Connecticut tax cuts are more likely than a third casino

I doubt many people were more enthusiastic for a third tribal casino in Connecticut than I was, once Massachusetts set in motion competition that is going to most certainly suck gambling business out of this state.

And yet I suspect few are as pessimistic at this late hour as I am — as MGM keeps building its new Springfield casino — that Connecticut will get its act together to stop the hemorrhaging of gambling money and jobs across the border next year.

Honestly, the effort to empower the state's two gambling tribes to build some kind of satellite facility close to the northern border with Massachusetts could not have been more bungled in the last few years.

They might as well have put the New Londoners entrusted with developing Fort Trumbull in charge, just to really make sure nothing got done.

Here we are, well into a new legislative session, the third since MGM won its Springfield license in June 2014, and there isn't even a proposed bill that would allow Connecticut's tribes to open the third casino they envision.

On Thursday, the dysfunction of the process will be on full display with a “gambling forum” before the Public Safety and Security Committee.

Expect endless testimony from every entity with an interest in gambling, from the parimutuels to nonfederal tribes who have long lusted after the businesses of the gambling tribes.

Of course all these people who want a new casino on their terms, in their neck of the woods, ignore the status quo, that allowing someone else a gambling license would close the big spigot of gambling money from the Mohegans and Mashantucket Pequots.

For good measure, and to make the idea of a third tribal casino seem ever more daunting, expect to hear from MGM execs, who incredibly play the victim in Connecticut, even as the Vegas juggernaut plans to siphon off much of Connecticut's gambling business.

Indeed, MGM has played this expertly, throwing a wrench into Connecticut plans with lawsuits and more threatened lawsuits, saying choosing the tribes without competition is unfair and unconstitutional.

When John Rowland was governor he managed to offer the Pequots a new casino in Bridgeport, a plan that was finally quashed in the state Senate. But Rowland knew back in 1995 how to avoid the favoritism charge being wielded today by MGM. He opened the bidding to everyone but made the tribe's continuing payments to the state on its slot machines a criteria in choosing a Bridgeport casino operator.

This seems an obvious solution today, since other gambling operators would be unlikely to match the

lost tribal slot payments to compete for a new commercial gaming license. Clearly Massachusetts had limiting criteria in awarding gambling licenses, like the one MGM got for Springfield.

What seems to be missing now in Connecticut are consensus-building decision makers.

Rowland moved heaven and earth to get the Pequots a vote in the General Assembly on their proposed Bridgeport casino.

When his predecessor, Gov. Lowell Weicker, wanted to stop a new commercial casino in the state, he unilaterally and decisively made his slot machine deal with the Pequots, to which the Mohegans were later cut in.

Alas, today the tribes are drifting aimlessly, apparently unable to make a decision about where they even want to build a third casino, with few powerful allies on board in Hartford.

At this point I would be less surprised to see the General Assembly solve the state’s fiscal crisis and cut taxes than approve a third tribal casino.

MGM’s outmaneuvering Connecticut’s tribes, first in snatching a Massachusetts casino license from under their noses, then blocking them from competing on their home turf, will seem very delicious back in Vegas, when MGM Springfield strikes up the band next year and starts waving in its first Connecticut gamblers.