(Recap and analysis of the week in state government)

By Jim O’Sullivan

STATE HOUSE NEWS SERVICE

STATE HOUSE, BOSTON, SEPT. 28, 2007….Week two of Casino Nation on Beacon Hill. A few phrases with which debate-watchers should familiarize themselves: "open-minded," "complicated issue," and "concerned about the impacts."

They were in long supply this week, as Gov. Deval Patrick’s proposal to establish the Bay State as the preeminent gambling mecca of the Northeast continued to elicit thumbs up and down from the lawmakers who will decide whether it becomes reality.

Another one: "I’m waiting to see the bill." Lawmakers are growing weary of fielding questions on their stances on gambling without having legislation in front of them. One, Rep. Harriett Stanley, told the News Service Thursday that Patrick’s approach of announcing his policy then waiting to file his bill wasn’t sitting well: "I’d really like to have a plan to look at, not just a press conference to hear about it."

And once it’s filed, the measure will sit in the Legislature. House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi, watched as the potential doomsayer for the plan, deployed some understatement in a WBZ Radio interview when he said, "More than likely, I don’t think anything will happen this session. So I think the debate will continue this year and into next year."

DiMasi told the News Service on Thursday he was unsure how to comment on a bill not yet filed. This was an intriguing twist on a useful technique often deployed by governors, who are at least nominally the heads of state government. Governors often decline to take a position on a bill until it lands on their desk. DiMasi is declining to take a position on one until it lands on his.

Sort of. Terms like "nauseating" trip the alert mechanisms in the parts of legislators’ brains that weigh things like, for instance, committee assignments, fundraisers, and district priorities. These parts are often very well developed.

And so the legislators who joined the speaker in Waltham Friday morning over cheesed eggs heard him call the amount of attention on casinos "nauseating." He had a message for members who have weighed in: "I’ll make this public. Any legislator or anybody that tries to make a decision or an opinion [on a bill] that doesn’t exist is a little bit ahead of themselves. So relax."

Patrick said last week he’s firmly resistant to compromises. The governor didn’t rush into his decision to open up the state to casinos, and he’s clung to the numbers and rationale behind it. But there was a conspicuous lack of rushed support in the days following his leak and press conference. And while he was figuring out how to advance his plan, the team down the hall was figuring out how, if they so chose, they could prevent that advance.

The governor is showing some flexibility. By the end of the week, he’d backed off the concept of an urban casino. He also said he was open to fewer than three casinos. Some scorekeepers would count two compromises.

Thus, a phrase with which the governor and his staff, making the rounds this week to nail down support, might want to familiarize themselves if they’re serious about casinos and may already have: Let’s make a deal.

STORY OF THE WEEK: Battle royale over casinos royale rolls on.

----------