Penn's eastward expansion over the blighted postal lands has been greeted with mostly nods and applause. But what if the renewal project built casino resorts instead of nanotechnology centers or dorms?
Whether you like it or not, two casinos are going to break grounds along the Delaware River waterfront in a few weeks. Forget about that birthday extravaganza in Vegas. Soon, you may be able to fulfill your innermost gambling desires and show off the mad probability skills you've acquired from your STAT 430 class - right here in the convenience of the city.
For those who are slightly out of touch with the latest happenings in Philly, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for the impending $600 million SugarHouse Casino. In a 6-1 ruling, the state's highest court declared that no subdivision of government - not even our very own Mayor-elect Michael Nutter - has authority over the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (PGCB) when it comes to zoning. Meanwhile, Foxwoods Casino reached a pact with the Philadelphia City Council and also obtained a piece of the coveted waterfront land.
But as the gambling industry rejoices over its victory, I lament the loss of Philly's democratic voice. When it comes to matters dealing with great societal impact, local community officials deserve to have a say. After all, even though casinos may seem glamorous and enticing, our poverty-ridden, crime-plagued city has enough worries as it is. We really don't need the added stress of dealing with an extra casino or two.
To further elaborate - In Econ 101, I learned that rational decision making involves comparing the costs and benefits of every action. And a cost-benefit analysis of the casino development reveals very mixed results.
Obviously, the surrounding region will profit from new job opportunities and revenue sources. ABC 6 news reported that the two casinos are expected to create "over $1 billion a year for tax cuts across the state."
However, negative externalities may offset any unemployment reduction and potential income. When I talked to Dr. Peter Angelides, who teaches Economics and Urban Affairs at Penn, he told me the casinos could "generate substantial amounts of traffic, harm other businesses, decrease surrounding property values and contribute to social ills, such as crime and problem gambling."
There are also long-term development issues. Casinos "can tie up prime waterfront land for a use that does not need to be on water," he explained.
Of course, there are legitimate points on both sides. But regardless of the potential pros and cons, there's a more pertinent issue at stake. The seven appointed members of the PGCB are simply not sufficiently representative of Philadelphia. Local community members need to have their voices heard.
Already, grassroots organizations have urged supporters to vote for a referendum that would keep the casinos at least 1500 feet away from residential areas.
And in response to the recent court decision, a group called Casino-Free Philadelphia will resort to physically blocking the construction sites (think Sandra Bullock in Two Weeks Notice). According to their Web site, the "blocking" rehearsal is this Saturday, just in case you were interested.
But when it comes to the level of involvement by community officials, students at Penn also have differing opinions.
Though a fan of casinos, Wharton and Engineering Sophomore David Rice believes "communities have the right to control what occurs near them." He pointed to gambling addictions, like smoking, as an example of an action that affects local neighborhoods.
College freshman Josh Warren, a member of Penn Libertarians, disagrees.
"These voluntary transactions are a hallmark of the free society we must strive to be," Warren commented, adding that, since the government is there to protect our rights, "it is absurd for them to interfere with the un-coerced exchanges of individuals."
Still, individuals should have the right to say no. Who is the PGCB to dictate what goes where in our neighborhood?
Luckily for us, the designated casinos will be located far enough away from Penn that even if Casino-Free Philadelphia's "site occupation" plan doesn't work out, we still wouldn't be greatly affected.
But for the residents living near SugarHouse, the cost of PGCB's top-down decision making could be much greater.
Jenny Zhan is a College and Wharton sophomore from Pleasanton, Calif. Her e-mail address is zhan@dailypennslyvanian.com. Jenny from the 'Burbs appears on Fridays.
The Daily Pennsylvanian is an independent, student-run newspaper. Please consider making a donation to support the coverage that shapes the University. Your generosity ensures a future of strong journalism at Penn.
DonatePlease note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.