One of the state's most aggressive and dangerous special interests is the gaming industry, which is positioning itself to sponsor several statutory changes that will benefit its already sizable profit margins. Such changes, it needs to be understood, will not benefit the state at large nor Missourians who choose to risk their hard-earned money on machines jimmied to see they don't give a sucker an even break

As expected, the existing casinos in Missouri are doing a land-office business, attracting win-hungry patrons from throughout the Middle West as well as hundreds of thousands of our fellow citizens. The monthly winnings of these casinos constitute nothing less than a catastrophic nightmare for hundreds and hundreds of families, with an ever-increasing rise in both bankruptcies and gambling addiction. Just wait a few years to see how disturbingly high -- and costly -- these two totals become.

The principal difficulty with this latest entry into the lives of thousands of Missourians is that gaming interests are seeking several exemptions to the original intent of voters, whose approval of casinos was predicated on their ability to cruise the state's two largest rivers, with an additional restriction on individuals' losses to prevent bankruptcy from occurring in just a single evening.

There were good, logical reasons to place both of these restrictions in the original referendum, and absolutely nothing has changed to require their removal when the General Assembly next convenes in January. Nothing has changed except the desire of gaming companies to enhance still further their own economic gains in St. Louis, Kansas City, St. Joseph and Caruthersville.

One of the messages given voters when they approved riverboat gambling was that unless Missouri gave its blessing to a wide assortment of sucker-bait games of chance, the money would go to other states where more "enlightened" citizens had earlier recognized the efficacy of robbing from both the poor and the rich to give to the even-still-richer. A great many voices argued against this fallacy, but even those who bought the argument should now be able to recognize its error: gambling's lucrative returns are not remaining in Missouri but are feeding the bank accounts of large corporations that are located in states other than our own.

Before its approval, gambling was taking the losses of Missourians who traveled to other states for the privilege frittering away their money, but now that it is operating at full speed in the Show Me State, gambling is taking the huge profits of many more residents and sending it elsewhere. State and local jurisdictions share in only a small portion of the winnings and Missourians will never see the far greater percentage of casino profits. Nor will they enjoy the benefits.

The small core of gambling companies that make up the present corporate structure in Missouri want to increase even more the profits they're currently mailing out of state by permitting the casinos to stay permanently docked and by lifting the $500 daily loss limit. By employing attorneys, lobbyists and any politician willing to take their money, the gaming interests are targeting the next Legislature for some special favors: end the cruise rule and lift the loss limitation.

Those in the employ of the current casino group who are willing to talk, even if they decline to be identified, freely admit the scheduled agenda for next January. We can guess with considerable assurance that legislation to bring about both these changes has already been written and approved by retained counsel. Sponsors of this legislation will not be hard to find, and even if they were, a few vacation trips and assorted goodies would soften the hearts of numerous so-called servants of the people.

Missourians who question the harm from either of these proposals are deluding themselves. The cruising requirement was merely window-dressing, designed to put the best possible light on an illegal business. Gaming companies believed the rule would soften opposition, and most if not all sponsors knew an effort would be made, upon approval of the referendum, to remove its provisions. The excuse for discarding is "public safety," but that's merely a ruse. The real reason is that cruising subtracts from the gaming enterprises' bankable profits, and the motivation is plain and pure greed.

The attempt to remove the $500-per-day loss limit is even more odious. Some states, including neighboring Illinois, do not- have this limit, while Iowa has just removed it. The casinos are in business to make money, caring not at all whether any Missouri citizen loses his life savings in a greed seizure. As far as the industry is concerned, the more seizures, the better. They, after all, don't have to pay for the after-affects of bankrupt Missourians. The rest of us do.

We'll see how many legislators vote to relieve the casinos of these two requirements in the original referendum. Those who say they support the gaming industry out of fairness or equity or public gains are blowing smoke. They have either taken a direct or indirect bribe for their votes or they have lost any sense of moral direction.

The best Missourians can hope for, as we approach the critical second session of this General Assembly, is that we have only a minority of elected officials willing to sell their votes for a few dollars. If such a minority becomes a majority then we're in for a heap of trouble, the likes of which we haven't seen since the days the Pendergast organization had the franchise for illegal slot machines all over Missouri.

Even now old Tom must be looking up at his home state and wondering why he wasn't smart enough, or greedy enough, to submit the idea of riverboat gambling casinos to the voters of Missouri back in the 1930s. A gangster before his time.

~Jack Stapleton of Kennett is the editor of the Missouri News and Editorial Service.