A large number of House lawmakers who responded to an informal survey last week remain undecided on whether to support Governor Deval Patrick's proposal to license resort casinos in Massachusetts, setting up a potential battle royale over the fence-sitters.
Of 107 state representatives who provided their views of Patrick's casino legislation to the Globe, 40 said they are undecided; 40 others said they are opposed or leaning against the proposal; and 27 said they favor or lean in favor. Seven legislators who were contacted refused to discuss their opinions; the remaining 41 members of the 155-member chamber did not respond to repeated requests for comment.
In coming weeks, as Patrick presses his case that licensing casinos will generate jobs and fresh revenue streams, much of his focus will be on attempting to persuade undecided lawmakers, some of whom said they are torn over the issue.
"I have no idea where I'll vote; If you had a gun to my head, you'd have to kill me," said Representative Carlo P. Basile, a newly elected official from East Boston, where residents see both the job benefits from a Suffolk Downs casino and the increases in traffic that would come from it.
The large number of uncertain legislators is expected to heighten the drama on Beacon Hill as Patrick attempts to court new votes and House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi, who has said he is "deeply skeptical" of the governor's proposal, polls legislators and tries to use the extensive powers of his office to keep them in line.
Daniel O'Connell, the governor's economic development secretary and chief gaming adviser, said in an interview yesterday that administration officials are trying to meet with every legislator to make their case, including setting up one-on-one meetings between the governor and key lawmakers.
In a positive sign for the governor, the Globe poll found that 23 legislators who have a record of voting against expanded gambling say they are now undecided, compared with four legislators who previously voted in favor.
"The pressure is really on, big time" said the Rev. Richard McGowan, a Jesuit priest and professor of economics who studies gambling at Boston College. "For once the hearings are going to actually make a difference. People's minds really aren't made up."
DiMasi's skepticism has frozen a large percentage of the chamber and made lawmakers reluctant to voice public support for the plan and buck a leader who controls much of their political success, lawmakers said.
"The speaker carries a lot of weight with members," said Representative Robert M. Koczera, a Democrat from New Bedford who supports the plan. "But the governor has a chance to be proactive and show some leadership in working with them. It's just a question of how hard [Patrick] wants to roll up his sleeves and work on this."
Groups based outside the State House have also been girding for debate, trying to influence legislators in an intensity not seen since last year's same-sex marriage debate. In the Senate, the mood is more favorable toward casinos, with general support from Senate President Therese Murray.
Casino Free Mass, a coalition of groups opposed to casinos that includes the League of Women Voters and the Massachusetts Council of Churches, recently hired a public relations firm and has increased fund-raising efforts. The Massachusetts AFL-CIO, which wants the jobs that would come with casinos, is planning next week to start meeting with and writing letters to legislators.
The governor's legislation, which was filed in October, would license one resort casino each in Western Massachusetts, Southeastern Massachusetts, and metropolitan Boston. Patrick says each casino could generate $200 million to $300 million in licensing fees every 10 years. He is also counting on another $400 million a year in casino revenues for state coffers, gambling revenue that he says he would use for property tax relief and roads and bridges.
Legislators on both sides of the issue said they distrust those figures and want the administration to provide more data to back them up.
Although legislative hearings were held last year on issues related to casinos, hearings on the governor's legislation will officially start later this month before the Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies. Representative Dan Bosley, the committee's House chairman, has been the bill's harshest critic.
An informal Globe poll in December found that 12 of the 19 committee members would probably vote against the plan, and even administration officials concede that the committee vote will probably be unfavorable.
Coming before the full House with an unfavorable recommendation would mean that it faces higher hurdles, needing a majority of legislators to overturn that committee vote before floor debate.
Opponents of the legislation argue that the state Lottery and local businesses would be negatively affected by the competition from casinos. They also suggest that more Massachusetts residents would become gambling addicts and have portrayed the fight as a battle for the state's soul.
Supporters say that unless the state acts soon, it will lose negotiating leverage with the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe, which won federal recognition last year and has submitted an application to put 539 acres in Middleborough into federal trust. Several top Patrick administration officials are meeting with tribal members on Tuesday to discuss the tribe's plans.
There are a number of variables that could affect the outcome, chief among them how willing Patrick is to compromise on such issues as how to distribute casino revenues and whether to include slot machines at the state's four racetracks.
"If the economic benefits outweigh the economic and social costs, I might be inclined to support it," said Representative Joseph F. Wagner, a Democrat from Chicopee who met recently with Patrick administration officials.
"But that case hasn't been made yet to my satisfaction."
Globe correspondent Matt Collette and John Drake of the Globe Staff contributed to this report. Matt Viser can be reached at maviser@globe.com.
rising
falling 