Concerns about proposed expanded gambling amendment

Here are a couple of concerns I have about the proposed constitutional amendment to expand gambling in Kentucky.

• Revenue from expanded gambling is being sold as a solution to state budget shortfalls by the state's leadership. Economists agree that this is not a solution. In essence, claiming that this revenue is a cure for budget woes serves as an excuse to avoid taking a hard look in the mirror and making serious changes in spending policies in Frankfort

• The limit of 7 casinos in the state is odd. If this is the budget cure that the state leadership claims it is, let's have 1,000 casinos! But there is another aspect of the limit that I don't understand. Shouldn't any entrepreneur who wants to invest capital to open a casino be allowed to? What fortunate investors will be allowed to open the 2 "freestanding" casinos outlined in the proposed amendment? A more free-market approach would be preferred if legalized gambling is expanded.

Regardless of where you stand on expanded gambling, I think all Kentuckians can agree that we would like to see some real action taken on solving our financial woes. Revenue is not the problem. Spending is the problem.