One-time ‘South Works’ steel mill could remain a ridiculously-large lot

The one-time site of the U.S. Steel plant on the South Side, known as South Works, has sat vacant for decades, and there have been so many bits of speculation that have been made about what could be done with the site.

The old 'South Works' plant

Because as a spot right on Lake Michigan stretching from 79^th to 91^st streets, some make note of the fact it is larger than downtown Chicago.

THERE’S DEFINITELY ENOUGH room to build something of significance. Which may well be why Mayor Lori Lightfoot included the site amongst the five spots in various parts of Chicago that are under consideration for the casino officials want to build so as to help jolt the city’s economy further.

Which might make sense, except for the fact that throughout the years since U.S. Steel gave up on the idea of making steel at the plant there have been so many suggestions for what ought to be done.

A factory for Solo Cup. Development of an entirely new upscale neighborhood in between South Chicago and South Shore. Building a housing development that would incorporate unique building techniques so as to create more affordable housing.

And now, slot machines and roulette wheels galore. People could literally come to the shores of Lake Michigan and lose their shirts big time on the site where the steel that was used to build this country was actually produced.

THEN AGAIN, MAYBE this is just another idea destined to become a mere fantasy. It could be that a decade from now, the land along the lakefront in the 8000s could still sit vacant – with only that giant concrete barricade standing.

Tearing down that wall would be tough

A remnant of the old steel mill that remains only because trying to tear it down would be ridiculously costly. Not at all practical.

Better to build whatever you want to do around it and leave the barricade in place as some sort of historic remnant to the kind of people who think certain things ought never to change.

Now personally, I have always taken an interest in the site largely out of a sense of family interest. My own parents were born and raised around the South Chicago neighborhood and both my grandfathers were workers in the steel mills.

WITH ONE GRANDFATHER literally working at South Works because his neighborhood home was within walking distance of the old steel mill. My father can tell tales of the past when the steel mill was thriving, and all the grime and pollution it caused were tolerated because the filth was perceived as evidence that people were working.

What will someday fill this space?

Jobs were available. Times were good!

Now as I understand it, much of the difficulty in actually turning this site into something of future use is because of all the environmental contamination the site endured from the steel mill presence.

Anybody who tries to build something of use there is going to get stuck with the cost of environmental cleanup. And it ain’t a gonna’ be cheap to do – to put it mildly.

WHICH COULD BE why that site winds up not being taken too seriously by those people who want to see the big bucks generated by gambling – which they’ll insist on calling “gaming” because they think it has a less-sordid ring to it.

And they’ll go about lambasting anyone who insists on including the “b” even though I’d argue it’s merely being honest about what exactly casinos bring to a community.

So I don’t doubt Chicago city officials eventually will get around to locating a casino somewhere. They’re not going to let other communities have their gambling without getting their share – even though I’m inclined to think that we’re reaching the point of having too many casinos and that they’ll all manage to cannibalize each other.

But it could well be that the filth and grime that my grandfather would have viewed as evidence of ‘progress’ is really the factor that keeps the site from ever becoming a significant boost to the neighborhood, and to Chicago as a whole.

  -30-

Where, oh where, will casinos go?

It seems we’re destined to get several more gambling casinos erected in both Chicago and the nearby suburbs.

Will this become political battleground in war of casinos?

We’ll be able to take our pick of just where we want to go on the occasion we feel the need to throw some money away on the off-chance we can hit a big jackpot and become instantly wealthy.

BUT THERE’S ONE factor that has been popping up in my brain – the way in which the siting of a city-based casino will also impact the way the so-called south suburban casino will be located.

There are several municipalities scattered throughout southern Cook County, all of which are insistent that they’re the only local place to erect one of those tacky, flashy, gaudy structures that promise instant wealth (and downplay the chances you’ll walk out of there flat-broke, instead).

It seems there is one line of thought that a south suburban casino ought to be placed in a community fairly close to the Illinois/Indiana border. Almost as though its existence would stand in the way of people who otherwise would try to fulfill their gambling “jones” by venturing to those casinos in Indiana (Hammond, East Chicago and Gary, to be specific).

Why cross over State Line Road to the land of Hoosiers if you can gamble closer to home?

SO IF THE notion of a casino being located near the Lincoln Highway right by Interstate 394 (just barely in suburban Ford Heights) becomes reality, does that impact the idea of a city-based casino by making it more likely that such a facility would be located in the heart of downtown – to take advantage of the nearby presence of out-of-town tourists?

Or does the concept of putting a city-based gambling complex down around the 10^th Ward (as far southeast as one can go and still be in Chicago proper) become the big boost to the people who think a suburban casino ought to be at a site on Interstate 80 at Halsted Street?

I should make one confession. I have a step-mother who enjoys the environs of a casino (playing the slot machines is her big kick), and that latter location would put a casino about a five-minute drive away from her home.

It intrigues me the way these varying proposals for more gambling are going to impact each other – even though the political people tend to act as though the city-based and suburban-based casinos will exist in differing worlds.

ALMOST AS THOUGH they’re Las Vegas and Atlantic City.

Rather than the idea of an East Side neighborhood in Chicago casino being only about a 15-minute drive down the Bishop Ford Freeway to the would-be Ford Heights site.

Which may also suffer from the general reputation that suburb suffers in the public eye. I already can envision the notion that many people will have in thinking a Ford Heights site is too decrepit to want to go to.

Or it could also turn out to be like when Ford Motor Co. decided to build an auto plant in that area, and actually picked a site right on the municipality’s border. What was then East Chicago Heights, Ill., went so far as to rename their town to try to make Ford Motor think they were special.

ONLY TO HAVE the company choose to annex into Chicago Heights proper. Would a casino feel the need to claim they’re in another town (Sauk Village or Lynwood?) to escape the perceived stigma?

For all those people who already are calculating how much of a cut their municipality will receive in tax revenues from a proposed casino, we ought to consider that just because the Illinois General Assembly has given authority to allowing a few more casinos does not mean anybody’s ready to open for business anytime soon.

If anything, the real political infighting will now begin – with village vs. village being pitted against each other to argue the merits of who’s most worthy of having a casino with over-priced buffet where one can gorge themselves in between black jack hands operating within their boundaries.

Because let’s not forget – the operating premises of many casinos is that they want to keep customers inside at all times. They certainly don’t want them spending money at any surrounding businesses in the community – spending that would generate true economic development.

  -30-

Who benefits from casino locations?

Chicago is finally going to be able to have a casino operating within the city limits, yet that doesn’t mean the politically partisan infighting is anywhere near to being complete.

Where, oh where, in Chicago will this become a reality?

Because Chicago is a big city. Now we get to fight about just where it ought to be located.

JUST ABOUT EVERYBODY is prepared to make an argument about how their neighborhood is the choice location that ought to provide Chicago with the potential economic benefits that a casino can create.

Of course, those arguments are going to be countered with quarrels about how putting a casino in somebody else’s neighborhood is a sure-fire way to ensure that a casino would fail to produce any benefits.

After all, nobody wants to go there!

We’re going to be hearing a lot of these arguments in coming months. Because while people will talk about city-wide benefits from gambling and a casino, they’re going to want to have the perks coming from their own neighborhood. Chicagoans aren’t really united enough to work together for our collective betterment.

WE’D JUST AS soon see each other get screwed over, if it means we can be the ones who come out on top.

That’s why I wonder if the debate over locating a casino will be as long and drawn-out as the fight has been over whether to let Chicago have a casino at all.

There are those who always argued the whole point of casinos was to provide economic benefits to isolated communities that can’t attract any other kind of economic development projects.

They’re the ones who took their opposition to a Chicago casino all the way down to last week’s Legislative vote that permitted the city to have gambling somewhere within their limits.

IT’S INTERESTING TO see Gov. J.B. Pritzker argue against putting a casino anywhere near downtown or the McCormick Place convention center. He said this week he wants a Chicago casino put out in one of the isolated neighborhoods that otherwise wouldn’t have any kind of attraction to draw people within their boundaries.

In short, he’s following the line of logic that Illinois originally had back when it placed casinos in places like East St. Louis or Metropolis.

Although there are other people who think that placing a casino downtown or near the convention centers is the way to ensure that large numbers of Chicago tourists have easy access to the place. Why place a casino at an isolated location where it would be difficult for anybody except for those who already live nearby to attend?

It’s the argument I’ve heard about developing a casino at a South Side location, particularly if we’re talking about the far Southeast Side 10^th Ward.

WHO’D MAKE THE trip to the East Side neighborhood if they weren’t already there. Although there are others who argue that the neighborhood’s proximity to the Illinois-Indiana border and the casinos that have cropped up in Hammond, East Chicago and Gary, Ind., would mean we’d be able to steal away business from Indiana.

In short, get people to quit venturing across the state line when they feel the urge to gamble. Stay in Illinois, and keep your losses here.

Of course, consider that other casinos would be permitted in the nearby south suburbs, Waukegan, Rockford, Danville and Williamson County in Southern Illinois. We’re bound to wind up putting casinos just about everywhere – making it all to easy for people to blow their money on games of chance.

Which could result in the notion of true economic development coming about from drawing real businesses to one’s community – instead of a chance at a job parking cars at the casino or keeping the casino’s buffet well-stocked. Because those are the kind of jobs most likely to be made available from a casino construction somewhere.

  -30-

Friday could be historic deadline for Lege – or then again, maybe not

Friday will be an intriguing day for those of us following the General Assembly, which ought to be all of us living across Illinois.

PRITZKER: Will he have anything to sign into law?

There’s a good chance that Illinois will move extremely close to enacting new laws doing away with the notion that people using marijuana ought to be regarded as criminals, degenerates and an all-around scourge on our society.

WE MAY ALSO get changes in the law meant to allow for people to legally gamble on sports events other than horse racing.

This on top of the notion of implementing a graduated income tax over the current flat-tax system – a move that would require an amendment to the Illinois Constitution to be enacted. Which the Illinois House of Representatives gave its approval to Monday afternoon.

It’s possible that the General Assembly will finish up the spring 2019 legislative session by approving a constitutional amendment that could be put up for a vote in 2020. In addition to the gambling and marijuana measures.

This spring – whose session comes to an end Friday – could turn out to be one of the most significant legislative sessions of all time.

OR MAYBE NOT!

Because there’s always the chance that our state Legislature could turn out to be cowardly, spineless and all-around gutless.

There’s the chance that legislators may decide that marijuana and gambling are just too big a step for them to want to take. They may well decide to wait for another time before taking on these issues.

This may be a big week in Springfield, … 

Think I’m kidding? Just realize how many decades the issue of building a new Chicago-area airport near Peotone has been contemplated by the Illinois Legislature.

THE BOTTOM LINE is that I honestly don’t know what to expect from our state’s Legislature this year, or any time for the next few years.

Theoretically, Gov. J.B. Pritzker has the potential to run roughshod over his political opposition. He has, in theory, Democratic majorities in both the Illinois House and state Senate so large that they would overrule the Republican caucuses that would be inclined to oppose him.

But it’s also possibly that our legislators have the backbone of the cowardly lion. They may not want to have history record that they legitimized marijuana or made it legal to place a bet on a ballgame (provided that the ballclubs get a share of the gambling proceeds).

Or if they do, they’d rather have the final vote turn out to have Republican support along with Democrats. So that neither side can take total blame for the issue for those people eager to impose their sets of morals on everybody else.

THEY MAY THINK that taking on all these issues could be too much to take on at one time. Or maybe they just don’t have enough ambition to want to do significant things – fearing that too much change will be held against them.

All these things that the Illinois General Assembly spent the spring contemplating? It makes me think our legislators have the ambition level of way too many people (and myself, sometimes, to be totally honest) that I knew in college.

We did enough to make sure we’d get passing grades, and wound up waiting until the last minute before going on a work binge to ensure all our papers were written for our course loads.

… but activity returns next wk. to Thompson Center

Which is why the General Assembly likely will work its way to a hectic pace at week’s end – and may well have a final day of legislative action that pushes dangerously close to a midnight deadline.

BUT WHO’S KIDDING whom?

It’s the equivalent of collegiate “cramming.” Whether anything of significance will change in Illinois? It could turn out that, years from now, we’ll wonder how we could ever have thought the Legislature would accomplish anything this spring!

  -30-

Where should Chicago casino be?

Soon-to-be-former Mayor Rahm Emanuel let it be known just where he’d like to see Chicago develop a casino as part of a plan to let the city raise tax monies to pay off pension-related debts.

Envision a casino in the shadow of the port district near Lake Calumet

Not that it’s a shoo-in that a casino will be built any time soon. The city, after all, has been talking for decades about plans to have casino gambling within the municipal limits – without a thing becoming of such talks.

BUT EMANUEL IS talking about a casino down near Lake Calumet on a site by the Illinois International Port, which is the border between the 9^th and 10^th wards – which also are the far southeastern corner of Chicago AND adjacent to the Illinois/Indiana border.

What it is not is a location up at the exact opposite far northwestern corner of Chicago which would be adjacent to O’Hare International Airport, or somewhere near downtown Chicago (perhaps near Navy Pier).

Either of those sites would clearly be meant to entice tourists coming to Chicago to blow a significant amount of their money at our gambling casinos and (in the process) help Chicago pay off some serious bills it has developed.

I can already hear people inclined to want to trash Emanuel in his final months as mayor for picking the “wrong” site for a casino. They’re probably going to dredge up the same tired old rhetoric that they’ve used for ages against the part of Chicago that I actually was born in – and where I have cousins who are life-long residents of.

BUT LISTENING TO Emanuel’s rhetoric, it would appear he realizes one fact that is all-too-true. There are Chicagoans who like to gamble who enjoy the fact they have casinos not that far from where they live.

As Emanuel pointed out, the casinos of Northwest Indiana (particularly the Horseshoe Casino of Hammond that is less than one mile from the Chicago city limits) take in about $40 million per month in gross revenues from people who cross over the state line from Illinois – mostly from Chicago.

Which means Emanuel’s motivation is that he wants to keep people IN Illinois and within the city limits when they choose to throw their money away into slot machines or playing other games of chance.

I’m sure this will offend the Indiana Legislature-types who seem determined to want to bolster their economies off the proximity of part of their state to Chicago. But I can’t say that fact would bother me in the least, since those parts of Indiana with proximity to Chicago usually are amongst the most civilized and livable parts of the Hoosier state.

YES, I KNOW full-well how many people make the cross-over to Indiana for the cheap thrills they can derive from gambling, whereas a full-fledged trip to Las Vegas can be ever-so-costly.

I myself have been to those casinos on occasion, and it never fails to amaze me the amount of Illinois license plates on cars bringing people in to those casinos. I don’t doubt in the least that many of those people would stay closer to home, if only such a gambling facility existed.

As for those people who can’t envision something of the pseudo-luxury level of a casino being built in that part of the city, I suspect they’ve never seen the Harbourside International Golf Center.

It’s a one-time landfill that was converted to a golf course in the mid-1990s, and Emanuel points out there is open land upon which a casino and hotel could be built. It would force people to give up their image of the Southeast Side as a land of slag piles and sludge – which is something that would be beneficial to the city as a while.

SO I WILL be intrigued to see just how successful Emanuel is in his final effort to try to gain something on behalf of Chicago. Although I’m also realistic enough to know what a long-shot the concept is.

There are those who will see this being put at the city’s far Southeast corner and will figure it won’t benefit their home areas in the least.

Particularly those places where horseracing is predominant when it comes to local gambling opportunities. Because all-too-often, casino bills get dragged down because the racetracks want to be offered something to compensate them for the fact that many people will prefer the idea of throwing their money into a slot machine – rather than sticking it under a window to place a bet on the ponies.

For despite all the rhetoric we’ll hear about the glories of horseracing being the “Sport of Kings,” the fact is that most people who go to either racetracks or casinos really have only one goal in mind – a dream of a jackpot big enough that they don’t ever have to work again for a living!

  -30-

Serves Trump-types right if gamble on sports bets cost them immigration

I’ve finally found a reason to think the notion of sports betting isn’t a completely ridiculous idea.

If sports betting winds up offering legal protections ...

For it seems some people, possibly even President Donald Trump himself, now think that the Supreme Court ruling this week giving states the right to decide for themselves of sports betting ought to be legal will actually undermine the legal argument federal officials in this Age of Trump have been making against individual states or communities declaring themselves to be “sanctuaries” that will not assist federal immigration officials in their work.

NONE OTHER THAN the deadly-dull and straight-forward Associated Press reported on this concept, finding that many legal advocates are saying there’s a direct link between the two issues and that Trump can’t very well claim to be able to force local law enforcement to cooperate with immigration if the feds can’t force states to outlaw gambling in the form of sports bets.

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the court opinion that now gives states the right to decide how to regulate gambling within their boundaries, wrote, “it unequivocally dictates what a state legislature may and may not do. It’s as if federal officers were installed in state legislative chambers and were armed with the authority to stop legislators from voting on any offending proposals.”

Now I’m not about to claim this is a sure-fire victory for people with an interest in our national immigration policies who’d like to see something other than the bureaucratic mess that currently exists.

But it does sound like somewhere in the legal mindset is the concept that there are limits to law enforcement-types and that we ought not to be thinking of the various jurisdictions as one massive group that is required to think alike.

... to these activists, ...

FOR THE BASIC concept of the “sanctuary city” or the “welcoming city” or many other concepts meant to reassure all people that they’re not going to be harassed by police regardless of their immigration status is this.

It is NOT (even though many conservative ideologues try to falsely claim otherwise) that people within such communities are protected from immigration officials and can hide there.

It merely means that Immigration and Customs Enforcement ought to be required to do their own work. Send their own agents into those communities to do whatever investigation they wish and handle whatever prosecution they deem necessary.

The idea of someone being caught by a local cop in a traffic stop and having to worry that this bit of official attention will draw the attention of ICE is what is improper – if not downright absurd.

SO JUST AS the court now says states have a right to determine whether they want to permit gambling to take place out in the open within their boundaries, some are going to argue that it is now up to local officials to determine how much cooperation they ought to give with relation to immigration – which, if you think about it, is an issue so far beyond most of their comprehensions.

It only makes sense to leave immigration law enforcement to the experts and not think the local beat cop is there to “find foreigners” and have them deported from this country. Because I know full well that the local officials often complain whenever they think some higher-ranking authority is violating their concept of proper jurisdiction and overstep their bounds on some local issue. Only the ideologues can't see this, and it amounts to nothing more than selective vision when it comes to the law and its enforcement.

... will the president be the ultimate loser?

Some people may want to think this line of logic between the two issues is a stretch. There can’t possibly be a connection between placing a football bet and having a non-citizen removed from the United States.

Although considering that the appeals courts have thus far upheld the rulings of federal judges that have held back the Trump administration from withholding federal funds to communities that express sympathy for the immigrant lot in life, I’d have to wonder if placing a bet on this legal connection would be a safer one than betting on a Chicago Bears game – since you just know the moment you put money on it, the Bears will find a way to blow it for you.

  -30-

Perhaps a blackjack dealer is the key to resolving our governmental finances

It never fails to amaze (or amuse) me the degree to which our government officials think that gambling is the key to resolving its financial woes.

Should Illinois govt become a bookie?

Do our officials secretly fantasize about being blackjack dealers, thinking they’re capable of bringing in the big bucks that way to come up with the cash to pay our government’s bills.

THE FACT THAT some people wind up digging themselves into deeper holes through their gambling losses – which potentially causes more problems that government agencies could wind up having to deal with – doesn’t seem to factor into their line of thought.

It just seems like the lights and the jingles and the overall garishness of a casino environment is too enticing for political people to turn away from.

Not that I’m overly moralistic. If people want to piss away their money with games of chance, I suppose that’s their right. I’m just not enthused at the thought of having to cover their losses in life.

And yes, our society is only as strong as its weakest individuals. Meaning we can’t just take a hard line and say to let the losers suffer.

HARRIS: Thinks the answer is 'yes'

GAMBLING WAS UP for discussion in recent days. What with the Illinois Senate’s gaming committee (‘gaming’ is for people who want to think of fun, while ‘gambling’ allegedly is for fuddy-duddys who worry too much about the downside of life) meeting Tuesday at the Bilandic Building to talk about ideas from state Sen. Napoleon Harris, D-Harvey.

He wants Illinois to pass legislation that would permit sports betting in Illinois and would create an Internet platform by which Illinois residents could place bets.

Basically, cutting out the bookie and allowing one to place their bets with the state. No word on how Illinois would handle its collections from big-time losers.

How much money could Chicago win off Loyola loss

But just think of how many people would have been eager to place bets last Saturday either for, or against, Loyola University as they went into their semi-final NCAA matchup against Michigan.

HOW MUCH REVENUE could Illinois have taken in by people eager to place a bet on the Ramblers? How much could the Loyola loss have benefitted Illinois? How much does Illinois want to benefit from its residents (a.k.a., suckers) who bet with their hearts and not with their heads?

McCarthy betting his mayoral bid ...

Of course, there are federal laws that already restrict gambling on sports events. Harris’ measure would only be crafted into an actual bill if those laws are repealed – which some seem to think has a real chance of happening.

One realizes that this is Illinois’ vision of trying to raise revenue through peoples’ gambling losses. Which means that Chicago municipal government also has its own schemes in the works.

Take Garry McCarthy, the former Chicago Police superintendent who now is running for mayor in the 2019 election cycle. He’s making one of his campaign talking points the need for the city to have a full-blown casino.

... on enhancing O'Hare environment ...

WHICH ISN’T NEW. Rahm Emanuel has pushed for that, along with Richard M. Daley before him. But while they often talked about a casino near the downtown area, McCarthy would want it to be on the premises of O’Hare International Airport. He envisions all those travelers making stopovers in Chicago spending the time they have to kill at the casino. Their financial losses while in Chicago could benefit the city.

McCarthy even talks, at least during a Sunday morning radio interview on WBBM-AM, about all the layers of airport security as being a plus. It means anybody wishing to gambling will have had to clear security. Less chance of riff-raff managing to slip in and hang around there.

... with a gambling atmosphere

Although it makes me remember a time I was in a restaurant that had slot machines, and the owner advised me I could win enough money to pay for my meal IF I played the slots while waiting for my food.

Would we wind up getting people traveling from one place to another who pass through Chicago blowing their bucks in the Second City? Thereby depriving some other destination place from benefitting from the intended spending?

 -30-

No more Mega-Millions!?! @$$#%!

We’re coming up on the two-full-year mark of not having a budget proposal for Illinois state government, yet about the most outraged the public has become was that point in time in October of ’15 when state officials said the financial problems would cause payments to be delayed to Illinois Lottery game winners.
 

Soon to be no more?

The people who lamely played their numbers (or let the ‘quick pick’ option do it for them) learned that their “jackpot” wasn’t going to come anytime in the near future. They’d have to get in line and wait like everybody else who does business with the state.

THAT, I RECALL, ticked people off enough to file lawsuits demanding immediate payment of their newly-found fortunes. They weren’t going to wait one minute for the prize money they thought they were entitled to.

In short, it was this relatively trivial aspect of state government finances that caught the attention of the public and probably was the first bit of attention many people paid to the fact that we have our government in operating mode without any specific plan for how it is spending money.

The lottery can do that for you; it will capture the attention of the public, particularly those with no work ambition who seriously are banking their future on the off-chance of a game-winning prize.

Perhaps those kind of people who watch re-runs of the old “Roseanne” show and think that program’s final season (in which she wins $108 million in the Illinois Lottery and goes through many life-changing experiences) is their fantasy come true!

WHICH IS WHY it was significant last week when reports indicated the state’s financial problems are again impacting the lottery.

It’s the Mega-Millions and Powerball games – those multi-state initiatives that the Illinois Lottery cooperates with that, because so many people get involved, have the potential to create such large prizes so quickly.

They’re popular for those people who really want to dream about what they’d do with a couple hundred million dollars, but wouldn’t have a clue how to earn money legitimately.

It seems the inability of the state to promptly pay its bills is causing bureaucratic complications that will mean Illinois will no longer participate in those particular games. The Illinois Lottery will go back to just its standard weekly draws and its instant scratch-off games.

AFTER WINNING ALL those millions, how are we going to get people to want to play when the potential prize is an instant game $5?

It’s literally like that old World War I-era jingle, “How Ya Gonna Keep ‘Em Down on the Farm? After They’ve Seen Paree?” Or maybe we’ll be asked to believe that these new lottery prizes are something special – like Paris, Ill., the Edgar County town of some 6,100 people.

It was interesting to see the Capitol Fax newsletter out of Springfield the other day – as it published tidbits hinting it might actually be the state pulling out of the lottery games, rather than the state being dumped.

Although as WBBM-TV reported recently, the two games do kick back to the state a share of the proceeds from tickets sold here – totaling some $122 million. Not a petty sum.

BUT ALSO NOT something that helps the state much since, without a formal budget in place, we can’t spend the money on anything – except for those state programs that have federal court orders insisting they operate regardless of the state’s ineptitude.

I can’t help but wonder how the outrage will be expressed. Will we literally get people picketing for their right to play Powerball? Will the Mega Millions be the issue that causes the public to put pressure on the politicos to get off their derrieres and act?

 

Enough to make some of us honorary Hoosiers?

Will we experience a continued sense of apathy? Or will we see the rush of people across the state line to Indiana, seeking out every convenience store, gas station and cheap smokes shop with a “Hoosier Lottery” sign so they can buy their Powerball tickets there?

Will lottery tickets become like gasoline; something that people who live near the border make a special trip across State Line Road to purchase because the local option is just so ridiculous by comparison?

  -30-

Powerball prize just a myth? At least it seems like a great big one to me!

As I write this, I’m preparing to pick up my parents from the airport (Midway) as they return from a weekend trip to the casinos of Las Vegas, Nev.

My loser ticket. I don't feel need for another

At that time, I’ll be able to tell them they lost again – at Powerball. Although I’m sure they already realize they’re not big winners, they didn’t win that drawing last week.

THE ONE THAT could have paid out about $800 million!

Which results in the prize rolling over, and some estimates saying it could be a $1.4 billion prize to a single winner when the next drawing is held.

Now my interest in this is literally that I’m holding a Powerball ticket from the Saturday drawing that nobody won. In my case, I bought five chances (a $10 bet) and only came up with one matching number.

I bought the ticket for my father, who literally called me from Las Vegas on Saturday to ask me to make the purchase.

MAYBE HE THOUGHT he’d have something big to come home to if his losing streak in Nevada continued throughout the weekend. It seems I placed a crummy bet.

Which is why I have to admit all the enthusiasm and ecstasy that some people feel about gambling is totally lost on me. I don’t get why people are so eager to dump a few bucks of their hard-earned money on tickets.

As I see it, the $800 million promise of last weekend was a myth. Whereas the $10 bill I had in my wallet was real, and all I have to show for it now is a slip of paper laced with some sort of chemical that if I tried to eat my losses, I’d get a rancid taste in my mouth.

Then again, it’s not just lottery tickets that lose me. The whole casino experience leaves me dry – even though the last time I set foot in one, I actually walked out with about $50 more than I walked in there with.

MY THANKS TO the people of the Horseshoe Casino in Hammond, Ind., for that little financial boost. Although I also have embedded in my mind the sight of a woman who tried three different credit cards in a cash machine and wound up having all of them rejected – because she had bet so much and lost.

Thank goodness for the activist-types who often get derided for ruining people’s fun for saving that woman from losing even more cash that day.

In my own case, part of my lack of enthusiasm for gambling is that I’m cheap. You have to be willing to bet big, and often, in order to boost your chances of winning a significant prize – and I’m just not willing to do that.

Realize that I’m fully aware of the fact that my step-mother (if she ever reads this) will regard such thoughts as heresy. For all I know, I may get disowned from the family. Or at least uninvited to the next family get-together.

AFTER ALL, THE reason she and my father were in Las Vegas this past weekend was a birthday celebration. I won’t find out until Tuesday whether she really had a Happy Birthday!, but I suspect somehow she did.

She really does find a joy in the casino experience that is just lost on me. Or on the gambling experience in general. Somehow, seeing “dream books” piled up by the Illinois Lottery ticket machine at the convenience store in suburban Hazel Crest where I bought last week’s Powerball ticket just seemed sad.

Which is why I won’t be among those getting all giddy at the thought of a Wednesday prize that could make me a billionaire!?! Because all I’d get was another loser because I didn’t buy a dream book to tell me what number I should play because I dreamed of my brother, Chris, and I sitting in the stands at a ballgame.

Maybe if I had, my father would have some winnings to come home to.

  -30-

EXTRA: That was quick! Or was it?

Former Chicago Schools CEO Barbara Byrd-Bennett got herself into the local political lore with that e-mail she sent, the one about having “tuition to pay and casinos to visit.”

BYRD-BENNETT: Trying to put issue to rest

An attitude that now has her in a position where she faces the possibility of a few years in a federal correctional institution, now that she has pleaded guilty on Tuesday to criminal charges alleging she directed contracts to an educational consulting firm that promised her assorted financial perks.

I’M SURE THEY weren’t presented to her as bribes, but that is the way they are being viewed by the U.S. attorney’s office – which last week said she was indicted on assorted charges.

Just as former 7^th Ward Alderman Sandi Jackson’s only real action for which she’s now on her way to prison was signing income tax returns for herself and former Congressman husband Jesse Jr. It was the federal government that determined those returns were not fully accurate, and therefore worthy of incarceration for the couple.

But because Byrd-Bennett isn’t putting up anything of a fight, she was permitted on Tuesday to enter a plea to one count of wire fraud. The other dozen or so charges she faced last week have withered away into nothingness.

Not bad, particularly since federal prosecutors have said they will seek less than the 14 years in prison she could have got if she had been found guilty of all the charges she originally faced.

JACKSON: Prison for signing a tax form

BUT BYRD-BENNETT CAN’T say this ordeal is behind her.

Because the judge in question (Edmond Chong) isn’t about to sentence her until legal proceedings are done against a pair of co-defendants.

It seems that Byrd-Bennett is expected to cooperate with prosecutors against those defendants, and won’t know how long her own prison time will be until after things have settled. I’d hate to think her time waiting to be sentenced will be longer than the actual time she has to serve.

JACKSON: His actions got her too

Perhaps it seems I’m not taking all of this too seriously, or that I’m not appropriately outraged at the notion that Byrd-Bennett gave no-bid contracts to a company that used to employ her.

THE FACT IS that Byrd-Bennett resigned her post and we already have moved on to the new leadership of Forrest Claypool – who already is the butt of jokes for people determined to point out the public schools system’s every flaw.

BEAVERS: Also a gambling habit

Byrd-Bennett is already ancient history. Who probably wouldn’t be remembered anymore if not for her remark about needing money to feed her casino habit?

Which does little more than put her in a category with political people such as former alderman and Cook County commissioner William Beavers – who wound up doing his own short stint in prison because prosecutors objected to the idea of him using money from his campaign funds to help entertain himself at those casinos out on the fringe of the Chicago area.

Just think how many more politicos we’ll have facing criminal charges if our officials ever are able to get their acts together and approve construction of a casino within the city limits?

  -30-

Does video poker, slots have potential to become the “blob” that ate Illinois?

I felt a bit of relief this week when I read the reports that the Illinois Gaming Board rejected the desire of officials in suburban Hometown to establish a strip mall filled entirely with businesses that have video poker machines on the premises.

Gamble, or eat?

We’re talking about the laws from a couple of years ago that permitted businesses such as restaurants and taverns to install up to five gambling machines so as to help bring in more business.

PERSONALLY, I THINK they’re gaudy. I know of a half-dozen such businesses within a half-mile of where I live – including one Mexican restaurant just one block from home.

It’s not a place I regularly ate at (I know of other places where I can get better Mexican edibles). But the sight of those machines and the flashy lights and noises they emanate can make eating there a more tacky experience.

Although I am aware there are people who feel exactly the opposite – to the point that they go to that restaurant and other businesses SPECIFICALLY SO THEY CAN spend some time playing the slots.

They want to gamble, and like the idea of not having to make the trip to a casino.

WHAT INSPIRED THE idea of a gambling strip mall was the idea of expanding on the idea of legal gambling taking place within walking distance of home – at least if you happen to live in Hometown or its neighboring suburb of Oak Lawn.

If anything, the storefronts in this strip mall would have been less concerned with having to maintain a restaurant or a tavern because it turns out the kind of people who go to gamble at these places aren’t the least bit interested.

They view the primary business as being a distraction; something that would cost them money they’d rather stick into the slot machine out of a deluded belief they’ll walk away with more money than they entered with.

 

More likely, those people will leave with less. Possibly nothing at all. Which is a concept I just don’t understand. I work too hard for what little cash I have to lose it to the appeal of spinning wheels, digital symbols or flashing lights.

IT WAS ENCOURAGING to see the Gaming Board take the attitude that such a strip mall amounts to a casino – which have their own sets of regulations that must be followed to be licensed by the state of Illinois.

Honestly, I think we have plenty of those riverboat casinos scattered around the state for those people who absolutely feel compelled to put their money at risk in exchange for a cheap thrill.

And I think those establishments made a serious concession when they pretty much gave up on the requirement that the gambling take place on board boats that sailed around bodies of navigable water – because the same people who just want to play a slot machine without the distraction of a restaurant also didn’t want to have to take a gambling “cruise” (not even one that was just a lap around a river of sorts).

Now I know that some people claim these places aren’t casino-related. They’re just slot machines – none of the other, more hard-core games of chance are being played. No black jack. No roulette wheels.

JUST A CHANCE to pull a rod or push a button and hope you can get something other than three lemons – followed by the sight and sound of flashing lights and sirens and a flow of coins spewing from the machine.

Sounds kind of lame to me. Particularly since I remember one time I went to that previously-mentioned Mexican restaurant to place a takeout order and had the cashier suggest I play some slot machines to try to win the money to pay for the meal.

Why do I think the end result would have been losing $50 or so, in addition to the $20 I spent on food?

And that going to a gambling-oriented strip mall would merely change that to a $70 loss from gambing, and nothing left to grab a bite to eat later on?

  -30-

Would it change a thing if ‘Shoeless Joe’ were reinstated to baseball?

It has been 95 years since Joe Jackson played his last ballgame for the Chicago White Sox, and 63 years since he was even alive.

Still a baseball persona non-grata

Yet some people are determined to try to reinstate the man who got bounced from baseball following the 1919 World Series – which the White Sox lost to the Cincinnati Reds and for which Jackson was one of eight ballplayers later indicted on criminal conspiracy charges claiming he took money to lose ballgames.

OF COURSE, PEOPLE argue that Jackson was acquitted of those charges by a jury in Cook County, while others will claim that jury was so biased that their verdict was arguably more ridiculous than some people believe the “not guilty” verdict was for O.J. Simpson.

The problem becomes that whatever happened with the World Series that year and whether Jackson, or any, of the ballplayers took money from gamblers to lose happened so long ago that just about anybody who knew anything is dead.

This becomes a “paper trail” investigation that already came up with a result.

Which is why it would seem baseball officials aren’t about to do anything. Giving us such non-news headlines on Tuesday as “MLB won’t reinstate Shoeless Joe Jackson.”

THE SHOELESS JOE Jackson Museum that operates out of Jackson’s one-time home in Greenville, S.C., released a letter it received from baseball Commissioner Robert Manfred saying they don’t intend to do anything to change Jackson’s status.

The White Sox' all-time duo ...

“The results of this work demonstrate to me that it is not possible now, over 95 years since those events took place,… to be certain enough of the truth to overturn Commissioner (Kennesaw M.) Landis’ determinations,” which were that Jackson knew of efforts to throw a World Series and didn’t do anything to stop it.

Some claim that Jackson took $5,000 from gambling interests, but somehow managed to play well – coming up with numbers that indicate he didn’t stink (a high batting average, and the only home run of that World Series).

While others say this proves statistics don’t tell the full story, and in fact can be deceptive.

... won't become a trio anytime soon

ADMITTEDLY, THE JACKSON Museum has an interest – they’d like it if the guy they promote were to become an official part of baseball again. Rather than someone whom baseball would prefer to forget. Just like Pete Rose – who also has a lifetime ban from baseball for gambling (and a criminal conviction with six-month prison sentence for tax evasion).

Then again, I’m sure the White Sox would also like it if they could go back to publicly acknowledging that one of the greatest ballplayers ever wore their uniform – and that he could join Luke Appling and Frank Thomas as being among the greatest White Sox ever.

But aside from their marketing efforts, would it really change much. Would Jackson gain any points to his .356 lifetime batting average (second only to Ty Cobb’s .362)?

Would the White Sox gain any more wins to their lifetime career? It’s not like we’d get to change the 1919 World Series result and claim a victory over Cincinnati?

THERE WOULDN’T BE any one less person sneering or snickering at the White Sox for being the only team caught throwing a World Series (even though there have been rumors from other World Series and ballgames in general of that era having suspicious results).

Is Jackson plight more about backing Rose?

Or anyone thinking any less of Jackson from amongst those people who want to believe that Shoeless Joe would have been in the Baseball Hall of Fame decades ago – if only he hadn’t had that World Series stain on his record.

So I’m sure some people are going to be miffed at baseball officials for not being willing to resurrect this issue all these years later.

But barring the discovery of evidence that we can’t even conceive of at this point, it may be that baseball officials have the right idea in mind to just go forward. Rehashing the past never changes anything!

  -30-