News Room

Democratic trio speak out against gaming solution
March 31, 2005

Three influential Democrats said Wednesday they oppose plans to expand gambling.

Written by Guillermo X. Garcia, San Antonio Express-News

News255

AUSTIN — Three influential Democrats said Wednesday they oppose plans to expand gambling, accusing the Republican leadership of trying to create a budgetary crisis to force passage of a gaming bill as a way to fund public education.



The Democrats called on House Speaker Tom Craddick to pull the issue from this session's agenda. The issue is being weighed in House committees.

"We can't afford to let the Legislature roll the dice with our children's future," said Rep. Pete Gallego.

Craddick didn't directly respond to the request but said in a statement that no one has asked him "to pull gambling off the table."

He said that conference committee work between the House and Senate will be required to reconcile funding differences between the two chamber's education bills, but that "those adjustments don't necessarily include utilizing gambling to fund public education."

The speaker repeatedly has declined to state his position on gambling, but he has said throughout the session that he does not believe there are the required 100 votes in the House to pass a constitutional amendment that would be needed to place the issue before the voters.

The three Democrats, Jim Dunnam of Waco, Garnet Coleman of Houston and Gallego — the chairmen of the House Democrats, House Black caucus and the Hispanic caucus, respectively, — emphasized they were speaking as individuals and not on behalf of their members.

But several times during a noon news conference they implied that most of the 63 Democrats as well as up to 40 Republicans in the 150-member House would not vote for a gaming bill.

The main gambling bill, introduced by Valley Rep. Kino Flores, D-Palmview, calls for a significant expansion of gambling in Texas, allowing for the creation of casinos and installation of slot machines, termed video lottery terminals (VLTs), in casinos and at horse racing racetracks around the state.

Rep. Sylvester Turner, D-Houston, has filed another bill, less far-reaching than Flores' proposal. Turner's bill calls for the addition of VLTs at racetracks and existing casinos. Republicans have filed other gambling bills.

The only casinos legally operating in the state are on Indian reservations, exempt from state authority because they are under the purview of the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs.

The Republican controlled House last week passed a school finance bill that lowers by one-third property taxes, a Republican priority this session.

But the appropriation bill falls more than $600 million short of financing the school bill. Some lawmakers say that House leaders and Gov. Rick Perry are counting on making up the shortfall by quietly supporting a gaming measure that by some estimates could bring up to $1 billion a year to the state in gaming taxes and licensing fees.

A gambling bill "is the wrong solution at the wrong time," Dunnam said, adding that GOP leaders "want gambling in Texas, but they don't want their fingerprints on it" and have persuaded Flores and Turner to carry the measures.

Coleman said gambling is not a stable revenue source.

"Can't we learn from the past?" Gallego asked, referring to the passage in the 1990s of a statewide lottery that at the time was touted as the final solution for school funding.

"We don't want to build a public education system on gambling," Gallego said.

The three Democrats, frequently associated with promoting a liberal agenda, appeared to be in step with state Republican Party chair Tina Benkiser.

Adamantly opposed to any expansion of gambling in Texas, Benkiser today will lead an anti-gambling rally on the steps of the Capitol.

Related Stories

Fair Use Notice
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.