|
|
19 of 22 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Using the Juice, April 16, 2001
"Sixty years ago, Las Vegas was a gritty, wind-whipped crossroads of faded [houses of ill-repute] . . . and honky-tonks with stuttering neon." "It is a city in the middle of nowhere that is the world's most popular destination." The city is all about "diversion, entertainment, money, sex, escape, deliverance, another chance, a last chance, and another life for a few hours, days, forever." From these threads, the authors portray Las Vegas as the archetype of what America is becoming. Whoever has the money calls the tune, whether it be crooks, hustlers, businessmen or politicians. The person who controls the action "has the juice" and everyone dances to that person's tune. The basic story line is that Las Vegas has never seen money or people it didn't like. From Las Vegas, the authors tie the corruption centered there to the United States government, many foreign governments, Nevada government, and to many other institutions and facets of American life.Although the book covers the last half century of Las Vegas, the book also deals with the roots of the town earlier. The real focus, however, is on the most wide-open gangster years in Las Vegas from the 1940s through the early 1960s. You will learn a lot about Meyer Lansky, Bugsy Siegel, Benny Binion, Senator Pat McCarran, and Hank Greenspun who were the major figures involved in the early development of Las Vegas. What may be news to you is how many "above-board" people were involved with gangsters. Most of them will be names you recognize, and some will be attached to people you admire (possibly like the Kennedys, Richard Nixon, or Lyndon Johnson). I suspect that one of the reasons that the book focuses more on the early years is that it takes a while for investigative reporters to locate all of the crooked deals that have gone down. By now, everything up the the Kennedy assassination is probably pretty well exposed. While not so much is said about the 1990s, you are left wondering if perhaps the gangster infuence may not be as great now, or just isn't exposed as much. As someone who follows public companies that do business in Las Vegas, I have certainly noticed that profits from the casinos are more measly than make sense now. Is someone else getting the rest? In the old days in the cash room, it was "three for us, one for the government, and two for Meyer [Lansky]." The book details the role of Las Vegas in laundering crooked money, skimming off profits for mobsters, and suppressing competition for gambling revenues. The mobsters appear to have been buying politicians (on both side of the fence) all along, and gotten their money's worth. As described, this may sound shocking to you. On the other hand, I noticed that there was little in the book that had not already been reported many times before. The book's genius is its ability to connect the dots so that you see the pattern of corruption behind glittering lights on the Strip and in Glitter Gulch. The authors also detail some of the social problems in Las Vegas, including the history of racism, high rate of suicide, rough treatment of workers by casinos, prostitution, drugs, and lack of cultural activities for a city of its size. Interestingly, Las Vegas has been the nation's fastest growing metropolitan area for a long time. It does make you wonder about what may be coming if other areas follow this example. The book's main strength is the writing style of the co-authors. They make old news fresh and interesting. The sentences and their images are vivid and clear, as the quotes in the beginning should show. The book has three main weaknesses. First, the case isn't really made that this pattern of corruption is developing in the same way elsewhere. Perhaps it is, and perhaps it isn't. But having raised the point, I would have liked to know more. Second, there is some unnecessary repetition in the book. Juicy stories seem to be retold just to get the reader excited, rather than to add new information. Third, a lot of the characterizations are based on who hangs out with whom. The degree of connection can never be exactly established, so the case may be understated or overstated. Obviously, if there were more information it would have been revealed. I did have one check on the book that you won't have. I have spoken with one of the people profiled in the book by telephone. During that experience (the details of which I promised to keep confidential), I definitely came away with the feeling that something was wrong with the person I was talking with. The material reported in this book about this person certainly fits in with my impressions of someone who was not strictly on the up-and-up. I think the main question raised by this book is how much the social fabric is at risk with criminals having so much influence in the United States. The answer would seem to be quite a bit. Be sure you know whom you are dealing with before you go ahead.
|
by John L. Smith
by Pete Earley
by Steve Fischer
See all Editorial Reviews
