Md.'s ballot words on slots readied

Foes dispute terminology

By Tom LoBianco (Contact) | Tuesday, August 19, 2008

• Print
• [-][+] Font Size
• E-Mail Alerts
• Tell a Friend
• Got a Question?
• You Report
• Click-2-Listen

ANNAPOLIS — Maryland Secretary of State John P. McDonough submitted the final language Monday that voters will see on the ballot in November when deciding whether to legalize slot machines, a topic that has dominated Maryland politics the better part of this decade.

Mr. McDonough, a former slots lobbyist, said he wrote the wording for the "Authorizing Video Lottery Terminals (Slot Machines) to Fund Education" referendum only after consulting with a former secretary of state and reviewing other sensitive ballot issues - including a measure to ban abortion in 1992 and a proposal to ban handguns on the 1988 ballot.

If residents vote in favor of the referendum, a total of 15,000 slot machines could be put at five locations throughout the state.

The referendum language also includes one major term that lawmakers left out of nearly every slots bill introduced in Annapolis - "slot machines."

"I believe the imperative to actually explain the amendment to the public prevailed over what was in the amendment," Mr. McDonough said.

The constitutional amendment lawmakers approved in November, which pushed slots onto the 2008 ballot, includes no mention of slot machines, only video lottery terminals, or VLTs.

But slots opponents were not impressed with the change. And they have frequently blasted the euphemistic language used in the debate.

For instance, voters will choose whether to approve the measure which "Authorizes the state to issue up to five video lottery licenses for the purpose of raising revenue for education of children in public schools," according to the ballot language submitted Monday afternoon.

"I guess they left out the Big Rock Candy Mountain it would pay for as well," said Scott Arceneaux, senior adviser to Marylanders United to Stop Slots, referring to the concept of paradise often sung about by workers during the Great Depression.

The ballot language does not explain that about one-half of the proceeds would fill the state's coffers and that the rest would go to racetracks, horse breeders and slots license owners.

Mr. Arceneaux said his group has not ruled out filing a lawsuit challenging the validity of the referendum.

Mr. McDonough also submitted the language voters will see when deciding whether to approve an early-voting measure that would allow voters to cast ballots up to two weeks before an election.

Mr. McDonough said the process he followed was simplifying the language signed into law by Gov. Martin O'Malley, a Democrat.

His work for Rosecroft Raceway has made him a target for anti-slots activists, since he was appointed secretary of state by Mr. O'Malley last month.

Marylanders United asked Mr. McDonough to recuse himself from drafting the slots referendum because of his Rosecroft work.

Maryland lawmakers have already budgeted for the money they expect from slot machines, increasing spending on school construction, public education and health care - a sizable gamble the three major bond-rating agencies have noted in their analysis of the state's fiscal stability.

State budget analysts warned lawmakers last month that flat revenues could cost the state $200 million in the current fiscal year. Losing expected slots revenue would create an even larger problem for state lawmakers.

Click here for reprint permissions!
Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC

Do you have another point of view, photos, audio, video or more information about a story?