The Fat Lady isn't ready to sing yet

by David Grand
December 5, 2007

In fact, she probably left her dressing room, where she was practicing hitting High C, and left Annapolis in a huff and a puff in her chauffeur-driven limo, after hearing that her long-awaited performance had been scrubbed for the fourth time in as many years, due to the recent special session of the General Assembly electing to put the question of having slots in the state decided by the voters in a November 2008 referendum.

And if the militant, anti slots contingent had its way, her open-ended contract would be canceled and she'd be carted away to a retirement home for former divas, where her lyrical voice would be heard no more.

Now, I admit I have egg on my face for predicting in a earlier column, that at long last a slots bill would be passed in the 2008 legislative session and that the racing industry (and the 18,000 who depend on it for their livelihood) would have cause to celebrate.

But that was before the special session held in November, which turned out to be a grim reminder of Winston Churchill's words: "You can only predict things after they've happened."

In hindsight, what I failed to recognize through my rose-colored glasses was the extent to which Republicans would dig in their heels in opposing a referendum. I knew they were angry as a grizzly bear with a sore tooth over the special session being held in the first place, especially because it'd "focus on tax increases." However, I underestimated how strongly they felt about it. So much so, that they were willing to let the slots issue dangle in the air till the January session.

As Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller taunted Republicans after the vote was taken on the referendum (which passed by only one vote in the House): "We would not need to have one, if they had participated in the legislation and sat at the table and voted the way they did last year and the year before and the year before that."

True. But that was a different ball game. For their man, Governor Ehrlich, was on the pitcher's mound, who favored having a straight up-and-down vote on slots to determine the outcome, rather than by a referendum. As he was quoted as saying, "the voters elected us to make decisions, not to back away from making them."

Speaking of governors, I've always wondered why, by comparison to Maryland,  Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell succeeded in gaining legislative approval of a slots bill in 2004 with a minimum of sound and fury?

I think part of the answer lies in his having "sweetened the pot" by delivering on his pledge to provide property tax relief when signing legislation implementing expanded gaming and tax relief. With as much as $1 billion expected to be available for property tax relief, based on gaming revenues, they'd be lowered by an average of 23 percent statewide or for an average $333 for every homeowner.

As he proudly proclaimed at the signing, "Today, the people of Pennsylvania are true winners; for starting now, we begin the long overdue process of recapturing billions of dollars in lost revenues, creating thousands of jobs, dramatically contributing to the future of the horse racing industry and finally returning millions in the form of lower property and wage taxes for citizens of the state."

Oh, that I should live so long as to hear a Maryland governor echoing those words.