It was less than one week old and suffered from a political ailment known as the "Christmas tree effect,'' observers said of the measure, which is expected to die.

In other words, the lawmakers pushing slot machines as a cure-all for financial problems in certain regions of the state ultimately caused the bill's demise by stacking it with new initiatives.

"You keep hanging more goodies on the Christmas tree -- and the better it looks (when) it's amplified by ornaments -- until the weight of it bogs it down,'' said G. Terry Madonna, the director of Millersville University's Center for Politics and Public Affairs.

"The irony is, the slots bill is in trouble because of its friends,'' Madonna said. "It's not in trouble because of its enemies.''

Gambling opponents called the move a win for their cause, but added that it was a mere speedbump. Slot-machine proponents are expected to be back with a new, and probably more limited, bill, although it likely won't be considered until September at the earliest.

"It is never over here in Pennsylvania. We learned that lesson a long time ago,'' said Dianne Berlin of Penryn, a leader of the National Coalition Against Legalized Gambling.

"I'm delighted that it's at least over for now,'' she said. "I see the move made by the Senate as an opportunity for them to really move forward and make positive changes in Pennsylvania.''

The House bill, passed early Saturday following a marathon debate, would allow thousands of slot machines at each of nine racetracks and two unspecified sites in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. It would raise about $1 billion a year to reduce local property taxes.

The Philadelphia casino would generate $17 million for the city's convention center. The Pittsburgh-area casino would generate money to help cover the Penguins hockey team's share of a proposed $270 million arena.

The Senate, in a procedural move Thursday, buried the House measure -- mainly because many lawmakers had grown uneasy that it went far beyond its own, more limited slot-machines bill passed in late June.

"They hated the house bill,'' said Erik Arneson, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Chip Brightbill, who represents part of Lancaster County.

"Some thought that it went too far; some thought it removed important protection provisions,'' Arneson said. "They had a couple of different reasons -- but they were united in opposition.''

The Senate bill would allow the machines at eight racetracks to generate an estimated $300 million in the first year. It would also prohibit political contributions from the gambling industry.

Senators referred the expanded House bill to the Senate rules committee during a usually business-free "token'' session, and Brightbill -- the panel's chairman -- vowed that it would stay there when the full Senate reconvenes next week.

"What it means is that we've won a couple rounds,'' said state Sen. Gibson E. Armstrong, a Refton Republican and outspoken gambling opponent. "We've been holding our own since May, and the last month has been a slugfest. But all we have to do is lose one battle and it's over.''

Technically, the dueling House and Senate proposals were both amendments to the same House bill. Thursday's action meant slots supporters must introduce a new bill if and when they reach a consensus.

"I don't think it's dead,'' Madonna said. "I think there is still a consensus to do a limited version. If it unravels, it unravels because they've increased the scope of it.''



(The Associated Press contributed to this report.)



blog comments powered by Disqus