Experts: Martha Coakley opposition to casino question may backfire
Monday, May 5, 2014
By:
Attorney general and gubernatorial hopeful Martha Coakley will put herself firmly in the cross hairs of the divisive casino debate today when her office argues before the Supreme Judicial Court that people should not be allowed to vote on a ballot measure to overturn the state’s casino law, according to political observers on both sides of the aisle.
Democratic political strategist Scott Ferson, who formerly represented the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe in its quest to open a casino, said the case will be a problem for Coakley “if one of her opponents picks up the baton and hits her over the head with it.”
Charley Manning, longtime adviser to Bay State GOP candidates, including Mitt Romney, said,
“We’ve always been a state where people like to have their say-so on important issues, and casino gambling is an important issue. Politically, it’s going to hurt her in this campaign season.”
Coakley in September denied a petition to place a casino repeal on the November ballot because she argues it violates the implied contract rights of casino developers who have spent millions applying for licenses. The group Repeal the Casino Deal, which has gathered more than 73,000 signatures, appealed her decision to the SJC, which will hear arguments today.
Coakley’s stance has highlighted an awkward arrangement — her campaign strategist Doug Rubin and his firm, Northwind Strategies, also represents Suffolk Downs, partners with Mohegan Sun in the hunt for the lucrative Boston-area casino license. It also comes as polling indicates a softening of casino support in the Bay State, as communities have voted proposals down and the state Gaming Commission struggles to keep on schedule amid a host of controversies. Rubin has denied any involvement in Coakley’s decision to deny the ballot question.
“The Attorney General’s Office conducted an independent and strictly legal review of the ballot initiative,” Coakley’s campaign said in a statement issued yesterday. “The Attorney General believes the most important thing is that we get the right result, and her office will work cooperatively with all parties once the Court issues a final ruling.”
Justices today will hear arguments from Coakley’s staff, a lawyer for the Repeal the Casino Deal ballot committee and one representing other intervening parties, including casino license applicants.
A decision likely will be issued sometime in June.
Thomas Bean, an attorney for the repeal group, said Coakley is overreaching in applying principles related to public bidding laws to casino regulation.
“We believe there is no implied contract,” Bean said. “The people should have the opportunity to enact laws in the way the Legislature does, if the people think the Legislature has gone in a direction with which the people disagree.”
http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_politics/2014/05/experts_martha_coakley_opposition_to_casino_question_may?utm_source=ML+14%2F05%2F05+%28ACLU+%2B+SEIU+509%29&utm_campaign=20140505ML&utm_medium=email
Democratic political strategist Scott Ferson, who formerly represented the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe in its quest to open a casino, said the case will be a problem for Coakley “if one of her opponents picks up the baton and hits her over the head with it.”
Charley Manning, longtime adviser to Bay State GOP candidates, including Mitt Romney, said,
“We’ve always been a state where people like to have their say-so on important issues, and casino gambling is an important issue. Politically, it’s going to hurt her in this campaign season.”
Coakley in September denied a petition to place a casino repeal on the November ballot because she argues it violates the implied contract rights of casino developers who have spent millions applying for licenses. The group Repeal the Casino Deal, which has gathered more than 73,000 signatures, appealed her decision to the SJC, which will hear arguments today.
Coakley’s stance has highlighted an awkward arrangement — her campaign strategist Doug Rubin and his firm, Northwind Strategies, also represents Suffolk Downs, partners with Mohegan Sun in the hunt for the lucrative Boston-area casino license. It also comes as polling indicates a softening of casino support in the Bay State, as communities have voted proposals down and the state Gaming Commission struggles to keep on schedule amid a host of controversies. Rubin has denied any involvement in Coakley’s decision to deny the ballot question.
“The Attorney General’s Office conducted an independent and strictly legal review of the ballot initiative,” Coakley’s campaign said in a statement issued yesterday. “The Attorney General believes the most important thing is that we get the right result, and her office will work cooperatively with all parties once the Court issues a final ruling.”
Justices today will hear arguments from Coakley’s staff, a lawyer for the Repeal the Casino Deal ballot committee and one representing other intervening parties, including casino license applicants.
A decision likely will be issued sometime in June.
Thomas Bean, an attorney for the repeal group, said Coakley is overreaching in applying principles related to public bidding laws to casino regulation.
“We believe there is no implied contract,” Bean said. “The people should have the opportunity to enact laws in the way the Legislature does, if the people think the Legislature has gone in a direction with which the people disagree.”
http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_politics/2014/05/experts_martha_coakley_opposition_to_casino_question_may?utm_source=ML+14%2F05%2F05+%28ACLU+%2B+SEIU+509%29&utm_campaign=20140505ML&utm_medium=email
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment