|
|
Speaking Briefly
BOTOX
IN PALMS OF YOUR HANDS
 In
the latest move to turn casinos into everything-at-your-fingertips mini worlds--and
as a way to coax more cash from gamblers--one property's offering a new wrinkle.
Well, actually, a wrinkle remover.
Botox, the Food and
Drug Administration-approved procedure that's smoothed crow's feet and flattened
frown lines on foreheads the world over, has come to the Palms, whose minority
owners are the Greenspun family, owners of the Weekly.
Now you can gamble, eat, drink, slot, spa, movie-go and beat back Father
Time all under one roof. It's the fountain of youth, Vegas-style. "There are so
many spas, we wanted to be set apart," says Palms spa director Keri Printy.
The procedure will cost upwards of $300. Doing the restoration
work will be well-known skin repairman Dr. Paul Nassif, a Beverly Hills-based,
facial plastic surgeon.
Originally used by ophthalmologists
to treat nervous twitching of the eyelid, botox has been reducing wrinkles since
1982. Here's how it works: Botulinum toxin is injected into a wrinkled area to
relax muscles and flatten unsightly folds. The nonsurgical procedure's fast and
easy, so you'll be back in action lickety-split.
Gambling industry experts say the treatment represents another step in the evolution
of casino amenities. "(Operators are focused on) making money everywhere as opposed
to the casino alone," says Anthony Curtis, publisher of the Las Vegas Advisor
newsletter.
Bill Thompson, a professor of public
administration at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, says future casinos could
have alternative health centers, with fat-farm operations and Eastern medicine
practitioners.
Offering botox, he says, gives
the Palms a competitive advantage in the battle to create brand loyalty.
"It gives them an extra service to target toward their
primary market, which is people over 50," Thompson says. "It appeals to a high
level of vanity that we anticipate the best players have."
--Damon
Hodge
damon.hodge@vegas.com
CAMPAIGN
CHANNEL COMING TO TV NEAR YOU?
 When
political upstart Pete O'Neil saw Clark County Commissioner and congressman-in-waiting
Dario Herrera on public-access television, praising the county's prescription
drug program for poor seniors, he nearly blew a fuse.
"It amounted to free advertising," says O'Neil, an Independent Party denizen
who's challenging Herrera and Sen. Jon Porter, R-Henderson, for the newly created
3rd Congressional District seat. "It's unfair, as a candidate, if the person you're
running against has a television station to market himself."
So O'Neil griped. And at his behest, county administrators enacted an ordinance
prohibiting people from appearing on Cable Channel4 --which is shared by the city
and county--after filing for candidacy or re-election.
"Forums like that should be open to all candidates," O'Neil says.
If a political novice in Connecticut is successful, such
a forum could become reality.
Jeff Benedict wants
Connecticut's 2nd Congressional District seat. To get it, he plans on airing weekly,
half-hour infomercials and starting a public-access cable television show. By
law, cable providers would have to give equal time to all candidates, setting
the stage for the nation's first campaign channel.
Federal Elections Commission officials say such a channel is legal. The only
restriction, according to the Connecticut Department of Public Utilities Control,
would be a prohibition on soliciting campaign contributions.
O'Neil supports the campaign channel concept.
"It could be a great tool of democracy and reduce the impact of special interest
money in elections," says O'Neil, who would support a push for such a channel
in Las Vegas. "It could even the political playing field."
--D.
H.
READ
MY LIPS: NO NEW CIGARETTE TAXES
 Recession?
What recession?
Forget
Gov. Kenny Guinn's call for flat budgets through 2005, forget 9-11 recession woes,
forget funding shortfalls in everything from education to public health.
Nevada isn't hurting that bad. Can't be.
How else to explain why our state hasn't joined 22 others seeking to raise
cigarette taxes--both as a cure for budget deficits and as a public health deterrent?
Needless to say, smokers certainly don't want to see
higher taxes. Neither do some pols. In 1998, Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., warned
that a cigarette tax hike would lead to higher gaming industry tariffs. Ensign
did not return calls for comment.
Although Guinn
spokesman Greg Bortolin says cigarette tax hikes don't always work, he notes that
the governor's tax board will examine all options.
"You can't say gaming or mining or some other area isn't paying its fair
share," Bortolin says. "You literally have to turn over every stone."
The Nevada Tobacco Prevention Coalition wants a 50-cent-a-pack
tax hike, from 35 cents to 85 cents. If implemented, it would be the first increase
since 1989 and could more than double the $43.6 million in cigarette tax revenue
collected in 2000-'01. Executive Director Denise Brodsky told lawmakers last month
that the decision was a "no-brainer."
While critics
claim an increase could send smokers elsewhere, Clark County Health District Tobacco
Control Director Maria Azzarelli says it would boost tobacco-control efforts.
"Other states have witnessed declines in teen smoking
after increasing cigarette taxes because kids don't have $5 for a box of cigarettes,"
Azzarelli says.
States seeking cigarette tax
hikes include Utah (an extra 30 cents a pack) and Oregon, (an extra 50 cents per
pack). Beginning April 1, New Yorkers will have pay an extra $1.50 for smokes--the
highest tax in the nation.
--D.
H.
|
|
Alternatives to Major Surgery
|
|
|
