The recent story divulging the gambling habits of state Sen. Karen Carter Peterson was troublesome. First, we can all be empathetic for someone fighting an addiction, whether drugs, smoking or gambling, and I trust that the community supports Peterson's efforts to conquer her habit.
However, this same community should also be very concerned that Peterson was the chief proponent of the bill that would have extended Harrah's lease beyond most of our lifetimes. For some reason, the uninformed reader had to wade through many paragraphs to find this nugget of information. Is it fair to inquire why this gambling addict would have taken such interest in helping Harrah's? Was there a "quid pro quo" for her sponsoring of the legislation? Maybe I have watched too many bad movies, but this sure seems similar to several film plots, and I am prompted to ask why The Advocate hasn't reported on this important aspect of the story. I look forward to reading chapter 2 of this saga.
Joseph Maselli Jr.