The unanimous vote kept the bill from going to Gov. Ed Rendell. It also
continued a volley between chambers that has lasted for much of the past
year over how to fix problems identified by critics of the state’s
2-year-old gambling law, with one chamber often dropping pet provisions
written by the other. House Majority Leader Sam Smith, R-Jefferson, said he
sympathized with colleagues who were dissatisfied with the Senate’s version,
but warned that further revisions could scuttle passage of a final bill
before the legislative session ends Nov. 30. “There’s a limit to how many
times we can bounce this ball back and forth across this building,” Smith
said. “If we amend this bill, this bill then will be sitting in the Senate
in the lame-duck session, and at that juncture, all bets are off … as to
whether or not we will actually be able to get a very solid reform bill in
front of this governor this session.” Senate leaders were reviewing their
options and expected to announce a plan on Wednesday, said Erik Arneson,
chief of staff to Senate Majority Leader David J. Brightbill, R-Lebanon.
Christopher Craig, a lawyer for Sen. Vincent Fumo, D-Philadelphia, said one
possibility would be “to come back in before Election Day to put together
another version” of the bill. The Senate passed its version of the
gambling-law revisions during a marathon session that stretched from Monday
to early Tuesday as members rushed to complete major business and adjourned
until after the Nov. 7 election. With just two weeks remaining, legislators
were eager to return to their districts to campaign in a volatile election
year. Both houses have agreed to changes that would require the state
Attorney General’s Office to form a gambling-crimes unit, wipe out a
requirement that slot-machine manufacturers sell through an in-state
distributor, and delete language in the current law that allows public
officials to directly own up to 1 percent of a gambling interest.

But they have disagreed over many other provisions. The version approved by
the House includes provisions not endorsed by the Senate, such as banning
campaign contributions from applicants for horse racetrack licenses and
requiring casinos to comply with local ordinances banning indoor smoking.

The House version also allows the Legislature, rather than the state, to
decide whether to transfer state-owned riverbed property rights to casinos.

Rep. Kevin Blaum, D-Luzerne, called the absence of a ban on campaign
contributions a “serious, serious flaw.”

“If this bill ever did go to the governor’s desk and obtained his signature,
it would be open season on unlimited campaign contributions from all those
applicants,” Blaum said.

The Senate has consistently supported broad campaign-contribution
prohibitions, and its version of the bill does not allow any gambling
license applicants or licensees to make such contributions, Arneson said.

“It is beyond unfortunate that a nonexistent problem was used as the stated
reason to amend a bill that was ready to be sent to the governor and
included absolutely vital reforms to the gambling law,” Arneson said in a
statement.

The House did not change a provision of the Senate bill that would force
casino developers to follow local zoning procedures and allow zoning appeals
to go to the state Supreme Court.