Casino Results: A Tale of Two Languages, Used as a Gamble Hedge

During the past campaign season, the Orthodox community's position (or non-position) on Proposal 1 - authorizing gambling casinos in the Catskills and other upstate areas - produced conflicting and confusing reports on the community's stance. With the results in, it leaves no doubt on how the Orthodox communities voted on the issues, and it reveals how outsiders are often in the dark on who and what is getting the community's support due to language barriers. In our case, the results proof that a specific community led two opposite, but simultaneous campaigns, using the bilingualism to their advantage, to try to play it safe internally and externally.

The gambling issue was seen as an important plebiscite to the Orthodox community. The former Borscht Belt, a destination for Hasidic families and campers during the summer months, is the area to be mostly touched by it. During the years, the Orthodox newspapers decried earlier plans for Casinos in the region where tens of thousands spend their summers in Sullivan County.

Despite that, when the question came to the voters this time around, the community's political leaders were mostly silent during the months leading up to the elections.

Less than two week before the election, it seemed for a brief moment that the community will organize against the casinos. Three major Yiddish papers - including the Zalanite Der Yid, the Aranite Der Blatt, and Di Tzeitung -  had lengthy articles describing why casinos are detrimental to the Orthodox community, and they called the community to vote down Proposition 1. The reports of a Yiddish campaign against the casinos, first reported by Albnany's State of Politics, drew the ire of local Monticello officials.

The Aranites,  running camps in Sullivan County, quickly backtracked. The Monticello Supervisor erroneously said that Der Blatt "doesn’t represent the Satmar (Hasidic) community." Obviously, someone tried to mislead him on that. Rabbi Moishe Indig, a representative of the Aranites, had another dubious excuse, that the “article” was actually an advertisement. (To be clear, both articles looked like writings that were sent in ready to the papers and lacked any official names or groups behind the anti-Casino campaign. These papers consistently print articles received from outside groups, but they are different than paid ads, and their publication is usually seen that the content is in line with the respective group's leadership's views). According to the regional Times Herald Record: "Indig offered his community’s support for the referendum." It also quoted and Aroni Camp Manager, David Weiss, that he's “fully supporting” the referendum.

Later, Indig posted an op-ed in English declaring that "We Are Not Fighting the Gaming Initiative Nor Should We" fight the casinos, and he dispelled arguments why the casinos is bad for the community's summer enclave. Reading the article, one quickly realizes that English is not Indig's first language (neither is it mine, and you probably realized it from reading my blog - LOL), neither is it the first language of most of his targeted audience. Still, this article never made it into Yiddish, neither was it - or the the essence of its arguments - ever published in the Aranite community's official mouthpiece, Der Blatt, where it would have reached its supposed targeted audience. This is indicating that his post was intended for a different audience.

Word on the street had it that the Governor's staff reached out to both Satmars and other community leaders to convince them not to oppose the casinos. While we couldn't confirm it, it's clear that Governor Cuomo supported Proposal 1 and his staff worked for its passage.

For whatever reason, one thing is clear: The campaign against the casinos disappeared from all the above-mentioned three leading Yiddish newspapers's issues published during the week before the elections. Der Yid and Di Tzeitung totally ignored the topic. Even more, an edict, signed by various Rabbis from various communities, including prominent Dayanim of both the Satmars and others, was published in the Hamodia, but it didn't appear in the Yiddish papers, which is highly unusual.

Der Blatt was the only one of the three editorializing on Proposal 1 in it's last issue before the election - the one that usually sets the tone for the readers how to vote. A confusing, rather satirically, op-ed (In Yiddish, of course, as are all the articles in this newspaper) stated in the opening paragraphs that how to vote on the proposal is a an issue to be decided by Rabbinical authorities. The Op-Ed went on to give a 'lay-man's argument' why the casinos may do the community a favor, by forcing all Orthodox Jews to flee the Catskills, hence, sparing numerous families the huge expenses of the annual migration to the region. It is like saying let's allow crime to overtake the city, so we are forced to settle in cheaper upstate regions. If it did argument had an effect, it reinforces all the dire warnings of the nay-sayers that Catskills will turn uninhabitable for Orthodox Jews should the casinos gain approval. The article concluded that everyone should follow their Rabbinical authorities on how to vote on the matter. The only public Rabbinical stance that I know of is the above edict (Indig is not an ordained Rabbi, neither is he holding any spiritual position - it's customary for Orthodox Jews involved in politics or other communal roles to be titled Rabbis despite lacking the credentials).

In the wider Orthodox community, the Agudas Israel Leadership was also silent on the referendum, as far as I can say (they always stay out from politics, but a referendum, especially this one touching on spiritual issues, could have been an exception). The Hamodia, in an editorial a day before the elections, urged it readers to vote No. Otherwise, the paper mostly ignored the issue and covered it from a neutral perspective.

The political leadership in Williamsburg, where election day turnout was only half of what it already produced in election with strong internal competition, would have benefited from a strong anti-Casino campaign to drive up turnout. Spreading the Rabbinical edicts, coupled with warnings against perceived threats to their summer enclaves, could have driven up turnout to the Velazquez-Dilan proportions, where about 9,000 turned out to vote in the Orthodox areas. (Incidentally, the upstate camps were the major issue in that campaign, driving up the turn-out to record levels).  On the other hand, the leadership's silence on the Casinos dismayed community members. I heard quite a few grumbling against what they saw as the leadership's betrayal of the community's interests and values.

With the community's political organizers silent on the issue, an ad hoc campaign moved in, with leaflets and posters announcing the rabbinical edict to vote 'no' on proposal 1. Still, their campaign was no match to community's experienced GOTV machines.

To sum it all up - most Orthodox groups, including the zalanites - decided to stay out of the campaign. By being neutral they may have displeased some of their own people, and perhaps the political forces behind the casinos. The Aranites, on the other hand, used a different approach, by employing a bilingual, bi-positional campaign. Indig and Weiss led the English campaign to placate their upstate political allies etc., while in Yiddish, Der Blatt's mixed signals comforted their community members. Thus, they hedged on the gambling issue. It may have paid off, given that proposal 1 passed with a strong majority, far larger than the voting power of all Orthodox communities. Thus, it's highly unlikely that post-elections the officials supporting the casinos cared how the Orthodox actually voted. Rather, they appreciate the professed support that they were offered before the elections.

With that background in mind, lets examine the results:

The vote tallies show out that Orthodox voters - were they in Borough Park, Williamsburg, Rockland County or in Kiryas Joel - who expressed their choice on Proposal 1 resoundingly voted no. On Proposal 1 it was a tale of one community.

In Borough Park's Orthodox election district (EDs), the Board of Elections unofficial results show that 7,847 voted no, versus 1,648 (82.6 vs. 17.4); In Williamsburg's Hasidic areas, it was 3,502 nays, vs. 644 yeahs (84.5 vs. 15.5); In Kiryas Joel, where the Aranites are in the majority and at their lowest point carried over 55 percent of the vote, an astonishing 96.4 percent - 3,687 votes - were nays, vs. 3.6 percent, a mere 139 yeahs. Kiryas Joel's results even beat these of New Square - a village that is legendary for it's almost 100 percent unanimous vote - where 452 voted no vs. 31 yes (93.6 vs. 6.4). New Square's impressive results also trail Monsey's Orthodox results (we only counted the Ramapo EDs stationed in two polling sites in Viznitz schools, lacking the time an familiarity to identify all Orthodox EDs), where 95.1 opposed the proposal vs. 4.9 supporting it.

The above results, as mighty as they are, don't tell the whole story. The community's political leaderships' staying mum had an impact on numerous voters skipping proposal 1. In Williamsburg, for example, the turnout was dismal, turning out less than half than than it might have produced with a strong anti-Casino campaign. In addition, almost a quarter making it to the polls sites (1,293 voters, 23.7 percent skipped proposal 1). In sum: The non-campaign may have reduced the no votes by almost 5,000.

All other areas had higher turnout due to local heated races, but the non-communal position resulted in a high percentage of voter ignoring proposal 1. In Borough Park 24.3 percent - 3,046 - skipped proposal 1; In Kiryas Joel over two fifths - 2,830, 42.5% - skipped the race. The number of skippers is even more staggering in New Square, where the overwhelming majority strictly follows the instructions from the top how to vote or not to vote. There, 80.6 %, 2,006 voters, left that question blank; The Monsey EDs that we examined had the lowest numbers of skippers, 14.6 percent (520).

Conclusion: It is clear that the official silence had an impact on reducing the community's awareness and interest in the proposal, but on the other hand, the results show that there was no drive to support the proposal, as some tried to present to outsiders. In fact, the aranite stronghold produced the lowest numbers of yes from all the Orthodox area we examined. Still, their tactic may have reaped benefits, by relieving whatever pressure they had during the election season. I doubt that these upstate officials are looking back to the elections results, after the proposal passed with a close to 400,000 votes lead, dwarfing the Orthodox community's voting power.

Bonus Casino Result: Brooklyn Heights is On One Page with Hasidic Williamsburg

Proposal 1 was voted down in Southern Brooklyn's districts 44, 45 (narrowly), 48 (Borough Park), 50 (Williamsburg), and surprisingly in Assembly District 52 (check out results here). The last district is made up of Brooklyn Heights and neighboring areas, and is considered to be the most liberal district in the borough. During the recent redistricting process, some of Brooklyn Heights opposed bunching a larger portion of the 50th Assembly district in the 33rd council district, expressing fears that the higher number of Hasidic voters will inhibit their liberal voting pattern. I find it amusing that on casinos, the liberal Brooklyn Heights voted the same way as the neighboring Hasidic portions of the 50th Assembly district. It looks like that the NY Times editorial board (Brooklyn Heights is considered one of the few places where their opinion still carries weight), and the rabbinical edict - though driven by different reasons and principals - created here another tale of one district.

BTW, Assembly district 52's turnout was almost double than the average Brooklyn District. 30,784 voted there, versus and average of close to 16,500 in other Brooklyn Districts. That number is much higher than any other NYC assembly district. Before the primaries, the NY Times questioned the notion that the districts, "outsize image as a liberal Eden" has a high voter participation, stating that: "Turnout is relatively strong but not astonishing." In the general election, though, the numbers show that Brooklyn Heights still produce the highest number of votes and far more than the average district.

Casino Results chart for Orthodox areas
Sources: For the Ramapo results, broken down into EDs, click here; Orange County didn't post their detailed results yet, so we attached below the certified lists we obtained. NYC doesn't publish the results by EDs, and we only obtained the unofficial results, attached below. 

Casino BoE Lists

For notification of new posts, follow me @opundit.