Anti-slots lobbyists say fight isn't over

A main anti-slots group in Maryland remained confident a referendum to legalize slot machines in Maryland could be defeated despite a court ruling earlier this week that dealt a blow to its cause.

Scott Arceneaux, a senior adviser to Marylanders United to Stop Slots, one of the two large anti-slots groups in the state, said the group would "redouble" its efforts after a Maryland Court of Appeals ruling earlier this week didn't change language that slots opponents called biased.

An Anne Arundel County Circuit Court ruling last week changed the language by one word, making the question say the "primary purpose" of slots would to be fund education, rather than simply the "purpose."

The wording of the ballot question is "absolutely crucial," Arceneaux said, adding that the Monday decision by the state's highest court to uphold the earlier ruling was "disappointing."Meanwhile, For Maryland, For Our Future, an umbrella pro-slots group, praised the ruling and highlighted the fact that the anti-slots groups were ordered to pay both sides' legal costs.

Slots opponents had said the language was biased because only 48.5 percent of the money would go to fund education. One-third of the revenue would go to the operators of the machines, 9.5 percent to the horse-racing industry, 5.5 percent to local governments, 2 percent to the state lottery and 1.5 percent to a fund supporting minority- and women-owned businesses.

If it passes, the referendum would authorize a constitutional amendment to legalize 15,000 slot machines in five locations: Anne Arundel, Cecil, Worcester and Allegany counties and Baltimore City. State budget analysts have said slots could generate up to $600 million a year for the state after a few years.

Gov. Martin O'Malley (D), a slots supporter, has pointed to slots as a way to solve the state's persistent fiscal problems. The state could face a $1 billion deficit in the next fiscal year.

The Board of Regents, which oversees the University System of Maryland, voted earlier this month to support the slots referendum. At the time, Regent David Nevins said slots were "the most politically expedient way to add millions of dollars to our state's coffers."

"The fact that a group of gubernatorial appointees decided to support the governor's referendum, frankly, isn't a surprise," Arceneaux said.

But Arceneaux said slots would generate no money for the state in the first two years and aren't a solution to the state's current fiscal problems. Furthermore, he said slots would be a net loser for the state over the long run because of the increased social problems they would cause.

He also said slots weren't a solution to the state's long-term budget problem and described the fact that the legislature linked the continued existence of the Higher Education Investment Fund, the state's first dedicated source of funding for higher education, to the success of the referendum as a "shell game."

"They didn't have to do that. Nobody put a gun to their head," Arceneaux said.

Arceneaux, a veteran political operative, previously managed university Vice President for Administrative Affairs and former Montgomery County Executive Doug Duncan's campaign against O'Malley for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in 2006. He also managed Comptroller Peter Franchot's (D) campaign and was the political director for Sen. Chris Dodd's (D-CT) presidential bid.

robillarddbk@gmail.com