5 Pinocchios for Jim
Mathias
“Capitulating verses Negotiating”
by
Delegate Mike McDermott
It is not unusual for a politician to stand up and take credit for
something they did not do. I have talked about the “posers”
with those big checks before; but this week, Jim Mathias crossed a line
when he stood up and took credit for the return of millions in local slot
revenues to Worcester County when nothing could be further from the
truth.
When slots were first authorized in Maryland, Mathias was a
delegate. He was elected and quoted on the record that he would not support
or vote for slots. Yet, during the 2007 Special Session, he changed his
mind, and his vote became the deciding vote when he
voted for gambling in Maryland. The bill required Worcester County to
fork over a million dollars a year to Baltimore City and another cool
million bucks to Prince Georges County from the local government proceeds
that would have stayed on the shore. Search if you like, but you will find
no attempt to strike this payoff from the bill. (This has cost the lower
shore millions of dollars in lost revenue since it passed).
When Mathias got back home, this pay off was soon discovered by
local leaders and brought up in the press. When he was questioned about it,
he claimed he did not know it was in the bill.
I’m not buying it. After all, this bill was passed in a Special
Session and was the sole piece of legislation they needed to consider. It
should have been fought and eliminated; particularly if you were willing to
cast the deciding 71st vote for a bill that would impact your jurisdiction
significantly.
For several years, Worcester County and Ocean Downs Casino have
been paying off Baltimore City and Prince Georges County. All of that
money could (and should) have been utilized for local spending. When I was
elected in 2010, I was keenly aware of this wealth transfer and I looked
for a mechanism to bring it back home where it belonged.
That opportunity presented itself in 2012 during our 2nd
Special Session when the expansion of gaming was being sought. The issue
was no longer about whether or not we would have gambling, rather it was
about allowing a 6th casino to be built in Prince Georges County at
National Harbor. Gambling was no longer the issue.
This bill originated in the Senate and once again, I noticed that
the payoffs to Baltimore City and Prince Georges County were still embedded
in the legislation. There was no attempt by Mathias to remove these
provisions from the bill.
When the bill arrived in the House, the Democrats were hunting for
insurance votes to pass the bill. I took advantage of the situation
and spoke to the leader on the bill about the possibility of my supporting
it. My demand was straightforward: return the local impact money to the
citizens where the casinos are located. Depending on revenues, this could
amount to $2 million each year that would remain on the lower shore.
To our benefit, they agreed to amend the bill and cut out the
funding for Baltimore City and Prince Georges County as soon as
Baltimore’s casino was open for business. In turn, I cast a deciding
vote for the National Harbor expansion.
The amendment was introduced by Delegate Dave Rudolph (D-Cecil) whose
county also benefited directly from these local impact grants staying on
the Upper Shore in Cecil County.
I
could not help but see the irony of these two separate votes from two
Delegates representing the same area:
-
Mathias casts the deciding
vote that brings gambling to Maryland, establishes a casino in Ocean
City’s backyard, and agrees to give Baltimore City and Prince Georges
County $2 million of our money every year.
In a press release this past week, Mathias earned himself 5
Pinocchio's when he took credit “for
amending the legislation passed in 2012” which returned the money
to Worcester County. This represents a complete and utter
falsehood.
The reporter took his word for
it. I do not believe the voters will be as trusting come November.