pics Leaked, MGM Mirage & Perini Fight Over CityCenter, & Some Good News for MGM Mirage

- Yikes! Things aren't looking pretty at Rumjungle these days. They've filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy, claiming that MGM Mirage is trying to drive them out of business. Mandalay Bay just opened its new "eyecandy" lounge near the casino, and Rumjungle is claiming this violates their contract with MGM for Rumjungle to be the only nightclub at Mandalay. However, MGM counters that they owe $1.1 million in unpaid rent.

- Meanwhile, MGM Mirage actually gets some good news today. Malaysian casino operator Genting Malaysia Bhd. is buying another $18 million in MGM debt, which CEO Jim Murren is feeling good about.

- However, MGM Mirage still has to deal with Perini's move to try to impose a lien on CityCenter over $492 million in unpaid construction costs. MGM counters that the $492 million claim isn't accurate and The Harmon's construction defects result in a larger counterclaim for them. This should be a fun one to watch in court.

- Meanwhile on the other end of The Strip, more photos have been leaked for Encore's new Switch Beach Club and Surrender nightclub set to open Memorial Day Weekend. There's now a great debate over whether the club is edgy or trashy. I personally think the pool looks a little dull so far, but I have a feeling the real deal will glam it up some more... Especially since Surrender is looking quite promising!

- And finally, back to MGM Mirage... And what the hell is this??!! Are they actually inviting group orgies (on the cheap) to Luxor? Whoa, nelly! I guess this will be the new place to find a way to get laid FAST... And many times over... And still have some change left over to toss in the penny slots. Go figure. Only in Vegas. :-p

Worst of Great Recession Is Over, But Challenges Ahead: See, I Told You So.

(Also at Progress Now Nevada)

Hey, it's not like I enjoy proclaiming it all the time over here. But every once in a while, I must admit it can be a little satisfying to see a Brookings Institution study and Sun story confirm what I've been saying for some time now.

Local economic consultant Jeremy Aguero said the region must work to continue to provide adequate infrastructure, including water. He also made a subtle point about the relationship between the region’s strengths and weaknesses: “Right now, our biggest strength (low cost) is also our biggest weakness (because we underfund education).”

Las Vegas, relative to other cities, has low taxes and is filled with cheap buildings and cheap labor. The problem is that cheap, uneducated labor does not appear to be very useful at the moment or in the near future.

“The main policy implication is the human capital issue,” Parker said. “The extent to which Intermountain West cities are in recovery is highly correlated with education and skills. And we’re an outlier: We’re heavily dependent on industries that don’t require education.”

Indeed, the unemployment rate for those with a college degree is roughly 10 percentage points lower nationwide than those without a high school diploma, which probably understates the true picture because the undereducated are also more likely to be underemployed — they’ve dropped out of the labor force and thus aren’t counted in the official statistics.

Muro said this gap between those with college educations and those without simply confirms what’s been known for some time: “Education is a mainstay of success at the family, company, community and national level. There are few insights better documented than the benefits of education.” [Emphasis mine.]

As I said on Monday, the casinos can no longer be counted upon as a "free ride". We can't just expect new casino construction to prop up demand for construction jobs, which props up demand for new housing, which props up demand for housing construction, which props up the rest of Southern Nevada's economy. We may have lucked out in seeing this model work from 1989 to 2007, but all it really did was hide the weaknesses in this shaky economic model that ended up being exposed when "The Great Recession" hit and all the artificial demand for new casinos, new homes, new whatever fell like a row of dominoes.

However, it's not all bad news. Believe it or not, our long downward spiral finally looks to be over.

The worst of it finally appears to have passed.

After two years of economic decline, the gross metropolitan product of Las Vegas, which measures Southern Nevada’s total output of goods and services, grew slightly in the fourth quarter of 2009 [by 0.5% over Q3], according to a new report from the Brookings Institution.

The quarter also brought a substantial reduction in the foreclosure rate, although Nevada still leads the nation.

“When news has been bad for so long, things not getting worse is good news,” said Elliott Parker, a UNR economist.

Yes, there are signs of hope here. We're no longer seeing the mountain of foreclosures that seemed so mind-numbingly painful a year ago. We're no longer seeing the unemployment rate rocketing up to dangerous new highs, even though it's bad enough that it's still hovering around an already too high 13.8%. We are starting to see a return of economic growth, however so slight and lagging behind the rest of the country it is.

But again, I have to point out that we are lagging behind. We're especially lagging behind metro areas that have better PreK-16 education systems and more stable employment sources. Salt Lake City and Ogden, Utah, both have GMP (gross metro product) growth rates exceeding the national average and unemployment below the national average. Same goes for Denver, Boulder, and Colorado Springs, Colorado. So why is this? All of these areas boast a highly educated workforce employed in stable sectors like high-tech and biotech, and none were as dependent on the housing bubble and artificial "construction for the sake of construction" as Southwest areas, like Las Vegas and Phoenix (which is also lagging behind in economic growth).

So again and again, we come back to this dilemma. As long as our education system is broken and as long as we continue to make ourselves overdependent on the casinos and casino-fueled development, Las Vegas will continue to suffer under this radical boom and bust cycle that lives and dies on discretionary consumer spending. Sorry, but this is not how a major metropolitan area with 2 million residents and a state with over 2.7 million residents can survive!

We already know what's wrong with Nevada. We already know what's causing the prolonged suffering here in Las Vegas. When will we do something about it and start building the infrastructure for a better and more stable future?

Dina Titus Introduces Legislation to Strengthen OSHA Oversight

It's about time!

Rep. Dina Titus introduced a bill this morning that would give the federal government more flexibility in its oversight of state workplace safety program. [...]

At stake: Nevada’s control over the workplace-safety program. Nevada is one of 22 states operating such a program, which is supposed to protect private and public employees. The federal government shoulders the responsibility in all other states.

Federal OSHA has required the state to make changes to its program. But under current law, federal officials have only one option if the state fails to improve: terminate the state workplace-safety plan and take over. Titus called such a measure a "drastic step what would ... leave state and local government employees unprotected" and put the Labor Department on the hook for federal funding.

Titus' bill, dubbed the Ensuring Worker Safety Act, would create "a formal mechanism" to allow federal OSHA to step in, identify problems with state programs and exercise oversight without stripping states of day-to-day control. [...]

“The tragic deaths of numerous workers in Southern Nevada highlighted the need to ensure that state OSHA plans are doing their job of protecting workers,” Titus said in statement. “Unfortunately under current law, federal OSHA is left with only two options, both at the extreme end of the spectrum, when it finds state plans that are ineffective. This legislation provides OSHA with an important middle ground so it is not left with the choice of doing nothing or the drastic step of terminating a state plan.”

It wasn't that long ago when the 25 construction worker deaths at casino sites up and down The Strip in 2007 and 2008 caused people to wonder why all these workers were dying on the job. The Sun launched its now famous investigation into what happened, and discovered that Nevada State OSHA regulators had a far too cozy relationship with the very casinos in the hot seat over these construction deaths.

Hopefully if Dina Titus' proposed legislation becomes law, it will provide a more comprehensive framework for the feds to step in when state OSHAs (not just ours) are not properly addressing workplace safety violations. This will add more protection to the workers who need it without unnecessarily overloading the federal OSHA with all the states' case work.

Now let's hope Congress gets moving on this.

NV-Sen: Suzy Lowdown, Putting Her Business Interests Above Nevada's (Even When Serving in the People's House!)

Apparently, Suzy Lowdown's record at Archon continues to give her headaches. And this time, it's becoming clear she hasn't just run into troubles with the law. She also took advantage of being a lawmaker to give Archon the "competitive advantage".

Yesterday's Reno G-J examined Suzy's record at Archon, and her record in the State Senate from 1993 to 1996, and found some interesting tidbits. Let's start with something she's been saying lately about supposedly "single-handedly defending Nevada against the unions". Not only does she reveal her contempt for working Nevadans, but apparently she's been lying about what she actually did in the Legislature.

To hear former state Sen. Sue Lowden tell it, she was the lone vote that stood in the way of the state's powerful labor unions' attempt to overturn Nevada's voter-approved right-to-work status in a tense legislative battle in 1995.

The bill, as Lowden recounts, would have started the reversal process of the law that prohibits union membership from being a condition of employment.

"I was a state senator in this very difficult time of right to work," Lowden said in an interview. "You know, was it going one way or another? And it went right through the Assembly. It passed that the state would not be a right-to-work state. And I stopped it in the Senate."

The only problem?

There never was such a bill, and there never was such a vote, which Lowden acknowledged later when pressed for specifics.

OK, so it looks like she really didn't do anything on "right to work" laws. So what did Suzy Lowdown do in the Legislature? Apparently, she was too busy enriching herself. She was instrumental in passing SB 268 in 1993, which amended Nevada gaming laws to allow limited liability companies (LLCs) to obtain gaming licenses.

So guess who quickly took advantage of SB 268 when it became law? Hint: Santa Fe Mining Company, LLC, was established... To run the Santa Fe casino. Yes, Suzy Lowdown (ab)used her position in the Nevada State Senate to rewrite the laws in her company's favor!

And wait, it gets worse. When Santa Fe employee Robert Miller went to Carson City to testify before the Senate Commerce & Labor Committee about the unsafe working conditions there, not only did Ms. Suzy not recuse herself from the committee hearings due to the obvious conflict of interest (he was there to tesify about the frightening work conditions at her casino!), but she actually called the meeting to order and remained on the committee as Vice-Chair the whole time! And worse yet, just three days after he told that Senate Committee about just how dangerous a workplace the Santa Fe was, Suzy Lowdown fired Robert Miller for telling the truth.

Oh, but wait... It gets even worse. Suzy Lowdown suggested in that same Commerce & Labor Committee on March 10 that disabled workers' compensation should be reduced. Yep, once again she was using her position in the Legislature to try to reduce or eliminate business expenses for her casino! (And by the way, she did it again in 1995.)

Oh yes, Suzy Lowdown has a long history of (ab)using state office to benefit her business interests. She voted to increase slot fees in 1993 for non-casino venues, effectively handicapping neighborhood competition to Santa Fe (and violating "The Great Grover Norquist-Jim Gibbons No New Taxes Rule!"). She also voted in 1993 to allow casinos to advertise room rates on billboards, giving Santa Fe new marketing opportunities. And really, I'm just scratching the surface. There's even more dirt in those committee minutes, and I only have so much time today to review them.

Now while some of these votes may seem benign on the surface, the motivation should scare all of us. Suzy Lowdown obviously never sees the conflict of interest in voting for and even co-sponsoring (!!) legislation that directly benefits her company. Her record in Carson City even shows that when it comes to the well-being of Nevada's workers, she'll put her personal business interests over the safety of our workers every time!

Let's also remember that during her time in the Nevada Legislature, Ms. Suzy couldn't even be bothered to abide by the very laws she swore to uphold! The Santa Fe was fined by OSHA in 1993 for failing to maintain a clean workplace. The Sahara was fined by OSHA in 1994 for failing to provide medical follow-up to exposure to dangerous bloodborne pathogens. The Hacienda was fined by OSHA in 1995 for failing to maintain its floors and keep the floors free of nails, splinters, holes, and loose boards. And remember, all of these casinos were owned by Suzy Lowdown's Archon while she was serving in the State Senate debating state level workers' rights legislation!

Archon obviously has quite the troubled history here in Nevada. And obviously, Suzy Lowdown can't even think for one moment about the public's best interest without first protecting her corporate profits. Is this someone we really want in the US Senate representing us?

Final Thought on the Anti-Reid/MGM Mirage "Swift Boat Ad"

Mr. Gleaner has something good to say about it, but I have to give the last word to Ms. Whitney.



This is what Nevada will be saying to Floyd Brown and his fellow slimy GOoPers this fall.

MGM Mirage Strikes Back at New Anti-Reid "Swift Boat Ad"

After news broke on Rethuglican smear master Floyd Brown's new "Swift Boat-Willie Horton" style ad trying to accuse Harry Reid and MGM Mirage of supporting "slave labor" in Dubai (HUH??!!), MGM Mirage is now striking back.

Nevada's largest private employer is lashing back at attack ads aimed at linking Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to alleged exploitative labor practices in Dubai in the United Arab Emirates.

Lawyers for resort giant MGM Mirage say claims in the ads are "false, offensive and defamatory" and called on the creators to retract the commercials, posted online at www.exposeharry.com and scheduled to run on television this week in Las Vegas.

Oh yes, and did I mention these "Expose Harry" California carpetbaggers (they're based in San Diego County, by the way) are also "birthers" who continue to claim that President Obama is supposedly "illegitimate" because he's supposedly not a "natural born citizen"? Oh yes, it gets crazier. No wonder why this ad stunk.

"This doesn't really stand up to tests of reason. It is a big stretch," said Joseph Valenzano, an associate professor in the communications department at University of Nevada, Las Vegas who specializes in political rhetoric.

Valenzano said the labor ad is a success in that it prompts voters to think of Harry Reid, slave labor and CityCenter as being associated.

But it fails for two reasons, he said.

First, it doesn't establish any clear connection between the concepts other than mentioning them in the same ad. Second, the issue of alleged labor abuses in Dubai has nothing to do with how voters in Nevada will decide who to support in the upcoming election.

"This ad is designed for shock treatment," Valenzano said.

As the ad percolates in the public discourse it will lose effectiveness as voters realize the implied connections between Reid and Dubai labor practices are suspect and that nearly every Democratic and Republican politician in Nevada supported CityCenter because it was credited with creating thousands of new jobs during the greatest recession in state history, he said.

So are all our elected officials, Democrats and Republicans, now guilty of supporting "slave labor" because they supported the completion of CityCenter? Would Nevada have been better off if CityCenter failed, Nevada's largest employer collapsed, and Nevada's economy slid into another Great Depression?

Obviously, these California carpetbaggers know nothing about Nevada and how our state works. They shouldn't attack Harry Reid like this, they shouldn't attack MGM Mirage like this, and they shouldn't bash all of Nevada like this. These "Swift Boaters" just don't know yet how this crap will come back to bite them (and help reelect Harry Reid this year).

NV-Sen: Worst. Ad. EVAH!

(Also at Stonewall)

There's only one word that can truly describe this despicable bullshit:



FAIL!

I'd talk more about the despicable bullshit lies thrown around in this trashy excuse of a political ad, but for now I'll focus on it as the radical right's EPIC FAIL. From Dullard Mush:

For all the hype regarding the Expose Harry ads that were coming down the pike, one could be forgiven for thinking the Harry Reid death blow was at hand. After all, this was going to be from the team that helped doom Michael Dukakis in 1988 with the classic "Willie Horton" ad.

But, instead, it looks like something a Jr. High beginning video class would put out ... as a rough cut. For chrissakes, it plays like a low-budget union ad against MGM Mirage, not some great indictment of Reid.

It fails on virtually every level. Where was the deep and concerned narrator's voice, the ominous background music, the financial ties to Reid (like, oh, how much money he's received from MGM Mirage) and what's with the monstrous fonts at the end? It looks and sounds like something Todd Taxpayer whipped up for a buck and change over his lunch break.

Now how can I argue with this? I can't... And why should I? It's the Rethuglicans embarrassing themselves BIG TIME!

Richard Abowitz, who usually doesn't focus on politics at Gold Plated Door, made an exception today in his critique of the ad:

Wow, this is a stupid advertisement. I don’t often have opinions on political matters. But you can really tell that this was created by people outside Las Vegas and Nevada. I do think it is a scandal that Nevada gaming authorities gave Dubai World a pass on the behavior of a sovereign dictatorship no matter how benign and business-like the veneer. But blaming the Senator from Nevada via attacking his efforts on behalf of MGM-Mirage (the largest private employer in Nevada) is hardly an approach designed to appeal to voters here. And, when done bashing the Senator, the commercial seems to take a gratuitous shot at unions; in Las Vegas that means attacking a great many of the workers in casinos on the Strip. Maybe, nationally this sort of low blow advertisement can make a Senate Majority Leader less popular. But to a Vegas audience this advertisement is incoherent.

Translation moment for locals: when the advertisement calls MGM-Mirage “the slave bosses” –this is not a metaphor. And, how does that relate to Senator Reid? Oh, yes; he supports MGM-Mirage who are “the slave bosses.”

Sure Senators from Nevada are beholden to casino interests. But the sad truth is that you have to be a bit more specific to form that reality into a complaint. All Senators from Nevada support casinos, always, and forever. There will never be a Senator from Nevada who denounces casinos, duh.

Nevada is not used to being this important, politically. We were the place everyone else wanted to dump nuclear waste. Now, with a Senate Majority Leader from this state, that insane idea is dead. And, Nevada instead attracts advertisements seemingly dumped here from out of state.

Oh, yes... This should really win votes! Curry Nevadans' favor by trying to convince us to dump our powerful voice in Nevada, denounce our largest employer and bash them as "slave masters", and bash our friends and family members who work at the casinos as "evil union leaders"?

I wonder what MGM Mirage workers think about this. No wait, actually I don't. I bet they agree with CEO Jim Murren and are glad that CityCenter opened and they have jobs.



Again, this is just trashy... And I'm confident this won't work. In fact, I'm hoping by showing you this video, I will have lit a fire under your ass so that you'll be making sure we continue to have a strong advocate for working Nevadans in Harry Reid.

No New Casinos in Vegas? This Is Nevada's Rude Awakening.

OK, so you've been hearing me talk lately about Las Vegas Sands eyeing Florida for new casino resorts as it expands Sands Behthlehem in Pennsylavania and Wynn Resorts jumps into Pennsylvania with a new Philadelphia casino. And of course, we've been hearing constantly about all of our big casino companies flocking to Macau to cash in on the Asian gambling bonanza...

So why aren't we seeing this here in Las Vegas? That's a good question, and one that today's Sun ponders. Why was Harrah's rushing to buy PHo, but not to build a new casino? Why is Wynn rushing to build the Switch Beach Club at Encore, but not move on what had been its plan to build more hotel towers on what's now the golf course?

So what makes a pool or restaurant worth opening in the midst of a recession but a new Strip resort or hotel expansion a terrible idea? It’s not that casinos, in and of themselves, are the problem. After all, Steve Wynn wants to invest $250 million in a Philadelphia casino under development. And his competitor Las Vegas Sands — which already has a Pennsylvania casino — is lobbying to build a Las Vegas-style resort in Florida. So what makes Las Vegas casino owners swear off new resorts in their hometowns for developments in other parts of the world?

The answer is the Strip’s return on investment, which is, at its most basic, what a project earns divided by its cost. This equation, which drives business decisions in any industry, best explains why developers won’t be building hotels or casino resorts in Las Vegas for years to come.

Revenue generated by major Strip operators fell up to 21 percent last year and earnings fell by up to 37 percent. Returns for new projects — especially Encore, which opened in the midst of the recession and which has a year of operations under its belt — is close to zero.

That’s a dramatic change. In the early 1990s, new projects in Las Vegas generated returns in the 20 percent range, peaking at 29 percent in 1993, according to an analysis by casino consulting firm Union Gaming Group. Returns were sliding in the teens by the year 2000, plummeting to an all-time low of 5 percent in fiscal year 2009.

New properties increased competition in Las Vegas but also helped the market by attracting first-time visitors. That trick has become harder to pull off with the limited number of visitors able to afford the Strip’s increasing number of higher-end hotels. It’s even more difficult to do in a recession.

It's the law of diminishing marginal returns, plain and simple. As the 1990s Strip construction boom came to a close and the 2000s "luxury megaresort craze" began, Las Vegas began to reach the point of saturation with high-end megaresort casinos. The law of diminishing marginal returns began to take hold as the potential for profit decreased as the number of megaresorts vying for tourist dollars continued to increase.

This is why the Las Vegas of 2010 is a whole new ball game. We're no longer that tiny outlaw outpost in The High Mojave, but rather a maturing resort destination that already attracts over 37 million visitors annually. And while there are still some possibilities to expand that tourist pool, we don't have as much growth potential in gaming these days, like we did in 1950 or 1990.

Dr. Dave Schwartz at UNLV's Center for Gaming Research has examined the numbers and does a good job at explaining what's happening. By looking at the 2000-09 casino winnings and adjusting the numbers for inflation, we see that Las Vegas casinos are actually earning less today than they were in 2000. Again, we're dealing with the law od diminishing marginal returns as casinos realize they've "maxed out" earnings potential on The Strip.

Now contrast this to newer markets, like Florida and Pennsylvania domestically and Macau globally. Pennsylvania and Macau are nowhere near full saturation yet, and Florida is a potential gold mine with already desirable tourist destinations that haven't yet been tapped by casinos. Now we can see why all the big casino companies are rushing to build abroad as they only agree to minor spruce-ups at their respective Las Vegas home bases.

So what does this mean? No, it's not the end of the world! Las Vegas will go on, albeit now as a more mature gaming destination rather than some place with unrealistic "limitless" growth potential.

And yes, this also means something that I've been hammering here for some time: We MUST diversify our economy in Southern Nevada! This recession should be our "reality check" that gaming is not the "free ride" we thought it was. We talk a whole lot about economic diversification, but we never seem to get around to doing something about it.

This needs to change. Oh yes, and guess what attracts other industries the most?

Although recent economic studies show taxes are a rising concern for business, they generally remain low on the list of priorities of a company considering relocation.

More important is the availability of skilled, educated labor, says Robert Tannenwald, economist at the Boston Fed and director of the New England Public Policy Center.

And it’s usually found in communities with quality education, including research universities.

That’s why Colorado, with a first-class research university system, has emerged as a hub for the aerospace, biosciences and renewable energy industries.

Yep, yep, yep. It's all about education. Too bad for us that we're near dead last in education funding.

Now this all goes back to what I've been saying here for months. We get what we pay for. If we don't invest in needed infrastructure like better schools, we'll continue to suffer.

Again, gaming is NOT a "free ride". We can't count on just gaming any more to save our sorry asses. We need to get serious, fix our PreK-12 school system, make our university system truly world-class (a la Colorado), and offer the kind of top-notch workforce that will mean a better and more stable future in Nevada.

So when will we stop betting the farm in the casino and start planting the seeds for that better future?

Memo to GOP: Don't You Know What the Definition of "Stimulus" Is?

Ah... Another week, another day, another chance for the GOoPers to bash the federal stimulus. Yes, that's right, they still don't like economic recovery. So what would happen if Johnny Casino, Suzy Lowdown, and Lil' Tark Shark were to get their way and Nevada were forced to let go of unspent stimulus funds?

It's not a pretty picture, to say the least.

Were that to happen, Dennis Freimann has perhaps the best vantage point on the potential effect. The No. 2 in charge at Nevada’s Recovery Act office, Freimann said if leftovers from the state’s $2.1 billion share of the money were returned, “Then we’re talking about a lot of people losing their jobs.” [...]

The Recovery Act is bringing $2.1 billion to Nevada — $1.2 billion in direct aid to residents, including unemployment benefits, a $250 one-time check to seniors, income tax cuts, COBRA health insurance subsidies and an expansion of Medicaid health insurance for the unemployed.

Another $924 million went to Nevada agencies to pay for teachers’ salaries, highway repairs, housing rehabilitation, forestry improvements and other programs. [...]

The Nevada Recovery Act office tallies 2,500 jobs saved or directly created by the $924 million sent to state agencies.

But economists put the actual number at 20,000 by factoring in the $1.2 billion in direct aid programs and the multiplier effect: If folks keep their jobs and have money to shop, store clerks keep their jobs, too.

“The idea that we’d be returning money we desperately need is ridiculous,” said Democratic Rep. Shelley Berkley, who voted for the bill.

“We’re going to keep every penny that Nevada gets,” Berkley said. “Every senior in Nevada got a $250 check. Every disabled vet — I have 18,000 of them — got a $250 check. We also received a good amount of money for transportation and infrastructure. That’s creating jobs. We are spending that. There are good, important programs being paid for by the stimulus.”

Thank goodness Shelley Berkley, along with Harry Reid and Dina Titus, gets it. We'd be foolish to let go of money that can continue to be used to save jobs, create jobs, provide direct aid to those most in need, and fuel what's looking like a promising start to economic recovery in this country and here in Nevada.

And it's just hilarious to read about all these Republicans supposedly "concerned about fiscal responsibility". Really? So they forgot about what they did when George W. Bush was President? I don't remember them crying "fiscal responsibility" when he started two wars, passed loads of ridiculous tax cuts for the super-rich, and green-lighted tons and tons of the very "pork barrel spending" that Republicans claim the stimulus is (even though it isn't "pork", it's actual help).

And what's their solution now? More tax cuts for the super-rich, of course. Remember how that worked out? Desert Beacon does.

In the wake of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts we got a gross domestic product increasing by 13.9% over 19 quarters, for an average annual rate of 2.8%, well below the 3.4% GDP growth rate of the previous four cycles. The gross domestic income statistics weren't any brighter either: "activity expanded at only a 2.3% rate, more than a full percentage rate slower than the 3.6% GDI rate of past cycles." [EPI] And that job growth? As of 2004 the U.S. had only 1.6% more jobs than at the last business cycle peak 58 months previously. "At this stage of previous cycles jobs had grown by an average of 9.1% and never less than 6.5%. Private sector jobs were only 1% higher than in March 2001, compared to 9.1% in previous cycles, and the lowest previous employment gain was 6.9% in the private sector.

In terms of employment, the case for tax cuts wasn't substantiated: "In making the case for the tax cuts of 2003, the Bush Administration acknowledged that strong job growth should be expected without tax cuts. It projected that 4.1 million jobs would be created between mid-2003 and the end of 2004 without the 2003 tax cuts, and that 5.5 million jobs would be created with the tax cuts. In fact, Congress enacted even deeper tax cuts than those on which the Bush Administration’s estimates were based. Even so, only 2.6 million jobs were created over that 18-month period. Thus, by the Bush Administration’s own analysis, the 2003 tax cuts failed to create more jobs than would have been expected without the tax cuts."

It's not like we weren't warned. In February 2003, 450 top economists, including 10 of the 20 American Nobel prize winning experts warned the Bush Administration that the 2003 tax cuts would have a negative, not positive, effect on the U.S. economy. [Letter] "Regardless of how one views the specifics of the Bush plan, there is wide agreement that its purpose is a permanent change in the tax structure and not the creation of jobs and growth in the near-term. The permanent dividend tax cut, in particular, is not credible as a short-term stimulus. As tax reform, the dividend tax cut is misdirected in that it targets individuals rather than corporations, is overly complex, and could be, but is not, part of a revenue-neutral tax reform effort. Passing these tax cuts will worsen the long-term budget outlook, adding to the nation’s projected chronic deficits. This fiscal deterioration will reduce the capacity of the government to finance Social Security and Medicare benefits as well as investments in schools, health, infrastructure, and basic research. Moreover, the proposed tax cuts will generate further inequalities in after-tax income." They were right.

If, like Senator Ensign, we adopt the notion that tax cuts, and only tax cuts, are the key to expanding our gross domestic product, increasing our own gross domestic income, and creating more employment, then in the face of statistical proof to the contrary the only way forward is more tax cuts.

And if this isn't enough for you, Desert Beacon has even more on Johnny Casino's and the GOP's hypocrisy on "fiscal responsibility". Oh, and by the way, if the stimulus were so evil why are Johnny Casino, Arizona's Johnny Mac, and other GOoPers still lining up for more stimulus funds? Isn't that just more hypocrisy coming from them?

Oh yeah, that's right, we're talking about the Republican Party. They're always pro-hypocrisy, no matter how many of their other positions change daily (and nightly, for that matter).

Scenes from the Henderson St. Patrick's Day Parade!

(Also at Stonewall)

In case you missed yesterday's lovely parade and festival in Downtown Henderson, here are some pics for you to peruse. I was with Congresswoman Dina Titus' famous pickup truck crew, and all of us at "Team Titus" had a great time (and got a great reception from the crowd!) marching down Water Street. Other great progressive Democrats marching were State Senator Joyce Woodhouse, judicial candidates Nancy Allf and Phil Dabney, our brothers and sisters at Transport Workers Local 721 (also showing their support for Dina Titus!), and more.

Democrats were out and proud yesterday in Henderson, and I think we and our supporters in the crowd showed that we'll be working to keep Henderson blue this year... After we finish with all our St. Patty's Day green. ;-)

Casinos: MGM Mirage Reveals "Exit Strategy" Out of Atlantic City

Now that the New Jersey gaming control board has made it clear that MGM Mirage isn't welcome in Atlantic City any more (as long as it wants to do business in Macau) (H/T to Hunter), they've reached a settlement with the state to let go of its 50% stake in Borgata.

The deal was driven by the division's recommendation to the New Jersey Casino Control Commission last year that MGM Mirage's partner in the Chinese gambling district of Macau, Pansy Ho, be found unsuitable because of allegations her father Stanley Ho has had ties to organized crime.

The division recommended that MGM Mirage be directed to disengage from any business association with Pansy Ho. MGM Mirage instead chose to maintain its casino partnership in Macau and at least temporarily exit the New Jersey market.

Las Vegas-based MGM Mirage had previously disclosed settlement talks were under way focusing on placing the company's New Jersey interests into a divestiture trust. Under today's settlement, which is subject to approval of the New Jersey Casino Control Commission:

-- MGM Mirage's interest in the Borgata and the land will be placed into a divestiture trust and the interest is to be sold within 30 months.

-- MGM Mirage will cease doing business as a gaming licensee in New Jersey, but can re-apply for a license there 30 months after the sale

"We have the utmost respect for the DGE but disagree with its assessment of our partner in Macau," Jim Murren, MGM Mirage chairman and chief executive, said in a statement. "Regulators in other jurisdictions in which we operate casinos have thoroughly considered this matter and all of them have either determined that the relationship is appropriate or have decided that further action is not necessary. Since the DGE takes a different view, we believe that the best course of action for our company and its shareholders is to settle this matter and move forward with the compelling growth opportunities we have in Macau."

Well, what else can MGM do? And perhaps in the long run, this will be seen as a smart move. We all know just how lucrative of a gaming market Macau is quickly becoming. And with both Wynn Resorts and Las Vegas Sands now saying they're "primarily Asian companies doing some business in America", how can MGM be blamed for picking Macau over the rather thorny situation in Jersey.

And speaking of Jersey, Atlantic City continues to be in a free fall... Even as we recover here in Las Vegas and other big US gaming destinations are also seeing signs of recovery. But then again, not all of Atlantic City's problems are directly related to the economy. In particular, AC is now facing the harsh reality of increasing competition from Pennsylvania, New York, Connecticut, Delaware, and Maryland as all these states loosen their anti-gambling laws and allow more gaming (with PA, in particular, posing a real threat with new full hotel-casino resorts opening in or near Philadelphia, AC's biggest "feeder market").

So when we look at the full picture, it's easier to see why MGM is ready to leave AC. With increasing gambling options all over the Northeast, it's becoming increasingly difficult to see how AC can remain top dog. And at least now, MGM no longer has to worry about it.

BREAKING: Harry Reid's Wife & Daughter in Car Accident

Oh, no.

Sun columnist Jon Ralston is reporting that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's wife and daughter were hospitalized after a car wreck today in the Washington, D.C., area.

“Today, Senator Reid’s wife, Landra, and daughter, Lana, were involved in an accident in which their vehicle was rear-ended," according to a statement from Reid's office. "They are both being treated at a Washington-area hospital.”

The extent of their injuries wasn't known.

Please keep Senator Reid and his family in your thoughts and prayers. That's what I'll be doing starting now.