Now
Overcast
74.0°
High
74°
Low
60°
Full Forecast

Coupon

Jobs

Cars

Homes

Rentals

Alerts

Subscribe
Home > Local
Bookmark Us   •   Make Us Your Homepage

Judge rules casino initiative should be on ballot

Comments 19 comment(s)  
E-mail Story E-mail Story
Print Story Print Story
Share  Share
Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

By NATE JENKINS / Lincoln Journal Star

Thursday, Aug 17, 2006 - 08:17:14 pm CDT

Voters will have another chance to open the state to casino gambling when they go to the polls in November, barring a reversal of a court decision Thursday.

In a historic, precedent-setting ruling, Lancaster County District Judge Karen Flowers ordered signatures be tallied so a plan to build three casinos has a chance to go on the November general election ballot.

Attorney General Jon Bruning had argued the so-called three-casino initiative is too similar to one thwarted by voters in 2004 to be allowed to go before voters.

Story Photo
Bruning

The Nebraska Constitution prohibits the same measure either in form or “essential substance” from going before voters more than once every three years.

Flowers called the case one of “first impression,” noting that the constitutional language appeared to have not been debated before passage in 1912.

Her impression was that the 2004 initiative “differs significantly in purpose, object and effect from the three-casino initiative.”

Unlike the three-casino initiative — which would allow construction of one casino in each congressional district — the 2004 plan would have cleared the way for games of chance outside casinos, in communities with populations as low as 300.

“To say that the three-casino initiative and Initiative 420 are the same in essential substance is to ignore those provisions that would have brought gambling, other than casino gambling, into numerous locations throughout the state, something the three-casino initiative doesn’t do,” Flowers wrote.

Secretary of State John Gale had believed the 2004 and 2006 plans were too similar for the three-casino initiative to be allowed on the ballot, so he did not send petition signatures out to county clerks to be verified. That is necessary to insure the needed number of valid signatures are gathered for an initiative to be placed on the ballot.

Even with Flowers’ order that the verification process move forward, Gale has the option not to send the petitions to county clerks for verification because Bruning immediately appealed Flowers’ decision. But Gale has decided not to exercise that option.

“He believes it is prudent to go ahead and verify the signatures to protect the petition process,” said a press release issued by his office. Gale was out of town Thursday.

“He said he is taking this course due to time constraints in checking signatures and the anticipated length of the appellate review,” the release said.

“I recognize this is a novel issue in that this is the first court test of Nebraska’s resubmission rule,” said Gale in a statement, referring to the constitutional restriction on similiar ballot proposals.

Sept. 15 is the last day Gale can certify candidates, offices and issues to be placed on the ballot.

While Flowers disagreed with both Gale and Bruning on the question of presenting the main three-casino plan to voters, she agreed that the proposal on how casino revenues should be spent should be withheld because it is too similar to a 2004 plan.

The partner initiative to the main, three-casino casino initiative proposed splitting most casino revenues between the state’s schools, the racing commission and gaming control board, and a fund that helps treat compulsive gamblers.

Greg Lemon, chairman of the committee pushing the casino plan, which is backed by Las Vegas interests, said that leaving the funding mechanism off the ballot simply means revenue dispersion may have to be addressed by the Legislature should the three-casino plan pass. Also, he said, there already is a law on the books following the 2004 election that would require casinos be taxed and the revenue go to the state’s general fund.

“We’re very pleased the court agreed with us” on the main question of whether the three-casino plan should be allowed, Lemon said.

A leader of the group that has fought gambling initiatives seemed surprised at the decision Thursday.

“I’m disappointed with it,” said Pat Loontjer. “We thought it was a no-brainer — they did it less than three years ago so they shouldn’t be able to come back. But they have more money than God, so I guess they’ll be able to harass Nebraska voters again.”

Reach Nate Jenkins at 473-7223 or njenkins@journalstar.com.


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Local > Back to Top of Story

Post Your Comment

Standards and Rules
All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Hide Comments Hide Comments   Newest First Newest First  
DP wrote on August 17, 2006 5:50 pm:
" Just put it on the ballet and stop wasting money..give me a break.... "
Tom wrote on August 17, 2006 6:25 pm:
" What about people who signed the 3 Boyd petitions because they were presented as a package? 3 casino establishments, each with perhaps many gaming outlets spread over the state; licenses to be issued within 1 year; and money to our kid's education. This is not the same deal that was signed. "
c.h. wrote on August 17, 2006 6:26 pm:
" I love judges today! First judge Taylor puts the kibosh on Bush's illegal spy tactics, and now judge Flowersstrikes a blow for voter's rights in Nebraska. I've always said that our judicial branch stands a bulwark against those who would impinge our freedoms. I'd also like to point out that both these fine, fair, jurists are WOMEN! "
curtis wrote on August 17, 2006 6:46 pm:
" OK folks, this is our chance, let's get it right this time. View the sample ballots at the library. Take one home, go over it, make SURE you know what you're voting for. I've lost count of the number of people who told me they meant to vote FOR expanded gambling, and later discovered they'd done the opposite. Don't let it happen again! "
Gaming could be good wrote on August 17, 2006 7:00 pm:
" I think gaming could be good for Nebraska, despite the religious zealots disapproval of such. In the long run revenue from this could fund other programs. (Including gamblers anonymous) If you think people are not driving to Council Bluffs, your fooling yourself. Gambling and gaming are here already, we are not reaping the benefits of such! "
Tom wrote on August 17, 2006 7:00 pm:
" Signature verification shouldn't be barred, that process and printing of ballots are prudent and in the big picture a small cost. Will it appear the courts stood in the way of a process for and of the people? I trust final decisions by the court should stand for the people, that is what petitions are about, and voters may actually choose to vote against casinos. Fully in the hands of the people aand not government, that is the ideal. "
Mike wrote on August 17, 2006 10:12 pm:
" "Just realize that once we approve of just THREE casinos in our state the gaming industry will come in here with their flock of lawyers claiming it is unconstitutional as it is a state sponsored monopoly. Before we will know what has happened -- gaming joints will be on every corner!" "
Clyde wrote on August 17, 2006 10:12 pm:
" Let's legalize drugs then too while we're at it. We're about the reap the benefits of legal gambling, let's reap the benefits of Nebraska other cash crop...pot and meth, after all, it only hurts those who use it, right? "
Claudia wrote on August 17, 2006 10:29 pm:
" Research has been done and Mexico has legalized posession of recreational and escape drugs. Bringing efficacy and taxation on those drug categories might reduce use and funding of terrorists. Excellent point Clyde. "
Does anyone watch tv? wrote on August 17, 2006 10:38 pm:
" I think it`s so funny when the tv commercial comes on and it says "Thank YOU Nebraska for making Iowa`s casions #1 ! " I think people should get a grip , we all know someone if not ourselves that drive across to Iowa to gamble or just eat at the yummy buffets that the casinos have. What`s so wrong with keeping Nebraska Money in Nebraska ??? I`m all for it , you have my VOTE in Nov. !! "
no gambling wrote on August 18, 2006 4:16 am:
" Why don't we just send all our money to Nevada? Do you gamblers realize that over 90% of the profits will leave the state forever and the state will get only a minute amount in taxes? That is the main reason I'm against it. If all the money would stay in the state, I may change my mind. "
whitney wrote on August 18, 2006 5:18 am:
" Hurray for the women judges! an aside to clyde; actually, the simple act of legalizing marijuana would save the United States billions (yes, with a 'B') of dollars each year, so yeah, good idea. "
Terrance wrote on August 18, 2006 5:34 am:
" This is an issue that should be put to the entire voting populace of Nebraska, the anti gamers should get out of the behavioral control business. "
Jan wrote on August 18, 2006 8:23 am:
" I agree. Lets just put it to a vote and quit wasting money fighting it. Absolutely Clyde. It's not the governments place to protect me from myself. "
JAC wrote on August 18, 2006 8:37 am:
" Anyone gone to Harrah's or any of the other Council Bluffs Casinos, or those in Kansas or for those living in the Northwestern part of the state, those in South Dakota. Three quarters of the cars in the parking lots are from Nebraska. If you don't like the idea of gambling in Nebraska dont go to the casinos, but don't force your morality on those of us who do. Its a shame to see money that could be spent in Nebraska going out of state. That gambling money also goes to hotel, restaurants and shopping and would probably to wonders for Nebraska's declining sales tax revenues. Nebraska "the good life" is laughable. "
CS wrote on August 18, 2006 9:19 am:
" I feel that no one should have the right to restrict ones ability to vote on issues, including voters that get legislation passed to do just that. "
sad wrote on August 18, 2006 12:31 pm:
" Why are we so willing to help make Las Vegas casino owners richer, but refuse to consider helping our Native American brothers and sisters by allowing them to build casinos? "
Robert C wrote on August 18, 2006 4:53 pm:
" So what if 90% of the profits go out of the state? So do 90% of the profits of Walmart, Home Depot, etc. What about money spent by the casino to employ dealers, food service people, security, valets, hotel staff, etc.? That's no small change currently being spent in Iowa that would stay in Nebraska. "
Nozzleman wrote on August 18, 2006 7:04 pm:
" You know if you look at states that have gambling the roads, the schools, the police departments, the fire departments, and other city services are all the better for it. What is it about some people in Nebraska who just don't want to get with the times. It is about time that those who are the "Moral Majority" in this state stop forcing their ways and view on the rest of us and let the People of the State of Nebraska make up their own minds. You know if we had some of the jobs that pay what they do out in Nevada here things would be a lot better for everybody. The fire departments would not have to scrimp and save, they would have the money to get better equipment, there would be money to pay for more police and better crime prevention programs. But do out elected officials see that, no they are more interested in running studies on this and studies on that. Look at the City of Lincoln there was talk a couple weeks ago about cutting a 9-1-1 Operator from the budget, and we are losing a City Engineer due to budget issues. Yet the city is going to run a Study on who to hire for Fire Chief and how much is this new "study" going to cost us $180.000 for six months, yet the Mayor threw away over a half a million dollars on fines and fee on late delivery of the new Fire Trucks. When is this unnecessary waste and when are our Elected Officials going to wake up and do what is good for the state and the people of Nebraska. "

Ads by Yahoo!