North Jersey Casino Expansion Would Reduce Deficit by Only 1.2 Percent, Study Finds

The debate over casinos in North Jersey continues, and the question will be put to voters on Nov. 8. On Wednesday, Rutgers came out with a new study that shows casinos would help the state's economy — but only slightly.

“Outside of reducing the state’s budget deficit by 1.2 percent, a new casino appears to do little else for the state’s economy,” said Michael Lahr, a research professor who led the economic study. “Relatively few new permanent jobs would be created because gaming is the primary focus. (A) casino would not serve as a destination for families, and there would not be a strong need for employment in such ancillary services as hospitality, entertainment and lodging.”

This November 8, New Jersey voters will be asked whether to approve two casinos in north Jersey. Currently, there is a proposal to build a "racino" at the Meadowlands Racetrack and the American Dream complex, next to Giants Stadium, as well as casino in Jersey City. If voters approve the casinos, it would end Atlantic City's 40-year-old monopoly on casino gambling in the state. That's why lawmakers in Atlantic City and South Jersey are desperate to prevent the casino expansion.

If a new casino is built in northern New Jersey, the state might receive enough revenue to reduce its budget deficit “slightly,” according to the Rutgers study. Beyond that, however, no net substantial benefits are likely to be accrued by New Jerseyans; it would simply be a South Jersey-North Jersey job swap.

"A new gaming establishment would clearly increase state tax revenues," Lahr predicted. "But it would also likely harm the state’s existing set of casino resorts in Atlantic City as well as the industries that support tourism there, such as food and drinking places, entertainment venues, hotels and other retail establishments.”

Morguefile image