Casino debate gets a second wind on Beacon Hill
By Matt Viser, Globe Staff
The great Massachusetts casino debate could be back.
House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi, in a startling departure from previous stances against resort gambling, today decided for the first time to back a November ballot question asking voters whether they support casinos in Massachusetts.
Separately, the Senate this afternoon derailed a Republican-led effort to resurrect the governor’s failed resort gaming bill as an amendment to the state budget. The proposal failed on a 29-9 vote, with senators deciding instead to establish a study commission to look at gambling.
Political observers, lawmakers, and legislative aides throughout the State House were scratching their heads over DiMasi’s apparent switch in position.
By midafternoon, Governor Deval Patrick had yet to respond to DiMasi’s call.
Senate President Therese Murray said through a spokesman that she does not support a casino ballot question as part of the budget, but would support it if DiMasi initiated separate legislation.
“The president does not support the question of a casino referendum as part of this budget,” said her spokesman, David Falcone. “She agrees with the speaker that the budget is not the proper vehicle for this matter. If, however, a separate piece of legislation were to be filed by the speaker in regard to this matter she would support a full debate by the Senate.”
The idea of a ballot question was first floated in March by Senator Steven C. Panagiotakos, a Lowell Democrat, who argued that casino opponents in the House would be persuaded if the public were given a chance to voice their opinion.
The referendum would also trigger a massive amount of spending from interests on both sides of the casino debate, perhaps including efforts from the Connecticut casinos to quash the idea and protect their current business. In 2006, gambling-related ballot questions in five states triggered $53.7 million in spending, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics. Nearly 90 percent of the money was supplied by pro-gambling interests.
“I remain opposed to casino gambling,” DiMasi said in a statement issued this morning. “But, given the magnitude of what the Senate is considering, I would support as a compromise Senator Panagiotakos’ proposal to put an advisory question on casinos before voters this fall.”
Public opinion polls have routinely showed that Massachusetts residents support Governor Deval Patrick’s proposal to legalize casino gambling. A Globe poll last September showed that 53 percent favored the governor’s proposal.
“The speaker agreeing to a referendum, there’s a lot of momentum for it,” said Richard Tisei, the Senate minority leader and a gambling proponent. “It certainly shows that the idea of casino gambling is moving forward. Over the long term, there’s a recognition that casinos are coming and we’d better get in front of the train.”
DiMasi has been weakened by recent ethical allegations, and was put in a difficult position when amendments to revitalize the casino debate began gaining steam in the Senate.
Putting a question on the ballot would require House and Senate approval.
"The House's argument has been that it's going to change the culture and character of Massachusetts," Panagiotakos told the Globe in March, as he was making the case for a ballot question. "Well, the best to decide that is the people of Massachusetts."
