"the speaker’s power to strip legislators of their chairmanships and influence drove them to back one of his top priorities.....
“My sense is there will be consequences for people voting against this bill — particularly people in his inner circle. People know if they want to chair a committee or have influence, they should think about voting for this bill’’ -- Representative Ellen Story, an Amherst Democrat
Some would call that extortion, but....
Also see: Boston's Prime Parking Spots
Yeah, you can even lose your parking space.
Related: The Perils of One-Party Politics: Speaker's Shoes
And Massachusetts calls it democracy.
"Changes killed with House lining up for casino bill; Leaders may have veto-proof margin" by Michael Levenson, Globe Staff | April 14, 2010
Easily fending off a barrage of proposed changes, House leaders appeared yesterday to have the votes to pass landmark legislation to establish two casinos in Massachusetts and up to 750 slot machines at each of the state’s four racetracks....
Supporters of the bill, on a day of freewheeling debate about the merits and perils of expanded gambling, easily shot down measures that would have required a casino to be built in Western Massachusetts; banned casino operators from pumping pheromones into the halls; required casinos to post the odds of winning on slot machines; and mandated that public health officials intervene with people who gamble for more than 24 hours at a time.
The House, which resumes debate on the measure today, approved only minor changes, including one that would require casinos to buy American-made slot machines. Mostly, lawmakers traded impassioned arguments about the social ills and potential economic benefits of adding gambling parlors, as casino lobbyists buttonholed members outside the House chamber, and union workers and anticasino activists watched from the House gallery.
Backers said the bill offers Massachusetts a historic chance to create thousands of jobs and keep much of the estimated $1.1 billion that Bay State gamblers spend annually on casinos in Connecticut and Rhode Island.
Related: Casino Comparisons: Connecticut's Foxwoods Failure
Casino Comparisons: Rhode Island's Red Ink
But don't let the numbers stand in the way of the lies.
Representative Benjamin Swan, a Springfield Democrat who supports the bill, spoke of watching busloads of gamblers leave his economically depressed city every day to spend money at casinos in other states. He said it was time to welcome the casino industry.
Also see: Boston Globe Says Everyone is a Winner at Casinos
“The purpose is economic development and recovery for our Commonwealth and, more specifically, jobs, jobs, and jobs again,’’ Swan declared.
Supporters also promoted casinos as a way to help replenish state and local budgets. House leaders circulated a spreadsheet showing how much each city and town would receive annually of the estimated $100 million in local aid proponents believe the bill would generate from slot machine revenue....
Related: Against All Odds: Winners and Losers
Representative Bill Bowles, an Attleboro Democrat who supports the bill, said: “Say yes to keeping firefighters employed. Say yes to keeping police officers on the street. Say yes to keeping teachers in the classroom.’’
You guys told us that when you raised taxes and we are still seeing service cuts.
**********
House leaders succeeded in beating back amendments by arguing that legislators should not tell casino operators how to run their businesses....
But they should tell us how to run our lives from the food we eat, to the air we breathe, to the things we say.
Lawmakers rejected amendments that would have permitted casinos only in communities with passenger rail service; required them to have clocks on the walls; limited the amount their ATMs dispense; and required them to use mechanical, not electronic, slot machines.
After 17 years of serving in the back benches of the House, Representative Ellen Story, an Amherst Democrat newly elevated to Speaker Robert A. DeLeo’s leadership team, said she wasn’t willing to risk being marginalized, so she will vote for the bill despite opposing gambling bills in the past.
“My sense is there will be consequences for people voting against this bill — particularly people in his inner circle,’’ Story said outside the House chamber last night. “People know if they want to chair a committee or have influence, they should think about voting for this bill.’’
Representative Jennifer Callahan, a Sutton Democrat, tried unsuccessfully to force a public hearing on the bill, which went directly to the House floor for debate. House leaders have argued that the bill did not need a hearing because they held hearings on other gambling bills last fall.
And because of WHO WROTE the BILL:
"Public [is] not welcome.... activity is taking place almost entirely out of public view... and behind closed doors.... the Legislature is exempt from the state's open meeting and public records laws.... able to deliberate in private and guard key documents from public scrutiny.... allowing the public to take part in the proceedings would only bog things down....
Rank-and-file lawmakers currently have little clue about what is going on or what they inevitably will be asked to vote on with little notice.... Legislation was actually drafted by lobbyists and sent to the State House by courier for passage"
Also see: The Perils of One-Party Politics: The Ruling Party
Wow.
Democrat Fascism posing as a "liberal democracy."
Lawmakers voted down her amendment, 118 to 34. That and other votes like it suggested House leaders have the 106 votes needed to pass the bill with a veto-proof majority.
Indeed, opponents sounded, at times, resigned to defeat. Representative Carl Sciortino, a Somerville Democrat who opposes the bill, said the House was “on the eve of passing legislation that will destroy families.’’
Representative Cory Atkins, a Concord Democrat, expressed frustration that the legislation does not include enough safeguards to prevent gamblers from going too far. “Everything is geared so the house will win, and you will lose,’’ Atkins said....
--more--"
"House OK’s casinos, slots; Decisive reversal of ’08 defeat; prospects in Senate uncertain" by Michael Levenson, Globe Staff | April 15, 2010
The Massachusetts House yesterday embraced the largest expansion of gambling since the creation of the Lottery in 1971, approving legislation to establish two casinos in the state and up to 750 slot machines at each racetrack.
The lopsided, veto-proof 120-to-37 vote, a landmark moment in the long-running debate over casino gambling in the Bay State, followed a relentless campaign by House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo, a track worker’s son who has two racetracks in his district.
Related: DeLeo and His Dad
Yeah, put a bet down for Dad!
DeLeo succeeded in persuading many members who voted against casinos just two years ago to switch their votes....
And we KNOW WHY!
Threats -- same way the last guy got them to turn it down!
Legislators who changed their votes yesterday said the slumping economy had persuaded them that casinos and slots represent a historic opportunity to create thousands of jobs and capture much of the estimated $1.1 billion that Massachusetts gamblers spend every year at casinos in Rhode Island and Connecticut.
“How can we in Massachusetts continue to watch money and people flow to other states?’’ said Representative James M. Murphy, a Weymouth Democrat who opposed casinos in 2008 but backed the bill yesterday. “In my opinion, we cannot.’’
Several also acknowledged that the speaker’s power to strip legislators of their chairmanships and influence drove them to back one of his top priorities.
“This is the bill he has cared about more than any other bill,’’ said Representative Ellen Story, an Amherst Democrat and member of the speaker’s leadership team, who voted for the bill after voting against casinos in 2008. “My sense is that there may well be consequences for people voting against this bill — particularly people in his inner circle.’’
Profiles in courage!
Lawmakers hugged and cheered on the House floor when a beaming DeLeo announced the vote, after two days of impassioned debate over the benefits and dangers of casinos and slots. Outside the chamber, grinning casino lobbyists and union officials, having lost this fight several times before, rejoiced....
The bill now heads to the Senate, where it faces an uncertain future....
Senator Stanley Rosenberg, an Amherst Democrat who is Murray’s point person on casinos, said it was too soon to predict the shape of the gambling legislation Senate leaders will craft. Senators plan to begin deliberations with a series of closed-door meetings later this month.
“The debate is now fully engaged as the House completes their action,’’ Rosenberg said. “There will be a lot of pressure to move on the issue.’’
Also see: State Senate Shuts Down Slots
I'm so embarrassed he is my puke, even though I never vote for him.
Critics warned of catastrophic consequences from the social ills associated with compulsive gambling. They warned that increases in domestic violence, foreclosures, suicides, and other problems would offset the predicted economic benefit of two casinos and as many as 3,000 slot machines.
Representative Carl M. Sciortino Jr., a Somerville Democrat, spoke of relatives who faced economic ruin and marital strife because of their addiction to gambling. He denounced the House for giving its “blessing to an industry whose sole mission is to strip people of their hard-earned money for nothing more than corporate profit and corporate greed.’’
“It’s not economic development,’’ he said. “It’s exploitation.’’
Representative Matthew C. Patrick, a Falmouth Democrat opposed to the bill, choked up as he recalled how his father, a World War II veteran and high school football coach, became addicted to betting on horses, forcing his mother to raise the family.
“Poverty is no fun,’’ Patrick said. “Using food stamps, getting hand-me-downs, phones turned off all the time . . . I want you to realize this has a real dramatic impact on families. It’s going to hurt families.’’
Too late.
Besides, the"public servants" are more concerned about cash than they are the people.
Opponents also predicted that casinos would destroy local businesses.
Yup -- unless it's drugs or crime.
Gamblers will flock to the betting parlors, but “they’re spending money that in the long run would be spent elsewhere,’’ said Representative Daniel E. Bosley, a North Adams Democrat and longtime opponent of expanded gambling.
Casinos may be fun, but they are the “worst form of investment you can make as economic policy,’’ Bosley said.
He is retiring, and not a moment too soon.
Opponents held out hope that the opposition the governor and Senate president have to slot machines will ultimately doom the bill. DeLeo yesterday predicted the issue will ultimately be resolved in a conference committee this summer, but neither side seems willing to budge....
I never hope anymore, not in this s*** state with its agenda-pushing paper.
By engineering such a wide victory yesterday, DeLeo sent a message that the House could override a Patrick veto.
“I really feel very, very, very strongly about the need to keep the slots component in this bill because of the jobs factor,’’ said DeLeo, whose district includes Suffolk Downs and Wonderland Greyhound Park.
The speaker estimates the bill will create 15,000 jobs, but acknowledges only about 300 of those will be long-term jobs at the state’s four racetracks....
Several lawmakers who voted against casinos in 2008 sought to explain why they backed this bill.
That is not necessary.
One of them, Representative John V. Fernandes, a Milford Democrat, said he believed the current legislation was the safest way to regulate the gambling industry’s expansion.
“Despite all the discussion of the ills and good of the gaming industry, there is a certain inevitability to its march across America and into our Commonwealth, so the question for me was not whether, but when and how, because it’s coming our way,’’ he said.
Also see: Milford Makes Its Move
Another lawmaker who switched positions, Representative Antonio Cabral, a New Bedford Democrat, said some members were probably influenced by the ascension of DeLeo as speaker. But for him, he said, “it’s a different bill, different time.’’
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss, Bay-Staters.
Oh, yeah, and all those studies he sighted about jobs, etc?
Guess where they came from?
"Consulting firm works for DeLeo, Legislature" by Sean P. Murphy, Globe Staff | April 16, 2010
The New Jersey-based consulting company hired by the Legislature to estimate the size of the Massachusetts casino market — a market the firm concluded would be quite robust — has also been under contract to provide advice on gambling issues to the political committee of House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo.
Oh, so a bunch of $ELF-$ERVING $TUDIE$ were $PEWED FORTH, huh?
DeLeo’s campaign is paying $6,900 a month to Spectrum Gaming Group for the contract, which began last month as Spectrum was finalizing its public study for lawmakers.
The firm is providing advice to DeLeo, who pushed a bill licensing casinos and slot machines through the House Wednesday....Is that what they are calling bulls*** these days?
--more--"
