Package Deal

Democrats Contemplate United Front on VLTs
as Tool for Leverage on CHIP and Schools

By MIKE HAILEY

Texas House Democrats think they may be in a position to exact some major concessions from GOP leaders on children's health insurance and public school funding if they can present a united front on the issue of video lottery gambling in the regular session this year. Considering the way the Democrats have been battling each other since the Republicans took over two years ago, that might be more of a longshot than three purple plums in a row or whatever it takes to hit the jackpot with a single spin of a slot machine at the neighborhood video lottery arcade.

But more than a majority of the House's 63 Democrats have reportedly discussed the possible leverage they could enjoy as a group if they could deliver the votes needed to put a constitutional amendment to legalize video lottery terminals on a statewide ballot later this year. And considering the intensity of the infighting among the Democrats since being consigned to minority status in a chamber they'd always ruled, the fact that they're talking about the possibility of being unified is a sign of relative progress.

There seems to be a growing sentiment that the video lottery bill that Democratic State Rep. Sylvester Turner of Houston filed last week is a stalking horse for a separate VLT bill that will be carried by another member - presumably a Democrat in good standing with the Republican leadership. If that's the case, Turner's bill ostensibly would give pro-VLT forces an idea of where they lack support and what they need to do to make the final product more salable in order to obtain the necessary two-thirds support that will be required to send a constitutional amendment to the voters. In other words, they run the Turner bill up the flagpole to see who salutes it, who doesn't and why not. The Turner bill may have already served one key purpose by giving the state GOP an opportunity to go on record fiercely opposing VLTs without having to blast any of its own members in so doing.

The video lottery lobby estimates that it will need about 50 members of each party to move VLTs through the Texas House this spring. VLT supporters could take a chance and try to legalize slots with a simple majority vote that would only take 76 votes to slide through the House. But Governor Rick Perry would have to sign a bill at that point before it could become law - and opponents would be able to challenge it on the wings of the opinion that Republican Attorney General Greg Abbott issued two years ago indicating that the state's constitution would have to be revised before slots could be legal. Politically and legally, a constitutional amendment is the way to go.

But given the Republican Party's reaffirmed opposition and the obvious disdain that GOP activists showed toward video lottery at their state convention last year, no Republicans are going to want their names on a VLT measure as a sponsor or co-sponsor during the session this year. So the ideal sponsor of a video lottery bill will be a Democrat - someone like State Rep. Allan Ritter - a Nederland Democrat who's also a key member of Speaker Tom Craddick's leadership team. At this point there's no evidence that Ritter has agreed to perform such a feat. But his name is mentioned often in the pool of speculation on who that VLT sponsor might be - if it's not Turner. Another possibility is State Rep. Kino Flores, an Edinburg Democrat who sponsored a VLT measure two years ago during his first year as chairman of the Licensing and Adminstrative Procedures Committee.

Whoever that turns out to be - assuming it's a Democrat - the VLT sponsor will face the juggling act of a political lifetime in an effort to give about 50 Republicans some margin of cover while keeping that many D's on board. What makes this so challenging is the fact that the Republicans and Democrats generally speaking will want to pass VLTs for very different reasons. It's true that some members will vote for video lottery gambling for the sheer reason that polls show their constitutents want that. Most folks seem to think a constitutional amendment will pass if the people get an opportunity to have the final say in the matter. But voters who favor VLTs won't need two-thirds support to make them come true.

The Republicans who dare to vote for video lottery will argue that they're doing so to keep from having to raise taxes any more than they might have to do anyway this year. But that will be more of an individual thing. Democrats - in contrast - can band together under the banner of the Children's Health Insurance Program and public education funding and collectively say that it's their way on those items or no way to video lottery terminals.

And that's when Perry and the House leadership has to determine whether VLTs are worth the trouble and the pain it takes trying to pass them. We're talking about $3 billion or more for the next two-year budget. Where there's a will there's usually a way.

Mike Hailey's column appears regularly in Capitol Inside