There’s a saying that a man who wears two watches never knows what time it is. In the case of the Florida Lege, it knows something dramatic needs to be done about gambling policy but is of dramatically different mindsets about just what that “something” is. 
A bill in the House would preserve the status quo, including giving the Seminole Tribe a 20-year extension on blackjack exclusivity. A more lavish Senate bill gives the tribe roulette and craps as well, possibly because it dilutes the market by opening the prospect of slot machines to several additional parimutuels.
While state Sen. Bill Galvano (R, pictured) may say “Inaction is not a choice,” the Lege has been prone to do little on the issue for a couple of sessions now. And reconciling Galvano’s bill with the “freeze” version in the House is a big stretch, one that has people like state Rep. Mike La Rosa (R) saying things like, “we can’t be afraid to step away from the table if we ultimately have to.” The risk in that strategy is that the courts could get ahead of lawmakers and legalize slot machines in eight more counties, in a case currently pending.
Also in court on a gaming-related matter, is Gov. Rick Scott (R), locked in battle with Speaker of the House Richard Corcoran (R) –
– you know, the guy who thinks the amount of gambling in Florida can actually be reduced. Corcoran is steamed that Scott and the Florida Lottery cut a deal with IGT Global Solutions that exceeded what the state had budgeted. Scott’s lawyers say it was OK to hand the Legislature this fait accompli because it was contingent on lawmakers coming up with the necessary $700 million. (“You don’t have a problem with that, do you?”) They also accuse Corcoran of meddling with the executive branch’s prerogative to let contracts. We don’t know who will win this but Scott and Corcoran seem to deserve one another.
* Another state that’s flirting with gambling expansion is Illinois, where — as part of a larger “grand bargain” to grow governmental revenue — lawmakers are debating adding six casinos, including ones in Chicago, Danville, Rockville and Williamson County (all of them built on land — no more riverboats), along with slots at four horse tracks, and slot routes at O’Hare Airport and Midway Airport. The buy-in is considerable: $100,000 for a license and $30,000 for every gaming position.
There are also a few sops to existing casinos. The state’s onerous 50% tax rate would be reduced to 16% on table games and 20% on slots. 
Existing casinos could also add 400 gaming positions at no cost. Still, the voice of reason (for once) comes from a casino opponent, Illinois Church Action on Alcohol & Addiction Problems Director Anita Bedell, who wonders why the state would so dramatically expand gambling at a time when casinos are losing revenue to slot routes. Not that gaming policy in the Land of Lincoln has ever made much sense. Still, for extant casinos might find the dramatic tax reduction worth gritting their teeth and putting up with six to 10 new rivals.
* Comparing casino revenues on a week-to-week basis is something one should rarely do unless coping with a dearth of other data. However, based on small measures, it looks as though some gamblers in Schenectady have kicked the tires on Rivers Casino and then gravitated back to Saratoga Casino Hotel. Time will tell.
