Comments on: BILL FARISH: WILLIAMS’ CONSTITUTIONAL COP-OUT

By: Bengal Bob

Bengal Bob — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 22:01:37 +0000

#44:

It says the product needs to be improved, not propped up by subsidies.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:53:26 +0000

You know the argument is being lost when people start focusing on the identity of who is saying what rather than on what they’re saying.

By: FunnyCideOver

FunnyCideOver — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:51:13 +0000

When racing can’t stand on its own two feet in Kentucky of all places, what does that say about the product?

This is just a band-aid that will allow the big Lex farm owners to continue on with business as usual, just as they’ve done for decades as they brought racing to this very place.

By: Bengal Bob

Bengal Bob — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:37:28 +0000

To #41:

It’s hard to attract new fans and grow handle when the horse racing industry has given up on its own product.

By: Lesley Campion

Lesley Campion — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:35:45 +0000

I applaud Mr. Farish for his article. I believe it to be fair and without bias. Mainstream your points of arguement and credibilty are immediately slighted by your choice to use a pseudonym, don’t be a “nameless horseman”…. If you have something to say take the options of your convictions and practice “full disclosure”….

By: Peter

Peter — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:57:11 +0000

I think it would be neat if Kentucky tracks, and racing in general, spent less time on looking for free money with slots and instead tried to raise horse race betting handles.

…… Just for a lark.

By: Bengal Bob

Bengal Bob — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:04:46 +0000

If 70% of Kentuckians want VLTs as Mr. Farish suggests, then this constitutional amendment should pass easily.

BTW, while we’re at it, the vote should be for full casino gambling, not just VLTs.

By: Eagle One

Eagle One — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:35:46 +0000

Reading this thread for the first time is fascinating. Notwithstanding, attempts by detractors in some of the 36 comments above, to deflect attention from the central premise advanced by Bill Farish’s thesis (”Williams’ Constitutional Cop-Out”) through a litany of red herrings, superfluous issues and/or disingenuous personal attacks (sticks and stones will break my bones…), they haven’t laid a glove on the central argument advanced in Bill’s opinion piece. The fact is that — as Bill Farish opines — a constitutional approach, which is now being surfaced by rattled Republicans like Damon Thayer to save their political hides, is dead-on-arrival in Frankfort. Until Senate Republican realize that the quarterbacking of Senator Williams is no longer productive and throw him out of their lifeboat, they are doomed to minority status beginning in 2011, if not sooner in the event of a party switch or two either via special election or otherwise.

By: small time owner

small time owner — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:30:12 +0000

Personally detest slots; haven’t played them, don’t want to any time soon, but I don’t understand how this is not win-win for all involved?

1). Racetrack owners (involved in a for profit business) make money. So what? I hope they make it hand over fist and improve their facilities with a portion. It should be a requirement that infrastructure (stable areas for example) be improved with a portion of the revenue received. It’s about time the entity actually putting on the live event reap a greater portion of the benefit instead of the entity taking the wager anyway, but that’s a whole separate issue!

2). KY horsemen win with purses on scale with those offered in slots benefited neighboring jurisdictions. Better purses, better opportunity to earn a living right here in KY without having to move their families around chasing it.

3). KY breeders win with a statebred incentive program improved with the addition of slots revenue. Not just for the thoroughbred industry either as the once thriving, but now dying standardbred industry would also receive a must needed shot in the arm. Less horses/breeders leaving the state to chase slot fueled breeders incentives as well.

4). The Commonwealth of KY wins with the addition of the first dollar in tax revenue it receives from alternative sources of wagering. It’s needed and I haven’t heard of any alternative proposals which can generate it.

Oh wait, just thought of those who lose…. it is all the neighboring states offering casino style gaming around Kentucy’s borders. They would lose now as why would KY residents (at least those wanting to play slots) now need to drive out of state to do so?

By: Picksburg Phil

Picksburg Phil — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:12:46 +0000

Ray said, “That tin foil hat may be getting a little too tight on your head!”

Ouch, Ray. That really hurt.

But, you must admit, when it’s between the Welfare Queens vs. the Degenerate Gamblers, you always come down on the side that butters your bread, the Welfare Queens. You never use your powerful pen to advocate for the Degenerate Gamblers. Try using your influential website to get exchange, or peer-to-peer, betting. Too progressive for Ky? With peer-to-peer exchanges, Keeneland, on Wednesday afternoon, would look like Woodstock. Ok, most betting would be online, but handle would increase dramatically (with a modest rake, anyway)