Maryland House Acts to Put Slots Before Voters
In Wee Hours, Full Chamber Ends Tussle Over Where the Machines, and Money, Would Go

By John Wagner and Lisa Rein
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, November 18, 2007

Voters are likely to get the final say on whether to welcome slot-machine gambling to Maryland, following passage early this morning of legislation by the House of Delegates that provides details of a plan to place 15,000 machines at five locations around the state.

The 71 to 44 vote, which came at 1:40 a.m., was the second action needed to execute a proposal by Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) to hold a referendum next November on legalizing slots at venues in Baltimore and Allegany, Anne Arundel, Cecil and Worcester counties.

Two similar bills cleared the Senate a week ago, and lawmakers suggested differences could be resolved as early as today, breaking an impasse on an issue that has paralyzed Annapolis for years and prolonged a special session called to close a looming budget shortfall of at least $1.5 billion.

"The citizens of Maryland will have an opportunity to decide whether there's an expansion of gaming in Maryland," House Speaker Michael E. Busch (D-Anne Arundel) told reporters after the vote. "It has been a divisive issue for five years, and it was a reasonable way to bring it to resolution."

Leaders of both the House and Senate predicted earlier in the evening that if the second slots bill passed the House, the two chambers probably would be able to resolve their differences today on other issues pending in the three-week-old special session called by O'Malley (D).

The House approved a bill Friday night, 86 to 52, that authorized putting the question of legalizing slots to voters next November. The bill received one more vote than the required supermajority of 85 delegates and sparked impassioned debate.

The bill debated last night, which required only a simple majority of 71 delegates, addresses issues including how proceeds from the machines would be divided among the state, slots parlor operators and the horse-racing industry. It also outlines the criteria that a commission would use to award licenses at locations detailed in the bill.

The vote total was expected to change slightly in an official tally released later, as several delegates announced or changed their votes after the tally was announced.

Several anti-slots delegates who voted for the referendum as a way to break the legislature's impasse said they were reluctant to vote for the implementation bill, which they view as a more affirmative, pro-slots vote.

The House Ways and Means Committee sent the bill to the floor yesterday on a 14 to 5 vote. Several committee members who voted to move the bill forward said they saw no difference between their votes on the two slots bills.

O'Malley's proposal is expected to eventually yield $650 million a year for the state, with additional funds going to operators of slots parlors and the horse-racing industry, which is subsidized by slots in several surrounding states.

The Senate has passed slots bills in four of the past five years. The only slots legislation to clear the House prior to the special session 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 agreed to support a referendum.

An agreement today on the slots bills probably would ignite a year-long battle between gambling interests and grass-roots groups opposed to expanded gambling. About seven in 10 Maryland residents favored legalizing slot-machine gambling in a Washington Post poll last month, but some similar ballot initiatives in other states have failed in recent years even when early polls looked promising.

House debate over the referendum bill Friday night was cast in sweeping terms, with proponents arguing that a public vote would put the contentious issue behind them and help the state remain on sound financial footing. Opponents countered that the vote was a first step toward welcoming slots and the accompanying social ills, including gambling addiction and increased crime, into the state.

O'Malley, seeking to build support for the bill, conferred behind closed doors with Busch yesterday afternoon and then walked briskly with Lt. Gov. Anthony G. Brown (D) to a private meeting with the House Democratic caucus.

As yet another long day of the special session dragged on, some lawmakers expressed hope that it would soon reach a successful conclusion. Both 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.

"We've spent three weeks, day and night, tugging and pulling and compromising to get a package," said Del. Benjamin S. Barnes (D-Prince George's). "We're going to end up with a package that continues to fund the priorities of education and transportation we campaigned on."

Republican senators said they were ready to call it quits yesterday, however.

"Enough's enough, guys," Sen. E.J. Pipkin (R-Queen Anne's) said after Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. (D-Calvert) informed the chamber that the Senate was still waiting for the House to pass slots before taking any more formal actions.

A motion by Pipkin to immediately end the session failed 31 to 13, breaking along party lines in the heavily Democratic chamber.

"Everybody's getting a little sleepy and a little edgy," said Sen. Jamie B. Raskin (D-Montgomery). "We're waiting for democracy to work its way through the House."

Miller told his chamber that informal discussions have been taking place between House and Senate fiscal leaders about the pending tax bills.

"It shouldn't be too hard to come to an agreement" on the tax proposals, Miller said.

One amendment added to the House slots bill in committee yesterday would require groups and corporations advocating for or against the referendum to disclose their identities and spending four weeks before the vote. Another would prohibit elected officials from serving on the commission that selects slots locations.

Some of the most protracted discussion took place on a proposed amendment to limit other entertainment offerings by Ocean Downs racetrack if the Worcester facility wins a slots license.

Many elected officials in that area are opposed to the prospect of slots at Ocean Downs, which they say could steal business from nearby Ocean City.

The proposed amendment would prevent the track owner from placing a hotel, a convention center, miniature golf, an arcade or amusement rides at the track or on nearby property. After concerns about whether the proposal was constitutional, the committee put off consideration of the measure until floor debate. It was adopted by voice vote.

Staff writer Ovetta Wiggins contributed to this report.