Race: Citizen initiative to build a $165 million four-season casino in Oxford County.
TV ad: Two spots touting the proposed casino’s economic and educational benefits.
Length: 30 seconds each.
Sponsor: Maine Taxpayers Taking Charge, a PAC supporting the casino.
Ad 1
Announcer: “Voting yes on Question 1 will bring a four-season resort casino to Oxford County. A study by a University of Maine economics professor shows that Question 1 will create over 2,700 good-paying Maine jobs and generate at least $60 million in revenue without raising taxes. The owners are Maine businesspeople investing private money ($165 million) in one of the largest construction projects Maine (over 800 construction jobs) has seen in years. Take charge and vote yes on 1.”
Image: The ad makes heavy use of an artist’s rendering of the casino. It’s shown as a brick, wood and gabled facility set against a dusky sky. Job-creation claims are accompanied by images of two smiling hotel concierges and a chef. The $60 million revenue claim is shown in advancing type. Construction workers are shown as the announcer claims the project will be one of the largest Maine has seen in years. The ad ends with another shot of the casino rendering as the words, “Take charge now!” flash onto the screen.
Ad 2
Announcer: “A yes vote on Question 1 is good for education. A study by a University of Maine economics professor shows that a four-season resort casino in Oxford County will generate at least $60 million dollars without raising taxes. Over half is mandated for education ($32 million) improving funding for grades K through 12 as well as scholarships for our students attending Maine community colleges and universities. Take charge and vote yes on Question 1.”
Image: The ad uses the casino rendering, followed by images of teachers helping grade-school students. College students stroll beneath trees in autumn colors. The ad ends with the call to action, “Take charge now!”
Purpose: The first ad is to convince voters that an Oxford casino will result in good-paying jobs while bringing millions to state coffers through private investment. The second ad touts a mandate to divert some revenues to state education funding.
Accuracy: Both ads imply their claims are supported by a report by Todd Gabe, an associate professor at the School of Economics at the University of Maine. Neither tells viewers that the study was partially funded by Maine Taxpayers Taking Charge, the PAC supporting the casino and running the TV spots.
The study does not take a stand on the casino, but the ads mine the analysis to make a case to support the casino, omitting some key points. For example, the revenue claim ignores an important question: Will the projected casino revenue be new economic activity or money that would have been spent elsewhere, say, skiing at Sugarloaf or at Bangor’s Hollywood Slots?
The study repeatedly highlights that caveat. The ad, however, presents the revenue projection as definitive.
Additionally, the $60 million revenue claim is confusing. The figure represents annual revenues the state would receive if the study’s revenue projections for the casino are accurate. But the ad doesn’t say that, leaving the viewer to believe the $60 million is total projected revenue. Gabe estimated the casino’s yearly gaming revenue at $126.7 million.
The job-creation claim — 2,700 “good-paying jobs” — is open to interpretation.
Gabe estimated that the casino itself could employ 879 full- and part-time workers. He projected another 800 construction workers, jobs that may be neither new nor permanent. The rest come from a multiplier projecting the casino’s potential effect on nearby businesses.
Gabe’s study averaged salary ranges for casino workers published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor and adjusted them for Maine. The salary ranges vary, from $10 an hour for waitresses, clerks and cooks, to more than $30 an hour for management positions.
The first ad ends by stating the $165 million casino will be funded by Maine businesspeople investing private money “in one of the largest construction projects the state has seen in years.”
That claim’s ambiguity makes it difficult to verify, but appears in the ballpark. The Oxford proposal is about 40 acres of developed area. Other projects, such as the Rollins wind farm in Lincoln (525 acres), are larger but employ fewer workers.
According to the Maine Department of Labor, the Cianbro house manufacturing project employed about 500 workers.
The investor claim appears to be accurate, with Gary and Bob Bahre, owners of New Hampshire International Speedway, and Stephen Barber, CEO of Barber Foods, headlining the list. The PAC’s latest campaign finance reports show most contributions have come from donors with state ties.
The second ad says the casino will be good for education, claiming “over half” of the projected $60 million revenue each year, or $32 million, is mandated for local education funding and scholarships.
The semantics are confusing. More than half of the casino’s revenue will not go to education. By law, 62 percent of the casino’s gaming revenue must go to the state, of which 42 percent of that will go to education. That said, the ad is correct that $32 million a year will go to education, based on the study’s projections.
Our View:
The two ads are based on a study projecting the economic benefits of an Oxford casino. The associate professor who did the analysis is well-known and respected by those on both sides of the issue, so we take the analysis at face value. However, telling viewers half of all revenue will go to education is misleading, as is the ads’ failure to mention that the analysis repeatedly noted that the casino’s projected revenues may be revenues taken from other Maine businesses.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
