Kentucky Pro-Casino Groups Divided

The main pro-casino advocacy groups in Kentucky are divided over which of the three gaming expansion bills before the legislature they will support. House Speaker Larry Clark (l.) wants to put casinos at state racetracks.

As anti-gaming forces are united in opposing any measure to expand gaming in Kentucky by legalizing casinos, the pro-casino groups are divided over which of three measures before the state House to support.

Pro-gaming advocacy group Kentucky Wins has said it will support any of the three bills to create a constitutional amendment legalizing casino gaming. However the pro-casino group funded by the horse-racing industry, the Kentucky Equine Education Project (KEEP), voted last week to “strongly oppose” the latest gaming expansion bill, submitted by House Speaker Greg Stumbo.

Stumbo’s bill, which would amend the state constitution to allow the General Assembly to expand gambling, does not specify a number of casinos, and does not specify that any casinos would be added to the state’s storied racetracks. It was drafted without consulting any track owners.

By contrast, the first two expansion bills filed, sponsored by House Speaker Pro Tem Larry Clark, include enacting legislation calling for licensing and regulating casino gambling at five horse racetracks as well as three stand-alone casinos. A proposed amendment to that bill would cap the number of casinos at seven, and would guarantee at least 10 percent of the revenue to “promote equine interests.”

“We’re supportive of all three bills,” said Terry McBrayer, Kentucky Wins co-chairman Terry McBrayer told the Lexington Herald Leader. “We’re not here to advocate a specific piece of legislation. We just want it listed on the ballot.”

But KEEP Executive Director Robert Heleringer told the newspaper that 18 of the organization’s 19 members oppose the Stumbo bill. “We are getting our message out to all legislators and interested parties,” he said. “Our primary concern is to protect the horse industry. The speaker’s bill is the most problematic for us. It could allow for any type of gambling.”

Pro-casino legislators are still scrambling to gather the 60-vote majority they would need to pass a bill for a constitutional amendment vote.