Today marks the final chance for Pennsylvania to vote in a major gambling expansion in 2017. Lawmakers have about a week to drill out the final details of a bill that could bring much needed revenue to the state’s budget, however there is still no consensus in sight. Gambling proponents are worried that a week is not long enough for lawmakers to agree on how the new gambling regime should look and operate.
What is sure is that lawmakers have to decide on how they will close the $2 billion deficit in the state’s budget; and if not with the expansion of gambling then through what other ways. While the expansion of casino gambling (and the introduction of online gambling) is just one of the ways proposed, lawmakers also need to consider other ideas such as borrowing against future state revenue or cutting costs.
When it comes to gambling expansion, it seems that the House and the Senate simply cannot see eye to eye as to how to go about it. Earlier this month, bipartisan support was shown in the House for the introduction of video gambling in thousands of bars and truck stops. The Senate, however, is wary about supporting such large casino expansion plans, with Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman stating that the Senate would be “a little nervous about the size and scope” of a plan even bigger than the state’s last expansion. In 2004, Pennsylvania voted to introduce sweeping changes to its gambling landscape, including the legalization of up to 14 commercial casinos.
Another worry expressed by the Senate is that casino expansion – and especially the legalization and regulation of online gambling in Pennsylvania – could cannibalize the existing industry.
Governor Tom Wolf, in recent days, has expressed concern that the introduction of video lottery terminals could negatively affect casinos and the state lottery. This is coming from a man whose own proposal for the budget relies on $250 million in new gambling revenue.
“I want real revenue, and I want net revenue,” Wolf said in an interview recently. “I don’t want anything that we do in gaming or gambling to interfere with the revenues that are already in place. If it just cannibalizes and takes from one bucket called gambling to another, the commonwealth isn’t doing anything more than it has in the past.”
