A longtime pollster and observer of the Colorado political scene, Floyd Ciruli, sees the vote on Prop. DD, which would legalize sports betting in the state’s three casino towns, as “a coin toss,” although he leans a little bit towards the yes column.
Mainly because the casinos don’t oppose it—in fact, they enthusiastically support it—and because it would benefit the state water project, which almost everyone can agree on. “They are giving the money to state water plan. If they had made it more general there would have been war over it. They went the smart way there,” Ciruli said in an exclusive interview with Global Gaming Business News.
The casinos in the state’s three gaming towns are the key element here. Although casinos can’t pass a gaming referendum by themselves, their opposition is usually the kiss of death.
The vote will be the seventh on casino gaming since the first casino set up shop in October 1991. Ciruli recalls that vote in 1990.
“Our governor (Roy Romer) at that time was against it, but it made it through. It was sold as helping three dilapidated historical cities,” Ciruli said.
There was a follow up vote in 1992. “Since then there have been several ‘needy cities’ and small counties and racetracks that said they would go under without slot machines.”
Every one of those initiatives, he says, “went down to crushing defeat, at 60 percent – 80 percent levels. Almost all of them had campaigns against them but at a certain point the public attitude was, ‘We aren’t going to do this.’ They didn’t buy that it would take jobs away,” he said.
There has never been a public sentiment to expand gaming beyond the three casinos cities of Central City, Cripple Creek and Black Hawk.
“We passed one expansion, in 2008, to allow the three towns to raise betting limits to $100, add games and stay open all the time. Of course, the casinos were for it, and it was seen as useful for the casinos but not an expansion,” he told GGB News.
Based on that history, there is a presumption that if they had gone with the New Jersey proposals (for sports betting throughout the state) that the public might have opposed.
“For that reason,” he said, “and because the casinos are for it and not against it, they ought to be able to get it done. The voters see the downside is limited and upside is useful.”
Ciruli calls himself “the longest surviving pollster” in the state. He has been doing non-partisan polling since the mid-‘80s, mostly for the media. He founded Ciruli Associates, a research and consulting firm specializing in public policy and research, in 1985.
His last poll on sports betting was a survey of Adams County likely 2019 voters that was done for the Denver Post. Adams County is one of the largest metro counties in the state. His poll showed about 42 percent against Prop. DD.
“I listened to the campaign most recently. They agreed that in their opinion there are upwards of 20 percent to 25 percent that doesn’t have a thought on it,” he said.
The campaign is just now starting in earnest, he says. “They have a couple of major advantages,” he told GGB News. “Typically they have no chance if the casino industry is against it. They are backing it. I know they are telling people they will have over a million to spend and I don’t think the opposition will have $50,000.”
He describes the one person who has filed in opposition to Prop. DD as “kind of a crackpot. He’s not showing up to speak. He’s going to ground. The other group that is potentially an opponent is a Christian foundation group. Historically in votes on gaming expansion the opposition was district attorneys, governors and religious groups. But what would mainly kill it was that the industry would spend all the money they could to defeat it.”
Ciruli believes that 25 percent is “persuadable.” He anticipates that supporters will have advertising saying that the agricultural community believes it’s a good thing—because of the Colorado water plan. “The business community will come out in favor. The water community is going to be in favor, and the major utilities,” he said.
People Ciruli talks to favor doing something about water.
“They are concerned about it. I think it’s a popular beneficiary. If they can credibly make the case that this expansion is confined and a limited proposal they will have a good chance to persuade them.” He adds, “I don’t think it will be a landslide. If there is no money behind the ‘no’ campaign the public will come down on the side of it, but not by much.”
You can read more observations by Floyd Ciruli by going to www.fciruli.blogspot.com.
