Outcome Is in Doubt as Differences Remain to Be Worked Out With Senate
By John Wagner and Lisa Rein
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, November 17, 2007
The Maryland House of Delegates approved legislation in a cliffhanger vote yesterday calling for a referendum on legalizing up to 15,000 slot machines, advancing the most contentious issue being considered in a nearly three-week-old special session.
The bill, which required a supermajority of 85 delegates, would authorize slots at locations in Baltimore and Allegany, Anne Arundel, Cecil and Worcester counties if voters approve it next November. It passed 86 to 52, after several days of heavy lobbying by Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) and House leaders.
Even with the House action, the fate of expanded gambling in Maryland remains uncertain. The Senate last week passed a referendum bill with some different provisions, as well as a far more expansive bill needed to implement a slots program. House leaders pledged to turn their attention immediately to the implementation bill, which also could be a hard sell in the chamber.
"I haven't counted quite yet," House Speaker Michael E. Busch (D-Anne Arundel) said when asked about the prospects of the second bill. "We're taking this an issue at a time."
If the implementation bill were to fail, it could make it more difficult for lawmakers to find consensus on other measures pending in a special session called to close a budget shortfall of at least $1.5 billion. And slots would likely dominate lawmakers' next regular session, scheduled to begin in mid-January.
During impassioned debate yesterday, supporters argued that a public vote would resolve an issue that has paralyzed Annapolis for years and prolonged the special session. Opponents countered that the vote was a first step toward ushering slots and accompanying social ills, including gambling addiction and increased crime, into the state.
"We're giving people the right to choose," said Del. Sheila Hixson (D-Montgomery), chairwoman of the Ways and Means Committee, which shepherded the legislation.
Del. Luiz R.S. Simmons (D-Montgomery) argued, however, that "this referendum is a Trojan horse to sneak slot-machine gambling into Maryland through the back door."
Simmons called slots "the crack cocaine of gambling" and strongly objected to pressure to support O'Malley on the issue, alleging delegates had been "subjected to a kind of political waterboarding" in recent days.
The 86 votes cobbled together by O'Malley and House leaders included several delegates who have opposed slots in previous debates -- and pledged to work for their defeat on next November's ballot -- but said they want to put the divisive issue behind them.
"It really came down to, 'What's the duty of a legislator?' " said Del. Doyle L. Niemann (D-Prince George's), a slots opponent, in explaining his favorable vote. "It's hard to philosophically justify not letting people decide on this issue."
The Senate has now passed four slots bills in the past five years. The only slots legislation to clear the House before yesterday came in 2005 and was declared dead-on-arrival in the Senate. Busch has historically been the legislature's most powerful slots opponent, but he has agreed to support a referendum.
Yesterday's debate came as leaders of both chambers sought to bring to a conclusion a session called by O'Malley to close the budget shortfall and raise additional revenue for transportation and health-care priorities. The two chambers have passed differing bills that would raise an additional $1.4 billion in annual tax revenue and direct O'Malley to cut about $500 million from next year's budget.
O'Malley told reporters last night that he considered the House slots vote "a major tipping point."
"Tonight was a major move forward with some bipartisan help for resolving this impasse and letting the people decide," O'Malley said.
The referendum bills that have now passed both chambers are only four pages in length, serving to establish the issue that would appear on the presidential ballot next year. The implementation bill, which a House subcommittee approved after making minor changes last night, is more than 60 pages.
That bill addresses issues including how proceeds from the machines would be divided among the state, slots parlor operators and the horse-racing industry. The bill also outlines the criteria that a commission would use to award licenses at locations detailed in the bill.
The implementation bill only requires a simple majority, or 71 delegates, for passage. But it could prove just as difficult to move through the House. Some anti-slots delegates who were persuaded to vote for the referendum bill are not expected to vote for the second bill.
In their search for votes, O'Malley and Democratic leaders were hampered by an announcement by House Republicans that they would not support slots in a special session, even though most of the GOP caucus supported slots under former governor Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. (R).
By withholding their votes, Republicans hoped to leverage more spending cuts. But five Republicans wound up joining 81 Democrats in voting for the referendum bill, providing the margin for passage.
O'Malley also reached out to the Montgomery delegation, pledging additional school construction dollars if more members came on board, several lawmakers said. Sixteen of the 24 delegates from Montgomery voted for the bill yesterday.
Del. Jane E. Lawton (D-Montgomery), a slots opponent, said she was swayed by a desire to "put this issue to bed" and by the school funding that she said was discussed at a meeting of the governor, County Executive Isiah Leggett (D) and undecided delegates.
Seventeen of the 23 Prince George's delegates also voted for the referendum bill.
"I think most of us are still 'no' votes on the issue of slots," said Del. Dereck E. Davis (D-Prince George's). But he said many in the delegation felt the impasse was preventing progress on other priorities, such as health care and the environment.
Before approving the referendum bill, the House added a provision that would require slots operators to comply with local planning and zoning laws. The Senate bill does not include similar language.
Delegates said the amendment, approved on a voice vote, was designed to give elected officials in Worcester a way out of allowing slots. Under the bill, the most likely location in the county is Ocean Downs racetrack, which is near Ocean City.
"If the town fathers don't want it, they won't have it," House Majority Leader Kumar P. Barve (D-Montgomery) said.
The amendment could also come into play if a site other than Laurel Park racetrack were selected for slots in Anne Arundel, said County Executive John R. Leopold (R). The track is considered the most likely venue in the county, but a license could be awarded elsewhere near Route 295.
Another amendment failed, 67 to 61, that would have allowed slots parlors only to be located in jurisdictions in which a majority of voters approve the statewide referendum.
The Senate, which last week passed five bills introduced by O'Malley, met briefly this morning, before recessing until today.
Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. (D-Calvert) reiterated his view that lawmakers should not pass the slots referendum legislation and leave town without agreeing on an implementation bill. Some delegates suggested this week that bill could be considered later, given the referendum date is nearly a year away.
"It's like selling a car and the people make payments on it for a year and there's no motor in the car so it doesn't go," Miller said.
Staff writer Ovetta Wiggins contributed to this report.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.