When the Boards of Directors of the Gaming Industry Association (GIA) and Montana Coin Machine Operators Association (MCMOA) met in Helena hot on the heels of the election, their respective executive directors, Rich Miller and Ronda Wiggers, were ready with the analysis.
The two groups met jointly for portions of their meetings at the Best Bet Casino Nov. 9, just two days after the election.
They both had the Senate pegged as a 25/25 tie and the House with 50 Republicans, 49 Democrats and one Constitutionalist, but Wiggers and Miller noted several races were so close recounts could occur.
Sure enough, post-election canvassing of the Laurel HD 58 race saw Democratic Rep. Emelie Eaton pull to a dead tie with Republican candidate Krayton Kerns.
Until the stunning reversal, Kerns was leading by 14 votes at the close of regular ballot counting. But when 16 ballots that had been rejected by counting machines and four provisional ballots were counted, that lead disappeared.
There will be a recount Nov. 30 and Dec. 1, but until then Eaton is being regarded as the winner, since Democratic Governor Brian Schweitzer picks the victor in a tie and will presumably choose the Democrat. The house would then be split 50 Democrats, 49 Republicans and one Constitutionalist.
And at press time, a recount was pending in HD 77 where Democratic challenger Sheila Eaton trailed Rep. Scott Mendenhall, R-Whitehall, by 24 votes.
In the Senate, Sam Kitzenberg, R-Glasgow, announced just days after the election that he would switch from the Republican party to the Democrats, giving the Democrats a two-vote Senate majority--26-24.
"Anybody who thinks that one vote doesn't count has not been paying attention to Montana politics the last two cycles," Miller said later. "We'll have to wait until December to see who actually gets the nod, but either way one party or the other will be in charge in the House and we will not have a repeat of last session where the parties shared power. The Senate will also not have to go through figuring out how to share duties in that chamber with the switch by Sen. Kitzenberg."
All in all, Miller and Wiggers told their boards, the composition of the Legislature appeared to be one that would be fair to small business.
Wiggers noted for legislation to pass, it would require bi-partisanship to get a majority, and that it would be difficult to over-ride gubernatorial vetos.
Miller said small business had lost a few good friends to election defeats but has probably gained a similar number. "I don't think small business interests were hurt by this election," he said, adding that the large projected budget surplus will allow moderation when it comes to taxes.
Wiggers noted spending on legislative races set records, with Democrats outspending Republicans two-to-one. She said a Senate race averaged about $6,800 and House races about $2,400.
Both said members could expect some attempts to pass targeted taxes. Miller said he expected liquor licensing legislation to surface, but noted backing seems to come from a few small pockets in northwest Montana and Wiggers added that widespread support, especially from chambers of commerce and other business groups, may be lacking.
Wiggers said a bill to give Indian tribes total control of gaming on reservations including over games offered, wager and pot limits, taxes collected and so on, would be introduced, perhaps as a trial balloon to test the winds. Miller reminded the group that the governor remains opposed to gaming expansion but that tribes could pursue avenues other than the legislature.
Wiggers said a perennial bill for the state to provide and fund a problem gambler treatment program could be expected, despite that the privately funded Montana Council on Problem Gambling (MCPG) program appears to be working. She also noted several state agencies met jointly with MCPG representatives to review the proposition last summer, but the Council backed away.
Miller did note that business groups are talking to the Gambling Control Division and the Montana Lottery about jointly operating responsible gambling awareness campaigns. He said one proposal would seek $80,000 for the programs but could achieve economies by using awareness advertisements that had already been produced by Montana gaming business groups and from campaigns conducted in other states.
He said other gaming groups such as the State Lottery and Indian tribes should also be expected to contribute to responsible gaming campaigns and treatment programs.
Miller also noted that the MCPG has, through increased contributions from gaming business groups, shored up its finances and is "now in pretty good shape," even though it continues to treat more clients and runs more therapy sessions. He said the MCPG recently reported using 31 clinicians to conduct 917 therapy groups for 2,216 participants.
Earlier, addressing only his own group, Miller said the bill to revise poker statutes continues to encounter snags with objections from some quarters threatening to scuttle the bill.
The Gambling Control Division, working through the Gaming Advisory Council, originally sought legislation to substantially increase fees on card dealers and tables to improve regulation in the face of burgeoning applications. But other updates to the poker laws, especially regarding pot limits and tournament prizes, have met resistance from some gaming groups and government officials, potentially costing the bill crucial support.
One board member noted dealers and card room operators would be heavily penalized if fees doubled as proposed, but would receive no incentives in return. Miller's board instructed him to meet with state officials to discuss problems with the bill and lagging enthusiasm, before GIA would formally endorse the bill or withdraw support.
GIA and MCMOA were in joint session to discuss progress with the state's web-based automated reporting system for gaming machines. Miller said he believed the system development was on track. Under the capable leadership of project chief Al Arvish, Miller said, he expected some live reporting to begin in January and that electronic permitting could begin July 1, 2007.
After a lunch break, the groups took up the question of the recent federal internet gambling ban. Miller said the internet Gambling Enforcement Act was primarily "another attempt to control the funds for internet poker" which instantly cost internet gambling company investors $7 billion in stock devaluations.
As an aside, Miller said internet gambling companies almost immediately responded by urging site visitors to vote against Republicans, the party that orchestrated the legislation. Rules to implement the Act will be out by July 7, Miller said, and the law's effectiveness will be unknown until then, though banks appear to be exempt from having to stop checks written for internet gambling.
He did note that the bill expressly allows intra-state internet gambling, so states can authorize wire gambling between parties in the same state. Nevada enacted similar legislation a few years ago and may now be poised to offer wire gambling within that state.
Board member Tim Carson, whose company distributes gaming machines in South Dakota, reported that the latest initiative on that state's ballot to outlaw gambling cost $900,000 to defeat. However, he noted that for the first time, its defeat was resounding--63 percent to 37 percent--as South Dakota taxpayers appeared unwilling to fill the big revenue hole left in the state budget if gaming disappeared.
Miller noted both Arizona and Ohio voters faced competing smoking ban initiatives, one that was total and one that offered exemptions for traditional taverns, tobacco stores and so on. In both states, the total ban was adopted over the alternative with exemptions. Even Nevada passed the stricter of two alternatives. Now only smoking in large casino venues will be allowed, and food service areas must be separated.
Miller said that when Ontario recently passed a total ban, across the line in Detroit gaming boomed to the tune of a $15 million increase in September.
Miller noted increased funding of the Montana Council on Problem Gambling has once again stretched GIA coffers thin. The board decided to increase dues to make up the difference for now, but that a committee would be formed to tackle the long-term solutions to perennial budget requirements.
The GIA fixed its next meeting date to correspond to the Legislative "transmittal break." So it will meet Thursday, Feb. 15 at 10 a.m. at Best Bet Casino in Helena.
[i]Source: The Montana Tavern Times, Dec., 2006, published monthly by Continental Communications, 125 W. Granite St., Suite 102, Butte, MT