Robert DeLeo blames casino woes on Deval Patrick

Photo by Nancy Lane

Gov. Deval Patrick is jeopardizing his re-election and “underestimating” voters if he kowtows to liberals and kills slots, Speaker Robert A. DeLeo told the Herald yesterday, as he blamed the “rigid” governor for the likely fatal deadlock on expand gambling.

“He’s probably underestimating the average working man and woman out there who want this,” the Winthrop Democrat said, even as he acknowledged the chances of passing casino gaming this year are “very doubtful.”

DeLeo – who indicated Patrick was playing to his liberal political base by blocking slots – said the governor must pay more attention to the state’s blue-collar Democrats or pay the consequences in November.

“I think saying no to local aid, saying no to 15,000 jobs, I think that could be an issue,” DeLeo said when asked about the governor’s re-election bid, adding that unions were “outraged” by Patrick’s decision to send the casino bill back instead of signing it.

Patrick insisted yesterday he’s not playing politics but added that he’s prepared for the blowback.

“If there are political consequences that come from that, then so be it,” Patrick said. He added that supporting slot licenses for the racetracks puts “short-term interest of a few against the long-term interest of the many.”

A frustrated DeLeo yesterday also mocked Patrick’s gaming compromise. The governor said last week he’d accept one competitively bid slot license after DeLeo pushed for four licenses – and eventually two.

“Just to say you’ll go to one, well, gee, thanks. I cut mine in half,” DeLeo said, adding that he was confused as to why Patrick then reversed his decision and slashed all slots.

“I think if you’re trying to work towards a compromise and you retreat from that compromise – how serious were you to begin with?” DeLeo said.

The clash between the Beacon Hill leaders comes as Senate President Therese Murray said she didn’t see how the casino legislation “can be salvaged.”

Lawmakers must return to formal session to reverse Patrick’s changes – something both Murray and DeLeo said is unlikely.

A resigned DeLeo defended his work throughout the session, however, pointing to other accomplishments such as ethics, transportation and pension overhauls.

“We’ve done a whole lot in these two years,” DeLeo said. “I think I’ve pretty much passed all the tests.”

Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1272195

Gov. Deval Patrick to sign national popular vote bill
/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1272309

Mass. to divest pension investments in Iran
/business/general/view.bg?articleid=1272306

Patrick: No deal for no-bid contract on slots
/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1272281

###############################################

Patrick’s stand on casinos a gamble

Amending bill keeps issue in play, may pay off in fall

By Frank Phillips, Globe Staff  |  August 2, 2010

Article Courtesy of:  Boston.com

As the casino resorts he once championed teetered closer to defeat yesterday, Governor Deval Patrick was walking a tightrope between two important parts of his base: liberals, many of whom were horrified at the prospect of casino gambling in the state; and labor unions, which view resort casinos as a major source of new jobs.

If the impasse continues, Patrick is better positioned to cobble together support in the fall election, according to several political analysts, because he blocked slots at racetracks — which gambling opponents decry as particularly corrosive — and can argue to unions that he advocated for job-creating casinos.

Patrick’s posture carries risks, however. Organized labor may yet hold him accountable for the demise of a bill unions dearly wanted, and liberal opponents of casinos may not forgive him for proposing them in the first place. Plus, the monthslong debate over gambling has given ammunition to Republicans, who say he has failed to grapple with far more important economic challenges facing Massachusetts.

“The governor looks principled and determined, but he also looks in a way like he can’t get the job done,’’ said Jeffrey Berry, a Tufts University political science professor who called the probable defeat of resort casinos a “split decision’’ for the governor. Berry said the battle over casinos has “left the Democratic electorate scratching its head.’’

The casino gambling bill, which won overwhelming support from state lawmakers Saturday in the waning hours of the legislative session, remained in a kind of limbo yesterday. At an appearance in Worcester, Patrick reiterated his intention to send it back to lawmakers with an amendment that would strip out the slot parlors and allow simply for three resort-style casinos in different parts of the state.

Patrick had been pushing a bill focused solely on casinos, while the Legislature — at the insistence of the House — demanded the inclusion of slot machines at the racetracks to help those struggling businesses survive.

“I call on the Legislature to accept the amendment promptly so that we can provide the good jobs at better wages and benefits that we all agree are available in destination resort casinos,’’ Patrick said. “Had they done so two years ago, when I first proposed it, thousands of workers in the building trades and in other fields would be working today.’’

But a spokesman for House Speaker Robert DeLeo, whose district hosts two of the state’s racetracks, said that he was not backing down. “Anything short of Governor Patrick approving this compromise bill represents a decision to kill the prospects of 15,000 new jobs and immediate local aid to our cities and towns,’’ spokesman Seth Gitell said.

Whether the Legislature will even consider Patrick’s proposal is unknown. The legislative session expired for the year on Saturday night and House and Senate leaders have said they would not call lawmakers back in. Even if they did, Senate President Therese Murray has made it clear that she does not have the votes necessary to override Patrick’s changes. If the Legislature does not reconvene to consider Patrick’s amendment, the bill will die for the year.

But Murray suggested another solution yesterday, saying that Patrick could safely sign the bill as is, because of a clause that she says gives him the power to block slot parlors at racetracks. She said the Legislature specifically put the decision as to whether tracks would have slots in the hands of the state commission that would be created to govern expanded gambling.

“The commission clearly can decide whether there should be two or one, or none,’’ Murray said in an interview.

She insisted that the governor would in effect control the five-member commission because he would appoint one member himself and two others in joint agreement with the state treasurer and the attorney general.

“He should declare victory,’’ Murray said. “It’s out of the political sphere now.’’

But Patrick and his aides said that does not give him enough assurances.

“The bottom line is this bill allows for no-bid slot licenses for track owners and the governor only has one guaranteed appointment to the commission out of five members,’’ said Kyle Sullivan, Patrick’s communication director.

Patrick has long opposed slot machines as a way to prop up the state’s racetracks, but last week said he would approve one slot parlor as long as it was subject to an open bidding process and not promised to one of the tracks.

If casino gambling stalls, Patrick could begin making amends with his base heading into the fall elections, some observers said.

“By rejecting the Legislature’s bill, Deval wins twice,’’ said Dan Payne, a Democratic media consultant, who is unaffiliated with Patrick’s 2010 campaign. “First, he shows that he will stand up to a Democratic Legislature, while at the same time, Patrick warms the hearts of those in his liberal base who consider slot machines as a form of economic slavery for poor people and those with gambling addictions.’’

Warren Tolman, the former Democratic state senator from Watertown and one-time gubernatorial candidate, said that Patrick’s impasse with Democrats could undercut the criticism that his gubernatorial rivals, Charles D. Baker and independent Timothy P. Cahill, are leveling at him.

“He stood up and held resolute in his demands, and still got a lot of the legislative initiatives he wanted,’’ Tolman said. “The big component in both Baker and Cahill’s arguments is that Patrick is part of the Democratic problem on Beacon Hill, but here we have Patrick standing up to the House and Senate on one of their biggest issues and saying ‘I am not doing your way.’ Whether you like the end result or not, you have to impressed with his leadership.’’

Republicans have a different take. They say Patrick has yet to show any leadership in resolving the state’s serious fiscal problems or getting any of the reforms in place that would make state government more efficient. “Governor Patrick has failed to enact the reforms and tackle the difficult issues facing Massachusetts and, as a result, the Commonwealth still faces a $1 billion budget deficit this year and a $2.5 billion deficit next year even after eight new tax increases,’’ Rick Gorka, Baker’s campaign spokesman, said yesterday.

Baker supports casinos, but says the state should start with one, to test its effect on the economy.

Cahill’s campaign declined to comment, but in a statement on his website, the state treasurer called on Patrick to sign the bill and “not play politics with our economy.’’

“With the construction industry suffering, unemployment at record highs, and hundreds of millions of dollars leaving our state each year, not voting to compete in the area of expanded gaming would be yet another setback for Massachusetts. We need to create jobs, expand tourism — and most importantly — put our citizens back to work,’’ the statement read.

The expansion of gambling has long put Patrick between the liberal wing of the party and labor. Both factions have been central to the Democratic party’s success in statewide elections for decades. One consists of the reform-minded political community that evaluates candidates on issues such as gay marriage, campaign finance, and social justice. The other is made up of blue collar, union voters who look to Beacon Hill for support on issues and programs that directly affect their paychecks: laws and regulations that essentially limit state construction projects to union labor, the setting of wage levels, and the management of unemployment benefits.

Patrick strategists, who did not want to talk on the record, are counting on liberals, in the end, being with him on Election Day. With the casino debate off the table, that seems probable. As for labor, they realize Patrick will be the target of much of their anger. But they note that labor has always been lukewarm to Patrick and did not play a significant role in his landslide victory four years ago.

Globe correspondents June Q. Wu and Alex Katz contributed to this report. Frank Phillips can be reached at phillips@globe.com