Kiner's Korner: Should We or Shouldn't We?

Happy New Year to all my readers. I would like to begin this new year with an idea that will appear every so often in this column. I am calling it "Should We or Shouldn't We?".

Patch will be asking our readers for input on matters that are important to our community and to our state. You, my good friends, do have power; perhaps more than you give yourselves credit for.  

What you say and what you want carries a lot of influence.  Just look at how consumers forced three titans of industry to capitulate. Bank of America was forced to roll back their debit card fees, Verizon was forced to cancel their $2 charge for the privilege of bill paying, and Netflix was forced to reconsider its pricing plans. Your voices are heard. Patch would like to give you a forum so that your voices can be heard here as well.

This week's "Should We or Shouldn't We?" deals with the use of the internet. Two items might very well come up for a vote in the General Assembly this year. One relates to state lottery purchasing and on line gaming - both done on the internet. The other issue concerns voter registration and potentially voting on the internet.

The U.S. Department of Justice's recent decision on internet gambling seems to pave the way for on line gambling throughout our country. When Governor Malloy was asked about this last week, he responded: (credit Brian Lockhart's Blog) “Listen, I’m not a big proponent of gaming. But what’s going to happen based on the change in position by the U.S. Justice Department … is that there’s going to be online gaming in the United States. So it’s not a question of whether it’s going to happen … (And if) all of the online potential within our state goes to companies that are outside our state, then obviously we end up the big loser.” The governor believes that "we should".

When Malloy was asked about the impact on problem gamblers, his response was pretty much to the point:  (again credit Brian Lockhart's Blog) "We do spend about $1.9 million a year (to help problem gamblers),” Malloy told us in Newtown. “If you’re asking me do I think it’s foreseeable in the future we may need to spend more money, I think the answer is in the affirmative. What the right level of money is and what the actual challenges will be remain to be seen. But at $1.9 million, we’re big investors and we’re probably going to have to invest more.”

So let's look at the pros and the cons for just a moment: On a potentially positive note, there would be an increase in revenue to the state.  On the negative side, the social and legal costs are high:  teenage gambling, increased problem gambling, conflict with the tribal casinos with which the state has a pact. "Should we or shouldn't we?"

The other issue involves online voter registration. Secretary of the State Denise Merrill believes that it is time for Connecticut to enter the 21st century. It is the feeling of many that with proper safeguards, online voting would allow more people to exercise their voting rights. Younger people who depend upon the computer for just about everything they do, would be the major beneficiaries of this change. "Should we or shouldn't we?"

"Should we or shouldn't we?" What do you think? If you would like your voice heard, you can either comment on this article or send me an email. I am sure that our elected officials who reside within the Patch.com network, would want to know your thoughts.