The Student News Site of Colorado State University

The Rocky Mountain Collegian

The Student News Site of Colorado State University

The Rocky Mountain Collegian

The Student News Site of Colorado State University

The Rocky Mountain Collegian

Print Edition
Letter to the editor submissions
Have a strong opinion about something happening on campus or in Fort Collins? Want to respond to an article written on The Collegian? Write a Letter to the Editor by following the guidelines here.
Follow Us on Twitter
The Top College Football Lines' Successful Players
September 14, 2023

When it comes to American Football, most people love to watch the NFL. We cannot really blame them though. This is where the magic happens....

Despite education funding, Amendment 68 not worth it

Jesse Carey
Jesse Carey

We are now at that beautiful point in any election year when the leaves turn colors and offer up awesome vistas, a sure reminder of nature’s wonder … Oh no, wait, that’s Autumn I’m describing. We are now at that point in election years where the mudslinging begins, where the pleasant comfort of a Sunday afternoon dozing in front of the TV is shattered by that most powerful of traditions: the campaign ad.

Of all the campaign ads this year, not one is as annoying as the “No” on Amendment 68, which promises doom and gloom for Colorado at the hands of that den of loose morals, intemperance, and gambler’s nest known more commonly as “Rhode Island.” But what is Amendment 68, and how does it benefit Rhode Island?


Amendment 68 is a proposed amendment to the Colorado Constitution that would expand legalized gambling in Colorado, specifically at the Arapahoe Park horse tracks in Aurora, as well as horsetracks in Mesa and Pueblo County. The proceeds in taxable revenue from the expanded gambling area would go to the funding of both K-12 and charter schools.

Sounds pretty good, right? The people of Colorado are allowed to gamble and the proceeds go to funding the education of the youth. Naturally, the opposition to this plan is comprised of the major gambling interests within the state who are only concerned with the potential lost revenue that would come of this plan. Politics as usual, nothing to see here.

Despite the plan to fund education, the amendment has three significant drawbacks that ultimately outweigh the benefits.

Firstly, the expansion of gambling in other places will take away revenue (and consequently, jobs) from the existing casinos. This is a problem because it is still largely unclear whether or not the new race tracks/casinos will be able to provide enough economic lift to sustain what is lost elsewhere.

Secondly, the emergence of new arenas for legalized gambling that will contribute to education funds is a nice goal. Really, it is. The only problem is that the existing casinos already contribute quite a bit of money from taxes for tourism, historic preservation, and local colleges within Colorado. The opening of new casinos would only dilute the two program funds. This is significant because it is estimated that the education fund would only translate to about one hundred dollars per student.

Lastly, this amendment is too narrow to be effective in regards to efficiency. As it stands now, only one group stands to immediately benefit from the amendment. For those of you reading along and still wondering what any of this has to do with Rhode Island, the sole group in a position to immediately benefit is a casino based in Rhode Island and owned by Rhode Islanders. It seems silly to modify the state’s constitution over three racetracks for the benefit of an out of state casino, especially when the rewards for Coloradoans are so few.

On the basis of these concerns, a vote against Amendment 68 is a responsible choice come November, despite the amendment’s purported benefit to Colorado’s Education.

Collegian Columnist Jesse Carey can be reached at or on Twitter by @junotbend

Leave a Comment
More to Discover

Hey, thanks for visiting!
We’d like to ask you to please disable your ad blocker when looking at our site — advertising revenue directly supports our student journalists and allows us to bring you more content like this.

Comments (0)

When commenting on The Collegian’s website, please be respectful of others and their viewpoints. The Collegian reviews all comments and reserves the right to reject comments from the website. Comments including any of the following will not be accepted. 1. No language attacking a protected group, including slurs or other profane language directed at a person’s race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, social class, age, physical or mental disability, ethnicity or nationality. 2. No factually inaccurate information, including misleading statements or incorrect data. 3. No abusive language or harassment of Collegian writers, editors or other commenters. 4. No threatening language that includes but is not limited to language inciting violence against an individual or group of people. 5. No links.
All The Rocky Mountain Collegian Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *