Local reps. vote similarly on casinos
By Caitlyn Kelleher and Jason Lefferts JOURNAL REPORTERS

The state representatives from the demarked towns from the map of the north Worcester County voted not to send the bill to a study committee. GRAPHIC/JASON LEFFERTS

A review of votes by legislators by the House on a negative report regarding casinos shows that one of the strongest areas of support for increased gambling in the state is in Central Massachusetts.

Ten legislators from Worcester County - including Reps. Lewis Evangelidis (R-Holden), Robert Rice (D-Gardner), Stephen DiNatale (D-Fitchburg) and Jennifer Flanagan (D-Leominster) - voted to not accept the negative report. Only the South Shore area around Boston put up similar numbers, with 12 members from that area voting against the negative report.

The House ending up voting 108-46 to approve the report, which puts on hold the effort to bring casino gambling to Massachusetts. Gov. Deval Patrick had offered a plan that would create three resort-style casinos in the state, but his proposal met stiff opposition from House Speaker Sal DiMasi, who engineered the negative report vote on Wednesday. In a somewhat confusing vote, a "yes" vote was essentially against casinos, a "no" vote was essential in favor.

"There was a lot of talk on the floor, there was a lot of back and forth, but there was no concentrated effort," Rice said. "We didn't say hey let's all ban together on this."

DiNatale, agreed saying, he had not consulted with local legislators before the vote, and was surprised by the local outcome.

"I can honestly say I did not (talk to other lawmakers). I was surprised as you were to see the report so broadly opposed in the Central Massachusetts area," DiNatale said. "I made my decision a couple of days before the vote. My concern has always been, I wasn't totally sold on the governor's plan, but the important thing was to discuss it."

Rice had proposed a version of a casino bill that would have reduced the restrictions on what a town or a city could use the money. The amendments dealt with what Rice consider some of the social issues - with the banning of ATMs in the casinos, as well as banning complementary food, drinks or hotel rooms.

"I don't think that anyone is really procasinos, but at the same time we are facing two factors, increased costs and demands on our revenues," Rice said.

He said it is a known fact that Massachusetts's residents are spending a billion dollars a year on casinos out of state.

"There was a recognition that we should try to capture some of that money. Everyone realizes that there are social costs," Rice said.

Rice said 30 years ago there was a decision to fund town and city budgets from lottery money and now, "our cities and towns are dependent on the lottery."

Rice said one of the reasons he supports Patrick's bill was to capture some of that money.

Flanagan and DiNatale both said jobs and the economy were main reasons for the vote.

"We're certainly in economic difficulty right now. We have a lot of instability in regards to finances and how we're going to fund programs in the state Legislature," Flanagan said. "It really came to me that casinos could provide two things. One is jobs, but the other is revenue."

Evangelidis said he was not supporting the governor's proposal for three casinos but he did not think the issue should be sent to a study, which would basically kill the bill. He called his vote more of one against the process.

"I thought it deserved to be vetted," he said.

He said he might be support of a proposal with less than three casinos and that would have the funds dedicated to property relief across the state and education funding.

South of Boston, 12 lawmakers voted against the negative report. Flanagan noted that in that region, the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe is pushing for what has billed as the world's largest casino in Middleborough. Flanagan pointed to the maiden floor speech by Thomas Calter (D-Kingston), who argued that the state would see significant revenue through Patrick's plan, but almost none if the Wampanoag's went ahead with their plans alone.

"I wasn't really shocked the South Coast voted the way they did," Flanagan said. "They're looking at a whole different conversation on this issue."

There were also pockets of support for casinos in the area around Fall River and New Bedford, where officials have contemplated a casino there for some time, and around Springfield, near Palmer, which has been targeted for casino development.

Along with areas of support for casinos, there was some notable areas where casinos had no support.

According the review of votes, the stretch of affluent suburbs between Routes 128 and 495 between Route 95 to the south and Route 93 to the north provided almost no votes in support of casinos. Republican Fred Barrows' hometown is Mansfield, which sits on the junction of Routes 495 and 95 to the south of Boston. The only other vote in that territory came from William Greene, a Democrat from Billerica.

"I think some of the people who are opposed to it, it seems to be sort of economically broken out," DiNatale said. "How well people are doing in their lives in terms of jobs and positions and that kind of thing."