A Nebraska anti-gambling group, Gambling with the Good Life, recently filed a lawsuit to prevent a measure regarding historic horseraces from appearing on the November ballot. The lawsuit said the measure would violate the Nebraska constitution’s provision against asking voters to answer two or more questions in just one vote. Ballot language asks voters to approve betting on the historic races and to approve directing tax revenues from both live and historic races to education, property tax relief and treatment for compulsive gamblers.
The previously run and recorded races would be displayed on terminals at licensed racetracks in Omaha, Lincoln, Hastings, Grand Island and Columbus. Group members said resemble slot machines and encourage more rapid wagering and bigger financial losses for gamblers.
Steve Grasz, attorney for Gambling with the Good Life, said the filing asked the Nebraska Supreme Court to bar Secretary of State John Gale from putting what would be Amendment 1 on the statewide ballot or to declare the election results invalid if the court rules after the September 12 deadline for certifying the ballot.
Gambling with the Good Life turned to the state Supreme Court after Gale recently approved the ballot language and rejected the group’s request that he keep the measure off the ballot. Gale said the language of the amendment does contain more than one subject, but it “connects its subjects together to be part of one general subject.” He referred to the Supreme Court’s rule stating multiple questions can be included in an amendment as long as they have a “natural and necessary” connection to each other.
Supporters of the amendment, including the Nebraska Farm Bureau Federation, have said the historic racing machines would help Nebraska’s struggling horseracing industry compete with other gambling operations and casinos in neighboring state.
State Senator Russ Karpisek said Tuesday he hopes the Supreme Court does not act on the petition. He noted a majority of legislators concluded, when the amendment was passed earlier this year, that voters need to decide the issue. “I think they’re just trying to suppress people’s votes,” he said, referring to Gambling with the Good Life and other opposition.
In response, the group’s Director Patricia Loontjer said, “This latest attempt to deceive the public cannot be allowed to go forward, and we believe the courts will agree with us.”
