Weather | Sports | Forums | Comics | Classifieds | Calendar | Movies
A Times Editorial
Legislation that would protect aging greyhounds is subverted by another devious attempt to expand casino-style gambling at parimutuel operations.
© St. Petersburg Times, published May 24, 2002
The ugliest side of dog racing was laid bare in Alabama this week with the discovery of thousands of animal carcasses on the property of a man who said he is paid $10 a head to shoot and bury aging or injured greyhounds that can no longer make money for their trainers. If that were the fate of worn-out race horses, public opinion would have put a stop to it long ago. But the most that could be done for greyhounds in Florida, which is the national capital of this so-called sport and is thought to be the source of the dogs slaughtered in Alabama, has been to enact legislation requiring this state's 17 dog tracks to establish and promote on-premises adoption programs. The bill (CS SB 160), now awaiting Gov. Jeb Bush's decision, provides specifically for booths that would be staffed by animal-welfare organizations.
If that were the extent of the bill, we would be urging the governor to sign it. But in a way that's sadly typical of the Florida Legislature, what began as a good bill was subverted on the way to his desk. It was amended to greatly expand the card room option that Florida's 28 parimutuel plants -- dogs, horses and jai alai -- wheedled from the Legislature six years ago on the premise that they needed it to survive. Instead of being limited essentially to when live races are being run, the poker games could also operate while they're taking bets on simulcast races elsewhere. In practical terms, that means every day. Where there's now a $10 pot limit, SB 160 would allow $2 bets on up to three raises in any round of betting. According to a Senate analysis, there could be as much as $200 on the table.
That elevates penny-ante poker into a serious business and means that many more than the nine facilities presently running card rooms would want to get into it. The several county commissions that refused to allow limited operations under the 1996 bill would come under heavier pressure to drop their guard. Worst of all, the state would have taken another plunge down the slippery slope to full-scale casino gambling such as Florida voters have overwhelmingly rejected three times. The parimutuels make no secret of wanting to recast themselves as casinos; at one point this year, they found an obliging House committee to put a casino amendment on a card-room bill. For Bush to let SB 160 become law would simply whet their appetite for more.
The governor has frequently expressed opposition to any extension of gambling in Florida, so SB 160 deserves his veto on that ground alone. Moreover, he would be teaching legislators a much-needed lesson against poisoning good bills with bad amendments, as he failed to do when he let them limit citizen standing in environmental disputes as part of the Everglades restoration bill. He should also make clear that he expects a clean greyhound adoption bill next year. The news from Alabama should make even the most jaded Florida legislator receptive to the merits.