OK, Miami-Dade voters, let me get this straight. You want slot machines allowed at some tracks and jai alai
frontons, but you want them only in the county next to you.
Am I getting this right? What do you have against Broward County?
Last fall, Florida voters narrowly approved a constitutional amendment allowing Broward and Miami-Dade
counties to vote on allowing slot machines at pari-mutuel facilities. Miami-Dade voters and Broward County
voters very much liked the idea. Two out of three Broward voters voted "yes." Fifty-seven percent of
Miami-Dade voters voted "yes."
Then, in local referendums Tuesday, 57 percent of Broward voters approved slots and Miami-Dade turned
them down, 52 percent to 48 percent.
Miami-Dade voters, once again you have everyone scratching their heads. But I guess you do that a lot.
Some credit or blame a last-minute mobilization of conservative voters by Gov. Jeb Bush. Some credit or
blame a voter turnout rate -- 14 percent in Miami-Dade, 18 percent in Broward -- that would be considered a
successful voter boycott in other political systems.
Expansion of gambling is always a hard sell in Florida. Religious conservatives and other so-called "values
voters" oppose it for moral reasons. Liberals oppose it because the gambling industry has a generally toxic
effect on the community.
To win, then, any gambling measure must make a strong pitch to two groups:
People who see gambling as no different from any other kind of entertainment or tourist attraction.
People who don't like gambling but believe it can create jobs and raise money for some public good,
usually education.
No gambling measure can win with the first group alone. For a gambling measure to win, the second group
must be sold.
Pollsters always come up with clever descriptive titles for groups like this, so let's just call these people
"grudging pragmatists." They don't embrace the idea of gambling but see its usefulness.
Grudging pragmatists gave the Florida Lottery its decisive 63 percent win in 1986. So many people believed
the Florida Lottery would bring increased money to public education that it took more than a decade for that
promise to begin to sound like a bad joke.
By contrast, the Miami-Dade referendum failed in part because the grudging pragmatists didn't believe this
really would end up helping education very much. They were more grudging than usual and pragmatically
decided there was no reason to bother voting. So they didn't.
Why would a grudging pragmatist be more grudging than usual?
A big reason is this vote was conducted before the Legislature passed any rules on distributing slots money.
Slots supporters could talk about school money all they wanted, but in the end, they had to ask voters to vote
first and trust the Legislature to do the right thing later.
"Just trust the Legislature" is not an applause line in Florida.
This was worsened by the way pari-mutuel owners cut side deals guaranteeing local government a cut of the
action. Local schools received no such assurances. They were, like everyone else, supposed to Just Trust the
Legislature.
Values voters went to the polls to defeat this. Grudging pragmatists stayed home to defeat this. Those who
feared a new push to bring slots to other parts of the state can thank them both.