Battle over slots: Cash gap wide

Pro-slots organization For Maryland For Our Future substantially outraised its rival anti-slots group during the last financial period, according to reports filed last week with the State Board of Elections.

For Maryland For Our Future ended the last financial quarter with $558,848.04 cash-on-hand and $3,781,500 in total receipts.

Anti-slots ballot issue committee Marylanders United to Stop Slots ended with $142,896.34 cash-on-hand and $411,053 in total receipts.

For Maryland For Our Future spent hundreds of thousands on television and radio advertising in addition to thousands more on consulting and research services. The vast amount of the committee's cash came from the horse racing industry.

"This support should come as no surprise considering that their industry's very existence is at stake," said Steve Kearney, For Maryland For Our Future's spokesman.

Marylanders United to Stop Slots spent most of its cash on staff, printing, and research, according to the groups senior advisor, Scott Arceneaux. Individuals and various organizations were the most frequent donors.

Arceneaux said he was happy with how his committee was doing financially, but criticized his rivals for trying to buy the election. "This is true David and Goliath," Arceneaux told PolitickerMD.com.

Kearney shot back, claiming Arceneaux and Comptroller Peter Franchot (D-Takoma Park) have been misleading voters for almost a year on the issue.

"We make no apologies for raising the resources necessary to correct their misinformation - from the same companies that have donated to campaigns Arcenaux has run, and with whom the comptroller worked on slots bills just a few years ago," Kearney said in a statement.

Voters will decide on November's ballot if the state constitution should be amended to allow no more than 15,000 slot machine installations at five different locations across the state. There are currently no contribution limits or restrictions on how much ballot issue committees in the state of Maryland can raise.

Question 2 has become one of the most heated issues in the state. Proponents argue the slots will provide necessary funding for the state's education infrastructure and will help close the budget deficit. Opponents believe the revenue projections are overly optimistic, the ballot's language is misleading and the problems associated with gambling far outweigh the benefits.