More News

At a slots forum in Prince George's County this week each side channeled the souring economy, with proponents stressing the need for new revenue sources and opponents questioning the wisdom of propping up a single industry in the midst of a widespread downturn.

Thomas E. Perez (D), secretary of the Maryland Department of Labor and Licensing Regulation, spoke for the pro-slots side at the Wednesday night forum at the University of Maryland's Riggs Alumni Center, while Prince George's County State's Attorney Glenn F. Ivey (D) represented slots opponents. The debaters were joined by about 50 faculty, students and residents.

On Nov. 4, Maryland residents will vote on an amendment to the state constitution that would allow 15,000 slot machines in Baltimore city and Anne Arundel, Allegany, Worcester and Cecil counties.

In referring to the state budget crisis — Maryland currently is facing a $432 million shortfall — Perez said: "What are we going to do without that revenue stream? Please tell me what we're going to cut? I'm still waiting to hear the viable alternative."

Ivey said the money could be used for other services and won't fully support education and other services for years to come.

"When the budget comes up next year, they're going to have to figure that out without those numbers," Ivey said.

Rather than speak of the ills of slots, Ivey questioned where a good chunk of the slots revenue would be going.

"If you really want slots because it benefits the public so much, because of this revenue it raises, why are we giving so much away to the horse-racing industry?" he said.

Ivey said the industry will receive 9.5 percent of the yearly slots profits, totaling $95 million a year.

"Who else gets a revenue stream like that?" he asked.

Perez said Maryland will be handing over just 33 percent of the revenue to the slots operators. That figure is much less than in neighboring states — West Virginia operators get 42 percent, Delaware 48 percent, and Pennsylvania operators 45 percent, he said.

"We have driven the best bargain for the taxpayer," Perez said. "We will get the most money returned to the taxpayer."

Perez said the amendment also stipulates that jobs created at the casinos be unionized, with the potential for employees to earn an average of $15 an hour with benefits.

Ivey said he would rather see the money for horse racing used to lure a Fortune 500 company or a biotech firm to the state. Those jobs would be better than ones at casinos, he said.

"If we're really serious about economic development, couldn't we take that approach?" he said.

Rebuking the belief that predominantly low-income families gamble, Perez pointed to the racetrack in Charles Town, W.Va., where 27 percent of the $4 billion wagered in 2006 came from Montgomery County and Fairfax County, Va.

Perez said many of the Montgomery County residents who traveled to Charles Town Races and Slots were seniors.

"These are folks who are comfortably middle class who have discretionary income, and this how they chose to spend their income," he said.

Some in the audience had questions for the debaters, including Mary Lucas, 74, an Annapolis resident opposed to slots. She wanted to know why casinos aren't planned for Montgomery County, when its residents are such loyal supporters of the Charles Town operation.

Michael Besser, 20, of Massachusetts said he has learned about the issue while taking government classes at the University of Maryland.

"I was conflicted coming in, and I'm even more conflicted now," he said. "It was definitely a public policy debate instead of an emotional appeal."

Student Angela Gentile, 19, of Berwyn Heights said she is opposed to slots but has found many students uninformed on the issue.

"They're mostly uninformed in favor of slots," she said. "To them, they sound like a good idea. Most kids think they're not going to be affected by it."