OFFICIALS NOW STRUGGLE WITH ENSUING STEPS IN STATE GAMBLING SAGA

In the aftermath of a stunning defeat of a constitutional amendment that jeopardizes the viability of riverboat gambling in Missouri, state officials were going back to the drawing board Wednesday trying to decide the next step.

Local officials in cities and counties where local options for riverboat gambling had been approved, and developers poised to invest millions of dollars in floating casinos in those locations, were also in disarray.

Just about everyone seemed content Wednesday to let the shock of Tuesday's 1,261 vote loss wear off before getting serious about future action.

Riverboat gambling is still legal in Missouri, however. The Supreme Court ruled in January that the constitution would have to be amendment before games of chance, like slot machines, could be played on the boats.

Last week, several state legislators expressed concern that the amendment could be defeated because of a lower turnout for city and school elections and the makeup of the electorate for such elections.

Many expressed confidence that if it did not pass, lawmakers would move quickly to put the issue back before voters in the August primary and November general election where turnouts would be larger.

But on the day after the election, some legislators said they were not necessarily anxious to send the amendment back to voters.

"I have an open mind on the subject," said Sen. Peter Kinder, R-Cape Girardeau, who said some senators have warned they might filibuster any attempt to send the amendment back to voters.

Kinder said he had no interest in being part of a filibuster, but when asked if he would vote to send it to voters, the senator said, "I'm not sure that I am. The voters have spoken now twice and counties across the state that passed it before turned it down Tuesday."

Rep. Mary Kasten, R-Cape Girardeau, also declined to make a commitment Wednesday, though she acknowledged major budget cuts will be needed to make up for lost revenue hoped for from gambling.

"People do resent keeping on voting on issues, and I would be inclined to let it rest a little bit," said Kasten. "I would like to think about it again, because I have not had time to think it through. I want to get a sense from people back home on both sides of the issue."

Rep. Herb Fallert, D-Ste. Genevieve, who as chairman of the committee dealing with tourism pushed the original measure through the House, said he was unsure about the future of riverboat gambling. He said boat operators would ultimately have to decide whether boats would be profitable without games of chance.

Said Fallert, "The word is out unofficially that we should let the sand settle, shift in place, and get the feelings and opinion of people. Nobody has panicked and said run another vote through in August or November. Most people I have talked to want to let things settle down."

Fallert was optimistic in an election with a higher turnout, the amendment would be approved.

One reason for the defeat Tuesday, Fallert believes, is that the concern of the public has changed.

"When this was voted on the first time in November of 1992, the number one concern across the United States was jobs and the economy. Now, the number one concern by a big margin is crime and drugs," said Fallert. "That makes a big difference in how people view riverboat gambling."

Rep. Gene Copeland, D-New Madrid, said he was disappointed, but not surprised by the vote and is ready to send the amendment back to voters.

"I'm in favor of putting it on the ballot in either the primary or general," said Copeland.

"I am not personally surprised by the defeat. To be honest, I was surprised it got that close."

Copeland predicted the House would move quickly toward sending the amendment back to voters but expressed some reservations about prompt action in the Senate.

Rep. Larry Thomason, D-Kennett, predicted the measure would eventually go back to voters, and with a larger turnout, pass. "Of course it will be on the ballot again, but exactly when I don't know right now," said Thomason.

Thomason, who as majority whip participates in daily Democratic leadership meetings, said the mood at Wednesday's meeting was to wait and see.

"Everyone felt there was a need to analyze what happened to see if it was a representative vote or not. We want to analyze what it is going to cost us not to have passed it. We have got to look at the whole picture," he observed.

"For us, it is back to the drawing board. But I feel there is no question that the legislature will take action to put the measure back on the ballot again. But it is premature to suggest when that might happen. We have some time to figure that out."

Thomason said he is a bit frustrated that there was not more support from proponents in cities and counties that had already approved the local option. In a future election, he believes that support will be essential.

"If I really felt like yesterday's vote reflects the mood of this state, I would be satisfied with the results," said Thomason. "But I think next time we will see a vote that more accurately reflects the mood of the people in Missouri."

Rep. Dennis Ziegenhorn, D-Sikeston, said he saw the defeat coming. "People are definitely opposed to it and they are very well organized. The reason it passed before was a very large turnout," said Ziegenhorn.

Asked whether he would vote to send the amendment back to voters, Ziegenhorn said, "I'll have to think about it. I don't want people to think we are not listening to the voters up here. Maybe we need to take a look at what people were saying Tuesday."

Sen. Jerry Howard, D-Dexter, said he thought sending it to voters in April was a bad idea from the beginning. "My choice would not have been an April ballot. It was a very risky decision from the word go," said Howard.

"I would probably vote for it one more time to be considered in the primary or general election."

After the court ruling in January that the statewide referendum approved by voters in November 1992 legalized riverboat gambling and games of skill, but not games of chance, Gov. Mel Carnahan urged legislators to send an amendment to voters quickly.

Once the campaign got under way, Carnahan stayed neutral. Chris Sifford, Carnahan's communications director, said the governor will likely be neutral on whether legislators should send an amendment back to voters.

"The governor generally views a decision of putting this out again as being up to the legislature. Joint resolutions do not need to be signed by the governor, and he has indicated it is up to the legislature to make a decision," said Sifford Wednesday morning. "At this point, he is remaining neutral."

Kinder said he believes many voters are becoming more wary of riverboat gambling, because of the experience in other states and fears that this will open the way for land-based casino gambling in the state.

"I think people have watched some of what has gone on in urban areas and made a very different judgment than the judgment they made in November of 1992," said Kinder.

"They also watched the legislature monkey around with the issue and are concerned there may be land based casinos which is much different from what they voted on in 1992."

Kinder also says talk of having video lotteries in bars has led people to have second thoughts about the issue.