Changes killed with House lining up for casino bill

Leaders may have veto-proof margin

By Michael Levenson, Globe Staff | April 14, 2010

Easily fending off a barrage of proposed changes, House leaders appeared yesterday to have the votes to pass landmark legislation to establish two casinos in Massachusetts and up to 750 slot machines at each of the state’s four racetracks.

Judging by the votes taken on a host of amendments, as lawmakers opened debate on the bill, House leaders may also have the two-thirds majority to override a possible veto by Governor Deval Patrick, who supports casinos but opposes slots at the tracks.

Supporters of the bill, on a day of freewheeling debate about the merits and perils of expanded gambling, easily shot down measures that would have required a casino to be built in Western Massachusetts; banned casino operators from pumping pheromones into the halls; required casinos to post the odds of winning on slot machines; and mandated that public health officials intervene with people who gamble for more than 24 hours at a time.

The House, which resumes debate on the measure today, approved only minor changes, including one that would require casinos to buy American-made slot machines. Mostly, lawmakers traded impassioned arguments about the social ills and potential economic benefits of adding gambling parlors, as casino lobbyists buttonholed members outside the House chamber, and union workers and anticasino activists watched from the House gallery.

Backers said the bill offers Massachusetts a historic chance to create thousands of jobs and keep much of the estimated $1.1 billion that Bay State gamblers spend annually on casinos in Connecticut and Rhode Island.

Representative Benjamin Swan, a Springfield Democrat who supports the bill, spoke of watching busloads of gamblers leave his economically depressed city every day to spend money at casinos in other states. He said it was time to welcome the casino industry.

“The purpose is economic development and recovery for our Commonwealth and, more specifically, jobs, jobs, and jobs again,’’ Swan declared.

Supporters also promoted casinos as a way to help replenish state and local budgets. House leaders circulated a spreadsheet showing how much each city and town would receive annually of the estimated $100 million in local aid proponents believe the bill would generate from slot machine revenue.

Though no study on slot revenue has been done, proponents estimate Boston would receive $7.2 million, Worcester $4.8 million, and Lawrence $2.3 million.

Representative Bill Bowles, an Attleboro Democrat who supports the bill, said: “Say yes to keeping firefighters employed. Say yes to keeping police officers on the street. Say yes to keeping teachers in the classroom.’’

Opponents said casino gambling and slot machines would dramatically increase domestic violence, gambling addiction, and foreclosures, and kill small businesses.

“We are literally discussing who shall live and who shall die,’’ said Representative Ruth B. Balser, a Newton Democrat who opposes the bill. “Who will commit suicide? Who becomes homeless? Whose families will become the victims of domestic abuse? That’s what we’re deciding.’’

The intense debate was broken by moments of levity. After lawmakers approved the amendment requiring casinos to buy American-made slot machines, Representative Robert S. Hargraves, a Groton Republican who has one arm, prompted raucous laughter by joking that he fully supports “one-armed bandits.’’

House leaders succeeded in beating back amendments by arguing that legislators should not tell casino operators how to run their businesses.

“We should not, as a Legislature, begin to micromanage every facet of this industry, and what they can and can’t do,’’ said Representative Brian S. Dempsey, a Haverhill Democrat and chief author of the bill.

Lawmakers rejected amendments that would have permitted casinos only in communities with passenger rail service; required them to have clocks on the walls; limited the amount their ATMs dispense; and required them to use mechanical, not electronic, slot machines.

After 17 years of serving in the back benches of the House, Representative Elllen Story, an Amherst Democrat newly elevated to Speaker Robert A. DeLeo’s leadership team, said she wasn’t willing to risk being marginalized, so she will vote for the bill despite opposing gambling bills in the past.

“My sense is there will be consequences for people voting against this bill — particularly people in his inner circle,’’ Story said outside the House chamber last night. “People know if they want to chair a committee or have influence, they should think about voting for this bill.’’

Representative Jennifer Callahan, a Sutton Democrat, tried unsuccessfully to force a public hearing on the bill, which went directly to the House floor for debate. House leaders have argued that the bill did not need a hearing because they held hearings on other gambling bills last fall.

Lawmakers voted down her amendment, 118 to 34. That and other votes like it suggested House leaders have the 106 votes needed to pass the bill with a veto-proof majority.

Indeed, opponents sounded, at times, resigned to defeat. Representative Carl Sciortino, a Somerville Democrat who opposes the bill, said the House was “on the eve of passing legislation that will destroy families.’’

Representative Cory Atkins, a Concord Democrat, expressed frustration that the legislation does not include enough safeguards to prevent gamblers from going too far. “Everything is geared so the house will win, and you will lose,’’ Atkins said.

One amendment that was adopted prohibits casinos from marketing to people who put themselves on a list of problem gamblers. Atkins, who sponsored the measure, likened it to a Do Not Call registry for compulsive gamblers.

Michael Levenson can be reached at mlevenson@globe.com.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/04/14/house_lining_up_for_gambling_bill?mode=PF