view raw text
NEW YORKS "MUTUEL BILL" Amendment Covering Same Will Be Submitted to Voters on Nov. 7. Result of New Jersey Election Expected to Influence Citizens of Empire State in Changing Method of Wagering. ALBANY, N. Y., June 21.— Senator John J. Dunnigan, introducer and sponsor of the amendment to the state constitution to au thorize pari-mutuel wagering on horse races conducted in New York state, which passed two successive sessions of the legislature and will be submitted to a vote of the people on election day, November 7, issued the statement below from his office in the capitol at Albany, N. Y., following the announcemenc of the results of the special election in New Jersey: "The result of yesterdays election in New Jersey in which the people adopted an amendment to the state constitution authorizing horse racing and prescribing the pari-mutuel system as the exclusive method of wagering on horse races must be gratifying to millions of taxpayers interested in balanced state budgeting during these depressed times. The majority of the voters in yesterdays referendum are to be commended for their judgment in approving this sound amendment to their state constitution. PREDICTS FAVORABLE VOTE. "I confidently accept the result in our neighboring state as a forecast of an affirmative vote by the people of this state on election day, November 7, when they will be confronted with an almost similar question. "Because of the long fight which I have waged for a similar amendment to the New York state constitution, I naturally followed the New Jersey campaign and special election with keen interest. The issue was the acceptance or the rejection of a program which would open a new source of additional revenue for the state. The argument for the amendment was the necessity of an additional fund to meet continuing depression costs. The old blue law groups opposed the amendment advancing the same false arguments which produced prohibition. The special election was a triumph for good sense over groundless fears. BROADER QUESTION. "The question submitted in New Jersey was much broader than the one which is being submitted in this state. In New Jersey the people, by their vote, adopted both horse racing and pari-mutuel wagering. In New York we actually have horse racing. The only question here is shall the state tax wagering through the only practical medium—the pari-mutuel system? We have the same depression relief problems as has New Jersey and I predict that the people in New York will answer the question yes as did the voters in New Jersey. A majority of the New York voters surely will agree that a man who can afford the extreme luxury of a wager on a horse race can afford to pay the state a tax. "Every state which had horse racing last year operated under the pari-mutuel system. Now, New Jersey has joined their ranks. New York, alone, remains with the outworn, illegal bookmaking system— whicii produces no revenue for the state. I am confident that the voters of this state will follow the good example of the state of New Jersey."
