|
Attached to this statement are copies of
articles reviewing Maryland's unfortunate
experience with legalized lotteries, general
historical experience, and England's second
thoughts.
Is it worth risking Maryland's good name;
and the erosion of its public standards by
legalizing a source of tax revenue, which
both historical and current examples show
is illusory?
I am asking this Committee to recognize
that lotteries do not create wealth. In the
last analysis, government must be sup-
ported by constructive and creative labor.
Taxation must rest upon this base — with
the full knowledge and acceptance of the
cost of government by the people of Mary-
land. Games of chance merely hide this fact
and they should be barred by constitutional
mandate.
I would like to supplement this statement
by saying that you will find the gambling authorizations in those states which are
tourist meccas. They do this to feed upon
the visitors and to avoid paying honest
taxes themselves. You will find this in
Nevada and this is the motivation in New
Hampshire. England is motivated by the
same policy and I think you will find this
also in the Virgin Islands. Now, there has
been talk about the great sport of horse
racing that has been traditional in Mary-
land. The real object of pari-mutuel betting
is to permit horse racing to survive. The
amount of revenue that Maryland enjoys
from horse racing is inconsequential. It is
relatively nothing. So to compare the great
sport of horse racing — to call it a gam-
bling operation is certainly incorrect.
Now, the result of permitting lotteries,
legalizing gambling in the State of Mary-
land, you will find a descent of locusts and
sooner or later I predict we will have open
gambling in this State. As Judge Sherbow
has said gamblers will come in and the life
will be permeated by the gamblers' influ-
ence. In the last session of the General
Assembly I believe the House passed an
authorization, I believe it was a constitu-
tional amendment to permit a lottery. It'
it should pass the General Assembly Mary-
land's good name soon will suffer the ero-
sion that comes with open gambling.
I call your attention that the Legislative
Liaison Committee is in substantial agree-
ment that this Constitutional Committee
should be continued and brought forward
to the new Constitution.
I urge that this is not a frivolous or a
funny matter. This is not a time for levity.
|
I like jokes myself and I have, you might
say, a few bad habits which I would not
want to relate here, but I want to say to
you that it is not a time for laughter be-
cause Maryland's good name and Mary-
land's future is at stake in this vote.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Dukes.
DELEGATE DUKES: I will call on a
conservative from Anne Arundel County,
Delegate Weidemeyer.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Weide-
meyer.
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: Mr.
Chairman and members of the Convention,
I do not think it is time for jokes either.
Neither do I want a joke in the constitu-
tion because this is what it would be as I
read this language, sanctioned or author-
ized, it all means the same thing-. When
you get into sanctioned, you get into acqui-
escence, too. When we get into that, even
if the Legislature did nothing, anyone who
had a conception of what lottery would be,
would be clearly authorized to go into any
port, in any county in this State and drag
in any church or any club or organization
that had any kind of a game of chance on
his theory that it was lottery and ask that
they be enjoined from violating the intent
and spirit of the constitution and as has
been explained by the Committee Chair-
man. This provision is broad and intended
to be broad and it is intended to embrace
a state lottery and any kind of a gambling
lottery that might be conducted by any
private individual or club or organization.
It also has been explained by the Chair-
man, that it would be a good bit on what
the court said a lottery was or the attorney
general's opinion, so that we might say
without having it written in here that the
State nor any of its subdivisions shall
sanction any lottery in any form except as
provided by ruling of the court or by
opinion of the attorney general. Now, rather
than have that in our Constitution, so that
we are in an uncertain area, we are better
off leaving it entirely out of the constitu-
tion and then let the legislature in its dis-
cretion legislate in that area of what is
and what is not and what is and what
should not be. If we keep our provisions of
referendum in the constitution, then if the
people in the State of Maryland are dis-
satisfied with any action of the state legis-
lature, they can at any time go in and take
it out on referendum and then we will have
the voice of the people.
I introduced a proposal here which was
before the Committee. It did provide in de-
|
