Delegates Likely To Vote Today On Referendum
By John Wagner and Lisa Rein
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, November 15, 2007
A bill calling for a public referendum on slot machine gambling in Maryland headed toward a vote by the full House of Delegates today, bringing one of the most difficult issues of a nearly three-week-old special legislative session to an uncertain climax.
The bill that moved through the House yesterday would place 14,000 slot machines at five locations, including one in Frederick County, if voters statewide approve the machines next November. The Frederick site, intended to cater to Montgomery County gamblers, was one of several changes made yesterday by a House subcommittee to a plan approved last week by the Senate.
The panel also voted to delete a site in Worcester County at or near Ocean Downs racetrack. Sites in Baltimore City and Allegany County were retained, and under the House plan, a final site could be placed in either Harford or Cecil counties, another difference with the Senate, which limited possible locations to Cecil.
A planned vote by the full Ways and Means Committee this morning could send the legislation to the House floor for debate today, with close votes anticipated.
The slots legislation, which advanced amid heavy lobbying of delegates by House leaders and Gov. Martin O'Malley's administration, is perhaps the largest remaining obstacle to finishing a special session called by O'Malley (D) to close a budget shortfall of at least $1.5 billion and raise money for transportation and health care.
Leaders of the House and Senate said yesterday that they hope to bring the session to a successful close by this weekend, a goal that would require resolving differences not only in the slots legislation but in bills passed by the two chambers to raise about $1.4 billion a year in new tax revenue and cut about $500 million from next year's budget.
"Things are on target," Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. (D-Calvert) said, after a breakfast meeting at the governor's mansion among O'Malley and legislative leaders. "Everybody's upbeat. . . . With a little bit of luck, we can have this process wrapped up by late Friday night. . . . There's going to have to be give-and-take on both sides."
The House also debated last night its version of a bill to set up a fund to help restore the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries.
The Chesapeake Bay Trust Fund 2010 would direct $50 million to efforts to curb rainwater running off streets, driveways and parking lots as well as rural land that washes chemicals and sediment into the bay. The money would go to specific projects developed by BayStat, the O'Malley administration's program targeting spending on the bay and measuring the results.
The initiative passed by the House would be financed through a tax on car rentals and a small contribution from the gas tax. It must be reconciled with a Senate version, which would take revenue from a tax on car titles and from the state's land preservation programs.
Most of the buzz around the State House yesterday, however, centered on uncertain prospects for slots legislation.
"Obviously, we're trying to get to 85 votes and give people a determination at the polls in November," said House Speaker Michael E. Busch (D-Anne Arundel), who has opposed slots but endorsed a referendum to resolve an issue that has paralyzed Annapolis for years.
Putting slots to a public vote would require passage of two pieces of legislation. The first, which serves to put the issue on the ballot, requires a supermajority of three-fifths of the chamber. The second, which provides details on where machines would be and how their proceeds would be divided, requires only a simple majority to pass.
O'Malley and other slots supporters were engaged in a complicated lobbying campaign yesterday, leaning on some delegates who have opposed slots to vote for the referendum even if they wind up opposing the more detailed bill.
"My appeal to them is that we haven't been able to resolve this," O'Malley told reporters yesterday. "We need to resolve it. . . . We hope the House will let the people decide."
O'Malley called the stalemate over slots "the monkey wrench in the cogs of compromise."
Several Democratic delegates who are leaning toward voting against a public referendum on slot machine gambling said they have been lobbied in recent days by O'Malley and others in his administration to support the bill, although most were reluctant to speak about it publicly.
O'Malley "lobbied me aggressively for the referendum," said an anti-slots Democratic delegate, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he did not want to be seen speaking publicly against the governor. "He was trying hard. He wanted my vote. . . . He was really trying to woo me."
Although she has long opposed slot machine gambling, Del. Tawanna P. Gaines (D-Prince George's) said she would support the referendum. But she said she has not been persuaded by the governor's office.
"I keep my phone on silent," Gaines said. "I don't want to be influenced or swayed based on personal relationships."
Other delegates said they remained undecided about the issue.
"I haven't made up my mind," said Del. Dan K. Morhaim (D-Baltimore County). He said his vote hinges on the bill's details, such as locations and the process of awarding licenses for the machines. Morhaim said the governor's office had not reached out to him. "Maybe that will come today," he said.
House leaders have floated the idea of a Frederick slots venue for the past few days. Del. Frank S. Turner (D-Howard), who chairs the subcommittee with jurisdiction over slots, said that it could serve Montgomery residents who now travel to West Virginia to play slots.
Sen. Ulysses Currie (D-Prince George's) said it is "a possibility" that both the Frederick and Worcester sites could wind up in a compromise bill worked out by House and Senate leaders.
Del. Richard B. Weldon Jr. (R), chairman of the Frederick delegation, said he is disturbed that delegates would recommend slot machines in Frederick to satisfy Montgomery gamblers.
"If we're going to carry that logic and most inane point, then build the damn thing in Montgomery County," Weldon said. "Build it in Rockville. If we're going to accommodate Montgomery County gamblers, then build it in their back yard."
Staff writers Philip Rucker and Ovetta Wiggins contributed to this report.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.