State senators are finalizing a proposal to establish slot machine gambling at several sites in Massachusetts, a measure that could also clear the way by the end of the year for a full-scale Indian casino.
The plan is still being hashed out, but several senators involved in the negotiations say they're confident they can fashion a bill that will draw a majority of the 40-member Senate. Gambling supporters believe the state can generate between $200 million and $300 million per year just by authorizing slot machines, money that would help the state manage a $3 billion budget gap next year.
"When people see how bad the budget is, we could all want the money," said Senate Government Regulations chairman Michael W. Morrissey, a Quincy Democrat. "We have to bring it out for the full Senate to debate. It's that critical of an issue."
Morrissey is working with Senate Republican leaders and other senators to cobble together a proposal that has wide support. It would go further than other plans by opening the door to resort casinos, as well slot machines.
Debate on the measure could come as soon as Friday or early next week.
But any gambling proposal that passes the Senate would set up a clash with the House, which last month rejected two bills that would have authorized slot machines at the state's four racetracks and other sites. State Representative Daniel E. Bosley, Morrissey's cochairman on the Government Regulations Committee, said gambling expansions pursued by the Senate will probably be turned down by the House, given its previous votes.
"I can't see the House position changing," said Bosley, a North Adams Democrat. "We need to stand back and take an impartial view of this, and decide whether or not this is worthwhile doing."
The Senate position also could be opposed by Governor Mitt Romney, who has called for five-year slot licenses to be auctioned by the state but has not taken a position on allowing slot machines permanently. He also has not weighed in on the issue of whether to allow stand-alone casinos but has said he would prefer to limit gambling expansions only to slot parlors.
The Senate proposal will probably allow at least four sites to install slots, with the expectation that several of those licenses would be obtained by dog and horse tracks, since gambling already occurs there and slots could be installed relatively quickly.
Morrissey also is working on a regulatory mechanism for federally-recognized American Indian tribes to be given priority in bidding for casino licenses, and some senators are pushing for other commercial casinos to be allowed as well.
Federal law generally allows Indian tribes to operate gambling facilities similar to those in place elsewhere in a state, so Morrissey said the state would be wise to negotiate favorable conditions with tribes before its hand is forced.
Massachusetts has one federally recognized tribe — the Wampanoags of Aquinnah on Martha's Vineyard, which has sought to build a casino in Southeastern Massachusetts — and two other tribes are considered close to winning recognition from the US Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Because the issue of expanded gambling could tie up budget negotiations for weeks or months, Republican and Democratic senators agreed not to bring up gambling proposals when the Senate debates its annual spending plan, starting today. But the deal calls for the Senate to discuss at least one gambling measure shortly after the budget is complete.
Bringing up gambling later will allow lawmakers to offer an alternative to deep spending cuts that doesn't include new taxes, said Senator Steven C. Panagiotakos, a Lowell Democrat. Adding provisions for full-scale casinos adds an attractive element of economic growth and job creation to the equation, he said.
"By sending it over there after the budget's done, you're going to see a cry from advocates and different groups looking for a way to restore services," said Panagiotakos, vice chairman of the budget-writing Senate Ways and Means Committee. "The casinos create more good-paying jobs than the other gambling proposals."
The Senate plan would call for slot machines to be supervised by the state treasurer's office, and state Treasurer Timothy P. Cahill supports such gaming, though he opposes casino gambling. Giving Cahill authority over slots could neutralize criticism that gambling will harm the highly-successful lottery, since it could be treated as a supplement — not a competitor — to lottery games.
The measure will call for any gambling revenues to go into a trust fund for the time being, so state leaders don't spend more than is actually generated and the issue of whether to expand gambling can be discussed out of the context of the state's fiscal crisis.
Antigambling forces are mobilizing for a fight in the Senate, though they acknowledge they face a tough job after years in which gambling interests and lobbyists have showered lawmakers with campaign contributions. State Senator Susan C. Tucker said the bill now being discussed would have a serious impact on the quality of life in the state.
"There will be a profound and rapid expansion of gambling all over Massachusetts if that prevails," said Tucker, an Andover Democrat. "There's a lot of money behind the gambling interests, and we're working hard to expose this for what it really is: a tax-by-slot scheme on working families and the elderly."