Lawsuit: Md. slots referendum wording misleading
ANNAPOLIS, Md. --Ballot wording for Maryland's referendum on slot machine gambling should change because it misleads voters about how the state will spend revenues, opponents argued in a lawsuit filed Thursday.
Plaintiffs are asking Anne Arundel County Court to prohibit state elections officials from certifying the ballot language and direct the secretary of state to revise the ballot question "with neutral language that fairly and accurately apprises voters of the true nature of the issue."
The lawsuit was filed by attorney Irwin Kramer, the lawyer who represented an unsuccessful Republican-led lawsuit to overturn last year's special session, when the referendum idea was approved along with $1.4 billion in tax increases to address a structural budget deficit. Leaders from two anti-slots groups also have signed on to the lawsuit.
Under the slot machine proposal, about half of the money would go to education. Slot machine operators would get about 33 percent. Another 7 percent would go to horse racing purses. But the ballot wording only mentions education funding, prompting cries from slots critics that the language puts approval in a more favorable light to voters, who will decide the issue on Nov. 4.
Referendum critics have attacked the ballot language written by recently appointed Secretary of State John McDonough, who worked for nearly two decades as an attorney and lobbyist for Rosecroft Raceway, a Prince George's County horse racing track.
"Simply put, the secretary is not permitted to beg the ballot question or to manipulate voter preferences by emphasizing certain aspects of the revenue plan and by omitting less popular purposes," Kramer wrote in an emergency motion to the court.
McDonough, who was appointed last month by Gov. Martin O'Malley, anticipated criticism from anti-slots groups from the beginning. However, he describes his role in the process as condensing the will of the General Assembly for the ballot.
Plaintiffs, including Aaron Meisner, who chairs an anti-slots group called Stop Slots Maryland, and Barbara Nickelbein, of No Casino Maryland, have proposed ballot wording that would authorize slot machines "for the purpose of raising revenue to be distributed to certain public programs and private entities."
The wording from McDonough would authorize slots "for the purpose of raising revenue for education of children in public schools, pre-kindergarten through grade 12, public school construction and improvements, and construction of capital projects at community colleges and higher education institutions." The secretary's ballot language doesn't mention money going to slot operators or horse racing tracks.
On another front, Scott Arceneaux, an adviser to a third anti-slots group called Marylanders United to Stop Slots, asked the State Board of Elections on Thursday to adopt different ballot language. He has asked that the ballot wording spell out that the money would be used "for public education, the horse racing industry, and lottery operations, with the remainder going to the licensees (operators)."
However, the board contends it doesn't have the authority to change ballot language submitted by the secretary of state. The board has until Sept. 10 to certify the language.
Slot machine gambling has been a divisive issue in Maryland politics for years. Late last year, lawmakers finally decided to punt the issue to the voters as part of a strategy for handling a long-running structural deficit in the state.
If approved, up to 15,000 slot machines would be allowed at five locations, including Anne Arundel, Cecil, Worcester, and Allegany counties, and Baltimore. State budget analysts estimate slots revenue could reach more than $600 million a year after it's fully implemented, which would take several years. 