Pro-gambling groups lobby in MA

BOSTON - Pro-gambling groups are ramping up their lobbying efforts in Massachusetts as lawmakers weigh whether to adopt slot machines, casino gambling, or a combination of both, a review of state lobbying records by The Associated Press has found.

In 2005, companies and groups pushing legalized gambling in Massachusetts spent $764,500 on lobbyists to press their message on Beacon Hill.

During the first six months of 2009, those same interests surpassed that total, pouring $777,983 into lobbying. That's on pace to match the $1.57 million spent in 2008 when the state's racetracks were locked in a failed effort to defeat a ballot question to end greyhound dog racing.

In the past 4½ years, pro-gambling groups - including casino developers, the state's racetracks, poker player groups, and gambling technology firms - have spent more than $5 million on lobbying in Massachusetts.

Even without a ballot fight, lobbying on gambling shows no signs of slowing. In 2005, 16 groups hired lobbyists to push for legislation legalizing casinos and slot machines. By 2009, that number jumped to 26, as more groups try to edge into the debate.

And not all of that money is staying in lobbyists' pockets. During the first half of 2009, lobbyists representing pro-gambling firms and groups have shelled out more than $100,000 in campaign donations to Beacon Hill lawmakers, often giving the maximum $200 per year, per lawmaker donation allowed under law, according to the AP's review.

Fueling the lobbying push is the growing sense that some kind of expanded gaming bill could emerge from the Legislature as early as this fall.

Gov. Deval Patrick, Senate President Therese Murray and House Speaker Robert DeLeo all support some kind of expanded gambling, but they don't necessarily agree on the details.

Patrick, a Democrat, has proposed licensing up to three resort style casinos in the state, an idea that was rejected last year by House lawmakers, in part because former House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi opposed it.

DeLeo, the current speaker, supports putting slot machines in the state's four dog and horse tracks, as a first step. DeLeo, a Winthrop Democrat, represents two of the four racetracks, and has said it would be quicker and easier to install slot machines than to build new casinos.

Murray, a Plymouth Democrat, has been less specific about whether she supports slots, casinos or both.

While state leaders debate the merits of expanded gaming, the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe is pursuing plans to build a casino in Middleborough.

The flurry of activity hasn't gone unnoticed - in and outside Massachusetts.

More than a third of the lobbying dollars spent on gaming issues in Massachusetts during the first half of the year came from outside the state, including companies in Missouri, Georgia, Washington D.C., Rhode Island, Louisiana and five in Nevada.

One of those companies is the Las Vegas Sands Corp., which spent $22,500 in the first half of 2009 to hire lobbyists to keep an eye on Beacon Hill.

"You want to monitor the situation and make an evaluation on your ability to participate if something should come to fruition," said company spokesman Ron Reese. He said the lobbying also lets the company "have a voice in the process and help educate" lawmakers and opinion-makers on gaming issues.

Reese said the Sands has another reason to keep close tabs on Massachusetts - company chairman Sheldon Adelson grew up in Boston's working-class Dorchester neighborhood.

The Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority in Connecticut is also keeping tabs on Massachusetts. The tribe, which operates the Mohegan Sun casino in Connecticut and has an option on 152-acre parcel in Palmer, Mass., has spent $36,000 so far this year on lobbying Beacon Hill.

"We find it is very helpful in communicating effectively with decision-makers in the commonwealth," said the tribe's chief of staff Chuck Bunnell.

The millions spent by pro-gaming interests in Massachusetts is leaving casino and gambling opponents outgunned.

Michael Falcone, spokesman for Casino Free Mass, said the advocacy group hasn't hired any lobbyists.

"We don't depend on money. We depend on people doing the right thing," Falcone said. "We are encouraging people who are opposed to casino gambling because of its regressive nature to talk to their elected officials."

Falcone said he's concerned that lawmakers may be receiving information from lobbyists that could paint a far too rosy picture of casinos.

Gambling opponents have taken some solace from the apparent split between DeLeo and Patrick on casinos versus slot machines, but even Falcone concedes critics have their work cut out for them.

Not all the debate about expanded gambling is happening in the Statehouse.

Poker enthusiasts have filed a proposed a ballot question that would legalize Internet poker in Massachusetts and let the state tax winnings. The Washington, D.C.-based Poker Players Alliance - which supports legalizing Internet poker - has spent more than $34,000 on lobbying