While most of the attention this cycle has gone to the high profile top of the ticket races, there are also millions being spent on a ballot initiative that would allow gaming at horse racetracks in Arapahoe, Mesa and Pueblo counties. Tax revenue generated from proceeds would fund K-12 education.
Now, we don’t have a horse in this race (ha!), but we have to ask: what the heck is the deal with the ads coming from the “vote no” side? Their tagline – “A sweetheart deal for Rhode Island, a bad deal for Colorado” – isn’t explained at all. At best, it is hella confusing for the average voter. At worst, people tune it out because it makes no sense. Their ad also takes the scare tactic approach and uses some truly horrendous nails-on-a-chalkboard music to imply that this measure is bad news. Take a look:
But, if we learned anything from the failed Amendment 66 last year, it is that people actually read the ballot language. Despite proponents having spent over $10 million, voters statewide soundly rejected the measure, 66 percent to 34 percent. If the pro-66 folks had been more honest with their message and their advertising, perhaps all that money wouldn’t have been spent in vain.
The proponents of Amendment 68 seem to have actually taken that lesson to heart and are being very upfront in their approach:
Unfortunately, we don’t have any insider knowledge of how the polling looks for Amendment 68, but who has the better ad is no contest.
Voting no. The lies are clouding up my day….so no.
Eric Glenn Geil The lesser of two evils argument…..
Quark Hadren Then how about the pro 68 ads that gloss over creating a monopoly in Denver area, Not paying for needed extra police and roads in Aurora. They had apparently strech the truth in many ads and were force to pull at least on if not two ads. http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_26584940/colorado-legislative-services-report-misused-casino-campaign-ads?source=infinite You have to learn to think and see the consequences of bills instead of depending on 60 second spots. The pro 68 seems to be more manipulative than the no.
Eric Glenn Geil Then that's what the ads should say, right. I just don't think any cause is big enough to justify lying and deception. The current ads are deceptive. If there are real reasons, that is what should be in the ads. I will never appreciate manipulative attempts.
Quark Hadren Learn about market competition. This bill will create and establish only one casino in the Denver area. This is crony capitalism at its worse. Benefiting one company and only one company is Bad Business. What part of this do you not understand. I am sure that you would not stand for only 1 and I repeat only 1 grocery store in Pueblo with all others prevented from opening by law. It does not matter if competition is available in Colorado Springs you would scream bloody murder about being force to shop at the single grocery store in Pueblo. I am not believing everything I am told but understand the principles of competition versus a monopoly. You are the one is blind and will not bother to read the facts. Go join the Dumbocrats who refuse to think.
J M Piller Learn to think.
The whole focus of the ad is that it will benefit an out of state company. Yet the existing casinos are owned by out of state companies. Exactly how is that supposed to convince me that one is bad while the other is okay?
Do some research – don't automatically believe everything you are told.
Quark Hadren no. learn to read.
Do you real expect a monopoly to invest more into the Casino when there is not competition. At least with Blackhawk you have a choice as to where to go. If this passes you will see the most run down casino in about 15 years because there is no reason to spend dollars on upkeep. My complaint is about creating a monopoly in the Denver area and what point of this do you not understand. There is a reason this company is willing to pay a 25 million upfront fee, because they know they will have a monopoly. This is a bad bill plain and simple. You think DMV has bad service, this will rival it since it will also have no competition.
YES , my all friend will vote YES
Okay, so why isn't anyone in Colorado investing in more gambling then? You're going to deprive us of gambling because no one in Colorado has the foresight to invest in it? Most of the casinos in Blackhawk are so run down and dirty I am afraid to sit on the chairs for fear of the diseases I will catch. Maybe if the owners in Blackhawk felt like investing in their own casinos, some people would be more interested in investing time in their casinos. It's like the people who are complaining about the 36 toll road that is owned by an Australian company. If you don't like it then find some people from the US who care enough in it to invest in it. People in this state just complain that people from other states/countries are investing in our state. Then put your money where your mouth is!!
This bill will do nothing to change the race track dynamics. Yes there might be a racetrack built in Pueble or Mesa county but that will only be a front to get a casino in 5 years. In fact it might hurt the actual racetracks since they will be a minor player only kept around to justify the casino but because they are not the bread winner they will be neglected by the owners. I can see Arapaho Casino taking over all the betting for Belmont, Preakness and Kentucky Derby because why go the racetrack for the wagering when you can watch it inside at the casino. So in hopes of helping a single racetrack you will allow it to become a monopoly of Gambling in Denver Metro Area. Not worth it in my opinion.
I am a small thoroughbred breeder in Colorado and raise hay and horses. I would like Coloradoans to help me support Amendment 68 to save Colorado horse racing and provide much needed funding to our schools K-12 for education. Horses contribute greatly to the Colorado economy for the state and help support our Colorado heritage and way of life. The horse racing industry is little about gambling but more about the Horses, Breeders, Farmers,Trainers, Vets, Jockeys, Grooms, Farriers, Tack stores, Feed stores, Racing fans and many other good people involved in horse racing industry. Breeders, Trainers and all people associated with the business truly love our horses and our sport.
I have lived in Colorado my whole life and grew up near the old Centennial Race Track in Littleton Colorado. I saw the race track there when they had crowds of over 100,000. This had a very positive impact on all of Colorado, Littleton, and the economy. It was more fun than a Bronco or Rockies game. I have been breeding and raising Thoroughbreds in Montrose Colorado for over 30 years. Amendment 68 is all about Colorado and investing in our K-12 schools and the economy. The bad publicity that the bill is getting is all about corporate money from big casinos fighting the race track. We can not compete with there million dollar add campaign so we need a grass roots campaign to stay in business and continue this Colorado heritage. This amendment 68 supports our Colorado heritage in agriculture and horse industry and provides much needed money for schools and economy. This bill is a total win/win. Please let everyone know this is a good thing for Colorado.
Sincerely,
Linda L Wood
Menoken Farms Montrose, CO
It's funny you mention Bloomberg because this whole thing is about east coast mafia money running away from failing Atlantic City dives and getting a wedge in Colorado. We have enough gambling here. No more. If they want a new casino let them open one in Rhode Island. At least the casinos in Black Hawk help Gilpin County not the mob.
Quark Hadren Stop trying to insult my Intelligence. This proposition receive over 90% of it's funding from one company. Mile High USA because everyone who actually paid attention to all the ramifications to it understands that it benefits only one company. It does not increase competition but reduces it giving one and only one company and gives it an unfair advantage. Competition means a fair and balance playing feel not one rigged by the laws. That is normal rules of New York City and Washington Politicians. I actually understand the truth a whole lot better then you and understand the actual consequences of this BAD bill. You claim not support the Denver over the greater good but this bill is exactly that. If this bill actually passes then the Blackhawk and Central City casinos will go out of business because the majority of the customers because they now have a local option which would have a monopoly. You never stated how the existing casinos can remain in business with this unfair competitor.
You never discuss or thought about how this propose law does not give a single company unfair advantage. Maybe because no one can sanely argue that fact. True competition allows companies to enter the fray with no one having an inherit advantage. This only allows one company to control the Denver area market. If you want gambling in Denver you should allow all companies to enter not just one. This is the crap that the Big Government proponents that New York City and Washington Politicians pull not the ones who favor free competition.
So in conclusion actually think about the full consequences of the law instead of blindly relaying on pro prop 68 ads because they are the ones trying to tell only a small part of the story. In fact they tried to twist the facts by stating the possibility of casinos in Pueblo and Mesa county when in fact not even the one supposedly allowed by law can be built before 5 years have past.
Here are a couple of articles you should be interested in if you really want to learn the facts:
http://www.durangoherald.com/article/20140812/OPINION01/140819861/Amendment-68-
http://www.9news.com/story/news/politics/truth-tests/2014/09/08/truth-test-rhode-island-meddling-in-colorado/15310757/
and the only two opinions that support it mentions that they prefer to have jobs closer to Denver then currently exists. IE increase Denver's power
http://washparkprophet.blogspot.com/2014/08/vote-yes-on-colorado-ballot-issue-68.html
http://iamcorrect.wordpress.com/2014/09/17/prop-68-gaming-in-aurora-lets-talk-about-it-shall-we/
Eric Glenn Geil "Pull your head from your 5th point of contact" Denver.
"If you really want " urban metropolitan values "move to" New York and live under Bloomberg.
"but don't destroy " the rest of the state just to serve an urban metropolis increasingly populated with east coast transplants.
"The majority of people probably will not drive an hour versus 15 minutes …" (Your words.) "Now for your convenience you are willing to " deny the rest of the state some commerce and tax dollars.
You said "this law will only allow 3 casinos "
I asked "Will allow only 3 casinos? "
You said "No"
"Competition" means 'competing.' If the others will not expand to serve other areas, then they are not 'competing' right?
"…casinos which will be based out of Rhode Island."
So… Based out of Delaware is better? Just a quick web search on only Black Hawk – you can do the others if you are truly interested in the truth. (I'm tired of being lied to like the ad is doing. You can do some work of your own to see if you are calling me naive when it is you who is uninformed – though I suspect you won't do your own fact checking…..)
Ameristar Casino Resort Spa Black Hawk
AMERISTAR CASINOS
On December 20, 2012, Ameristar Casinos, Inc. [which was based out of Las Vegas] entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger with Pinnacle Entertainment, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Pinnacle”), PNK Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of Pinnacle (“HoldCo”), and PNK Development 32, Inc., a Nevada corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of HoldCo (“Merger Sub”), which was amended by a First Amendment to the Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of February 1, 2013 (as so amended, the “Merger Agreement”). Pursuant to the Merger Agreement, Pinnacle will acquire all of the outstanding common shares of Ameristar …
Denver always says what they want it is for 'the greater good.' Of course, those saying it believe Denver is considered 'greater' than the rest of the state.
Eric Glenn Geil "Pull your head from your 5th point of contact" Denver.
"If you really want " urban metropolitan values "move to" New York and live under Bloomberg.
"but don't destroy " the rest of the state just to serve an urban metropolis increasingly populated with east coast transplants.
"The majority of people probably will not drive an hour versus 15 minutes …" (Your words.) "Now for your convenience you are willing to " deny the rest of the state some commerce and tax dollars.
You said "this law will only allow 3 casinos "
I asked "Will allow only 3 casinos? "
You said "No"
"Competition" means 'competing.' If the others will not expand to serve other areas, then they are not 'competing' right?
"…casinos which will be based out of Rhode Island."
So… Based out of Delaware is better? Just a quick web search on only Black Hawk – you can do the others if you are truly interested in the truth. (I'm tired of being lied to like the ad is doing. You can do some work of your own to see if you are calling me naive when it is you who is uninformed – though I suspect you won't do your own fact checking…..)
Ameristar Casino Resort Spa Black Hawk
AMERISTAR CASINOS
On December 20, 2012, Ameristar Casinos, Inc. [which was based out of Las Vegas] entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger with Pinnacle Entertainment, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Pinnacle”), PNK Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of Pinnacle (“HoldCo”), and PNK Development 32, Inc., a Nevada corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of HoldCo (“Merger Sub”), which was amended by a First Amendment to the Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of February 1, 2013 (as so amended, the “Merger Agreement”). Pursuant to the Merger Agreement, Pinnacle will acquire all of the outstanding common shares of Ameristar …
Denver always says what they want it is for 'the greater good.' Of course, those saying it believe Denver is considered 'greater' than the rest of the state.
Quark Hadren OK if it is all about Denver then why support only one Casino there. This is a sweetheart deal for the One company and only one company in Denver. You realize that one of the reason for allowing gaming into Colorado is to keep alive the small towns in the Mountains that were becoming Ghost Towns. Now for your convenience you are willing to throw all those existing jobs and towns under the bus just so you can play cards that much easier. If you really want gambling in Pueblo than allow anyone to open one there instead of just One Company. To me it is about One Company versus Any Company which is by it very definition Crony Capitalism.
I will not make it more convenient to game elsewhere at the cost of permanently establishing a favorite company to run gaming in Colorado. That is not free enterprise but establishing a monopoly under false pretenses.
So in conclusion it is about the greater good and not all about Denver no matter how you try to twist my arguments. So Pull your head from your 5th point of contact and see the overall damage this prop will do to Colorado. IT IS A BAD DEAL FOR COLORADO because it will eventually destroy the existing gaming community and enshrine only 1 company for the Colorado Gaming environment. If you really want gaming whenever move to Vegas, Cripple Creek or Blackhawk but don't destroy Cripple Creek and Blackhawk and the competition of the existing Colorado Gaming industry just to satisfy your desire to save an extra half hour for gaming.experience.
Eric Glenn Geil Because you keep demonstrating what I initially said – It ain't all about Denver. If my 'hidden agenda' is that I don't live in Denver, then you are right. I live in Pueblo. Family and I travel to Cripple Creek and Blackhawk – and Vegas Don't see anybody else jumping on making it more convenient for me or the others that are NOT in Denver.
Your Point 1 – all about Denver.
Your Point 2 – All about Denver.
Your Point 3 – All about Denver (metropolitan area)
See my point?
Quark Hadren So you are trying to nitpick minor details instead of talking about the larger issues.
Point 1 which you seem to agree on is there will be ONE CASINO in the Denver Area which gives it an unfair advantage. This is a Sweetheart Deal or Crony Capitalism at it best.
Point 2: The majority of people going to Black Hawk comes from Denver or do you question that? If you were to take a majority of these people away then you hurt the existing casinos ability to operate by removing their customers.
Point 3: No where in the prop ads did I see anything about people of Aurora actually giving support and approval of the Casino in question. They have approve the racetrack but their approval to turn the racetrack into a casino with all the trappings of a Las Vegas style casino (Card Games, slot machines) just on a smaller scale is not required.
All in all, the proponents of 68 have only focus in on funding for schools without discussing any of the other issues hoping to pull the wool over the eyes of the voters.
So my question to you is why you insist on trying to pick apart my argument on little details that don't matter in the overall argument instead of actually discussing the real issues. I think it is because you have some hidden agenda in getting this passed. I definitely object to giving one company advantages over all others which is what Prop 68 would do.
Eric Glenn Geil An hour vs 15 minutes…… IF you are in Denver……
Quark Hadren No but that is likely to be the effect. Those casino's relay on people driving out of the Denver and Colorado Springs area to visit them. The majority of people probably will not drive an hour versus 15 minutes to visit those 3 casinos. Please open your eyes and actually think for yourself. The no on 68 is actually being more honest. Why allow only 1 casino in the Denver Area and not allow 5 or 10. This is attempt to favor one company over the existing casino's. The reason the towns mention had approve the gambling in the first place was to save the local economies. You are being as bad as the typical liberal who refuses to see the broader implications because you think there are no side effects to the laws. So again please open your eyes and see the bigger picture instead of focusing on what prop 68 is trying to sell you.
Eric Glenn Geil "Not only do the current gaming dollars help those small communities but also there is no limit to how many casinos can operate there but this law will only allow 3 casinos which will be based out of Rhode Island…"
Will allow only 3 casinos? Are you saying the existing casinos in BlackHawk, Central City, and Cripple Creek will be forced to close?
I personally will vote no because the original intent of the Casino Gambling in Colorado was to help the Mountain towns that were dying. (BlackHawk, Central City, and Cripple Creek. Not only do the current gaming dollars help those small communities but also there is no limit to how many casinos can operate there but this law will only allow 3 casinos which will be based out of Rhode Island and permanently ensure their advantage to just them. That is the sweetheart deal for RI which you forget. This is Crony Capitalism at it's finest and they are definitely trying to pull a fast one. This is a bad deal for Colorado and I personally will vote no and encourage everyone else to also vote no.
Yea. I've seen these ads and seen through them. Really backwards thinking. Because the casino owners will benefit we should forgo the tax income here ….. Huh?
Right now, these tracks are producing minimal tax dollars – they are rinky-dink operations. With the investment coming in to turn them into real profit centers (money invested from out of state, I might add), we can see much more tax income. How is more tax revenue a 'bad deal' for Colorado? Bogus. illogical. Selfish.
I also think I've figured out 'why' the opponents don't want it. Notice in the opposing ad it fails to mention Mesa and Pueblo? Just Aurora? Well, I think I see what is happening. It is, once again, big city, urban Denver (big in population, relative small area of the State) trying to make the rest of Colorado comply with their urban ideas – and sacrifice for it too. They assume, as Bloomberg has openly said, that the rest of us are just country bumpkins who will believe anything we are told to believe – insulting.
That alone was enough to convince me to vote 'for.' If you can't be honest, don't insult me by assuming I am too stupid and blind to see your lies.
But I also know Pueblo and Mesa can use the commerce and tax dollars from out-of-the-area money. A huge boon for the smaller 'rural' areas even if metropolitan Denver doesn't want it. I can see no reason why everyone outside the Denver area must live under Denver's wants and desires.
They don't WANT it, but we NEED it.