GAMBLING BACKERS CONCERNED

Several Southeast Missouri legislators acknowledged having some concern last week that voters of Missouri could reject a constitutional amendment Tuesday legalizing riverboat gambling in the state.

"I see it failing or I see it passing. I'm just not confident either way," said Sen. Danny Staples, D-Eminence, chairman of the committee that deals with tourism and a proponent of riverboat casinos.

"Millions and millions of dollars have been invested by cities, counties, and businesses so far and the projected revenues have all been earmarked for education. The people should pass it. I would hope that Missourians have the vision and foresight to adopt it."

Rep. Larry Thomason, D-Kennett, agreed there is quite a bit of concern about the measure failing.

"You have to look at it from the other side and ask what if it fails?" said Thomason. "I wouldn't say there is fear that it won't pass, but there certainly is concern. It passed big before, but the people I talk to think it will be closer."

Riverboat gambling was approved in Missouri as a statewide referendum in November 1992 with about 1.4 million of the 2.2 million votes cast in favor of the measure. But in January of this year, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the change in statutes only applied to games of skill on riverboats. For games of chance, like slot machines, to be legal a constitutional amendment would be needed.

Lawmakers rushed to put the issue on the April ballot, while cities, counties and developers along the Mississippi and Missouri rivers continued with plans to seek licenses from the Missouri Gaming Commission.

"There is a lot riding on this vote," Thomason admitted. "The last time if it didn't pass there was no big deal. But this time, a lot of education organizations stand to lose a great deal. That doesn't include the money that has already been spent on planning and development of gaming facilities."

Several legislators believe the vote will be much closer this time because the overall turnout of voters will be smaller in the school and municipal elections than in a general election. Also, some feel that the type of voter likely to turnout in a spring election is also more likely to be opposed to gambling.

Rep. Herb Fallert, D-Ste. Genevieve, who pushed the riverboat gambling bill in the House as a way of increasing tourism in the sate, is optimistic it will pass.

"I think it will be closer because you have a different type of voter clientele this time than in a general election or primary," said Fallert. "The stakes are certainly higher this time."

Gov. Mel Carnahan has a lot riding on Tuesday's vote, because his education reform bill passed last year includes funding from riverboat gambling and he also has some proposed capital improvements funding in next year's budget with gambling proceeds.

Chris Sifford, the governor's communications director, admitted last week that if Amendment 3 fails Tuesday, "it could be a pretty significant problem."

Sifford said the governor has stayed out of the campaign. "It's an issue people have voted on once. It is up to the people to decide. He is comfortable with that approach," said Sifford.

Reps. Bill Foster and Mark Richardson, both Republicans from Poplar Bluff who voted against sending the amendment to the people and oppose gambling, sense momentum growing against it and disagree with proponents that bad things will happen to the state budget if it fails.

"The amount of money projected from riverboat gambling is not a large percent of the state's $12 billion budget. I think we could make adjustments if necessary," said Foster.

"There is no doubt that it is going to have some impact on our education funding," added Richardson. "But during an economic downturn we have lost more money than we will get from riverboat gambling."

Richardson said there is "growing skepticism" that the amendment might not pass. "There is a lot of concern it might go down. When the court ruling first came out, there was not much concern about whether it would pass. The only concern was getting it on the April ballot."

Added Foster, "I think it will be more difficult to pass on April 5 than the November general election."

Richardson complained that legislative leaders should have known when they put the issue before voters the first time it should have been a constitutional, rather than a statutory change. Richardson said the only reason they didn't was so they could expand the scope of gambling with a statutory change without going back to the people.

"A second year law student knows you can't amend the constitution by not amending the constitution. It was clear that a statutory change wasn't sufficient," said Richardson. "Leaders in the legislature owe an apology to the people of Missouri for the sloppy manner this was put to the people two years ago.

"There is a tendency to blame it on the supreme court and take pot shots at conservative groups. But we know who to blame."

One of the cities poised to put a boat in the water soon is Caruthersville. Sen. Jerry Howard, D-Dexter, and Rep. Don Prost, D-Caruthersville, both say a defeat of gambling would be a setback for their areas.

"I know the community is very excited about the prospect of additional jobs this will create," said Howard.

"I'm not real concerned because I think it will pass," Prost said. "It may not have as many votes as the first time, but I just feel like it is going to pass."

If the amendment were defeated, Howard, a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said it would be a major blow to the state budget. If the vote was reasonably close, Howard predicted lawmakers would send it back to the people in the August primary or November general election.

"I am concerned about the amount of money delegated from gaming funds and concerned how much has already been spent to implement it," said Howard. "We've already moved 70 state troopers over to help with gaming.

"It's all money on the come and if it gets beat we'll be back at the drawing board on appropriations."

Rep. Mary Kasten, R-Cape Girardeau, where the city council has selected a company to develop a gambling operation, believes there will be voter support for Amendment 3.

Said Kasten, "One never knows for sure, but I think as much work as has been done on it, that it will pass. I don't know how the opponents will do, but I assume it will pass again."

Rep. Dennis Ziegenhorn, D-Sikeston, added, "I don't think it will be a landslide, but we need it to pass."

If Amendment 3 were to fail, Thomason predicts quick action to send the plan back to voters.

"If there is a low turnout in the April election, it could fail, and I think we would turn around and try again," said Thomason. "If it hadn't passed as strong as it did the first time, we probably would not try to come back so fast.

"The last time it was voted on the people said they were not opposed to gambling, and that vote was thrown out on a technicality. What has changed since then? Logically, why should people have changed their minds."

Both Thomason and Fallert, along with other proponents, fear a late influx of funding from gambling interests in Illinois to the "no" forces in Missouri.

"I would hate to see it happen where voters would let outside interests influence them. Boats in Illinois stand to gain a great deal if Missouri does not have riverboat gambling," said Thomason.

"The thing that bothers me," added Fallert, "is the interference coming from Illinois boat interests. If we don't have gambling it means more money for them. They try to create a fear about all the evils of gambling, but in the short period we have seen it in other states, those things they are warning about have not come to pass."

Thomason added, "People are going to gamble regardless. I would rather see the people of Missouri benefit from it than have the revenues go to Illinois and other states."

He charged that opponents of the amendment are using "scare tactics" with false and misleading information to try and get Amendment 3 defeated.