|
|
» 1A » Sports » City | Region » Health | Family » Communities » Free Time » Weekender » Faith | Values » Inside | Out » A la carte » Arts + Life |
HeraldLeaderPhoto.com
 | |
 | |
| »
View slideshows by Herald-Leader photographers including The Week in Pictures Sports Staff Portfolios and more! | |
|
 |
Just 37 House members said that they plan to support the current version of the constitutional amendment that would allow casinos. Twelve others told the Herald-Leader they were undecided and five wouldn't reveal their positions.
Perhaps more concerning for advocates of the proposal, such as Richards and Beshear, is that 44 of the 99 current House members said they're likely to vote against the draft of the constitutional amendment that's pending before the lower chamber..
House Democratic Whip Rob Wilkey, who is responsible for counting votes, said his updated tally of lawmakers who could agree to vote for a casino amendment was "well above 50."
Upon seeing the Herald-Leader's vote count -- which relied upon interviews with 84 lawmakers and public statements by the other 15 -- Wilkey said those who took definitive stands are in line with his tally.
Without naming any lawmakers, Wilkey said he expects many of those who told the Herald-Leader they are undecided or were keeping their position secret could be convinced to vote for it. And he said House leaders will be trying to talk "soft 'No's" into changing their minds.
"There are some people who are saying 'No' right now who might be able to be persuaded," he said.
Still, Wilkey conceded that the next several days will be critical for Democratic leaders to lock up "five or six votes that are going to be critical" to get over the 60-vote threshold.
"I think the votes are possibly there. The problem is that you want to have a little bit of a cushion," he said. "The decision may be to put it up there and hope you pass it. I don't think anybody wants to do that. I think you want to make sure you have the votes."
This came after Beshear, who made passing a constitutional amendment allowing casinos a key goal of this General Assembly, met again with Democratic House and Senate leaders about the proposal's fate on Tuesday.
Beshear said his administration, as well as House leaders and horse industry representatives, are scrambling to count votes in that chamber.
"We all agree that at the moment we're not there, but we're still hopeful that we can come up with the votes necessary," he said. "We're in the 50s. That's of people who I feel pretty certain would be a 'yes.'"
He said they first are counting lawmakers who say they can vote for the current version of the amendment, which was pushed by Richards, the House Speaker. "And if there are concerns ... we note that," Beshear said.
Richards' version calls for nine casinos, including five that "may" be at horse racetracks. That rankled the horse breeding and racing industry, who want at least five licenses set aside for tracks. That also caused some lawmakers who had been willing to support the amendment to back away last week.
"There's no question it's come back around to us and we're picking up some folks," Richards said Tuesday. "The horse people are on board with us and we're all kind of singing the same song right now."
Some, like Rep. Carl Rollins, D-Midway, confirmed that they could now vote for the amendment because the horse industry will push to change it in the Senate.
Beshear said he talked about doing just that with Senate Democratic Floor Leader Ed Worley of Richmond.
"Sen. Worley and I agreed very strongly that should a casino amendment get to the Senate, we want to make sure that it will give some protections that the horse industry feel they need in order to have this issue on the ballot," Beshear said.
But Senate President David Williams, R-Burkesville, later said a casino proposal has no chance to garner the necessary 23 votes from the 38 senators.
"If the Rapture came and there were enough of them left here, it might, but short of that I don't see it happening," Williams said.
Talk of the Senate changing the current draft of the amendment is meaningless, Williams added.
"To amend this bill would be like putting lipstick on a corpse," he said. "And this corpse is going to be cremated. It's not going to be embalmed. Because we don't want it hanging around."
As the casino amendment -- which Beshear claims will raise hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue -- continues on its uncertain course, lawmakers also are trying to find more money to pump into an anemic two-year budget.
Several Democrats said Tuesday they believe it's unlikely a casino measure would be approved by the General Assembly and voters this year, forcing them to find other ways to generate revenue.
"We feel like Plan A has severe, severe problems. We question the validity of anything surviving down the hallway" in the Senate, said Rep. W. Keith Hall, D-Phelps, who said he'll vote against a casino bill. "So we're looking at Plan B and Plan C."
Among the key back-up plans would be to raise taxes on cigarettes and other tobacco products.
The House Democrats will meet Thursday to discuss several proposals offered by House Budget Chairman Harry Moberly, D-Richmond.
Beshear, however, said he's still holding out hope to salvage his struggling casino bill as a way to generate revenue. Raising taxes, he said Tuesday, remains a "last option."
"I'm not sure they know what their plan is yet because they've got to talk with their caucus about it," Beshear said. "I don't have any preconceived notions until I talk to them."
The Herald-Leader is pleased to provide this opportunity for readers to comment on stories and issues. However, we urge readers to avoid personal attacks or inappropriate remarks in their postings. Some of the comments may be reprinted in the newspaper. The views expressed here are not those of the Herald-Leader or its staff. Registered user names are posted for comments.
How representatives might vote, or not