Stutzman urges voters to reject Indiana casino referendums

Call for rejection in three counties

U.S. Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.) is encouraging voters in his congressional district to reject local ballot referendums regarding casino development. The campaign is focused on three specific jurisdictions in Northeast Indiana: Allen, DeKalb, and Steuben counties. On Tuesday, Nov. 3, residents in these areas will face three separate referendums that will determine whether developers can move forward with their proposals.

Stutzman, who is seeking his fourth term in Congress, is running against nonprofit founder Kelly Thompson. While the congressional race is a separate issue, the casino referendums have become a central part of the local political conversation. Stutzman’s opposition to the measures is rooted in concerns about the social and economic impact of gambling on local communities.

Legislative framework and financial requirements

The legal basis for these referendums stems from House Bill 1038, which Gov. Mike Braun signed into law in March. The legislation authorized the Indiana Gaming Commission (IGC) to issue only one casino license in the state through a competitive bidding process. This change was significant because it stripped Full House Resorts of its exclusive right to the license, a concession the company had previously sought to exercise by attempting to relocate its license from Rising Sun to Northeast Indiana.

Under the new rules, a county must first pass a referendum with a simple majority. If successful, casino developers can present bids to the IGC. The financial stakes for the winning applicant are substantial. The licensee is required to make a one-time payment of $150 million to the state. Additionally, the company must commit to a minimum investment of $500 million in the facility. When these figures are combined, the minimum get-in fee for the casino license stands at $650 million.

Stutzman’s argument against the measure

Stutzman has argued that the potential benefits of a casino are outweighed by the risks to vulnerable populations. In a statement to constituents, he said, “While many enjoy gambling as entertainment, several of our neighbors will eventually fall victim to the proposed casino as it seeks to generate profit off the backs of hard-working Hoosiers. Business development is a top priority of mine, but gambling is the opposite.”

The congressman emphasized the negative externalities of the industry, stating, “Casinos win when our neighbors lose.” He pointed to specific demographic groups that are most at risk, noting that casinos “create a new burden for low-income households, the elderly on fixed incomes, and local government services.”

Stutzman also cited research on the addictive nature of certain gambling formats. He told voters, “On top of that, many fail to realize that research has shown rapid-play gambling can be as addictive as cocaine or heroin.” This argument positions the referendum not just as an economic decision, but as a public health issue for the district’s residents.

Proponents’ claims and the path forward

Supporters of the casino referendums, including the group Vote Yes for Allen County Casino, have presented a different financial picture. Pro-casino groups claim that a new facility would create thousands of jobs in the region. They also argue that the project would generate more than $100 million in new annual tax revenue for the state and local governments.

Full House Resorts, which had previously lobbied to move its license from Rising Sun to Northeast Indiana, has since indicated it plans to stay with its existing Rising Star Casino in Rising Sun. The outcome of the Nov. 3 votes will determine if any new developers can enter the IGC bidding process. If the referendums fail in all three counties, the legislative window for a new casino in Northeast Indiana under HB 1038 will effectively close for this cycle.

Looking for somewhere to play? Browse our current no deposit bonus listings, with verified codes and the full wagering terms for each offer.