|
Maryland AG: Toss
Slot Lawsuit
The office of the Attorney General of the state of
Maryland is adamant in the belief that the wording of the ballot
summary of a slot machine referendum should be left as-is. A press
release issued from Annapolis last Friday announced that the AG had
filed court documents insisting that the lawsuit brought by slot
game opponents was baseless. A coalition of the state’s anti-slot
machine activists are trying to change the ballot language wording
that was originally written by the Secretary of State, and approved
by the lawmakers of the General Assembly.
The anti-slot machine faction insists that the crucial issue of
where slot game proceeds will go is not sufficiently spelled out by
the current ballot language. The language describing what would
become the newest amendment to the Maryland state constitution
currently mentions that slot machine proceeds would fund education.
While it is true that just under half of the profits would go
towards educational efforts, the remaining money would go towards
lottery maintenance, horse racing prizes, and the owners and
operators of these unpopular gambling machines. The slots opponents
argue that this is a critical oversight. The Attorney General’s
office retorts that the suit is baseless, as the ballot language is
fundamentally correct and as comprehensive as possible, given the
100-word limit on ballot summaries. The current referendum ballot
wording was drafted by the Department of Legislative Services, a
nonpartisan entity.
If approved by voters, the referendum would clear the way for the
installation of some fifteen thousand slot machines in Maryland in
five different, pre-approved locations. Lawmakers estimate that,
once the machines are up and running (a process that would take a
few years), the machines could bring in upwards of six hundred
million dollars a year, and create hundreds of new jobs.
Back to September 2008 Archive.
|