Pari-mutuel wagering on historic horse races advanced

Senators advanced a bill from general file March 21 that would authorize the state Racing Commission to license and regulate pari-mutuel wagering on historic horse races.

A historic horse race creates a pari-mutuel pool from wagers placed on a previously held race at a licensed racetrack.

LB806, introduced by Omaha Sen. Scott Lautenbaugh, originally would have allowed instant racing terminals at licensed horse racing premises only with the approval from the county board where the licensed facility is located.

With the relocation of the state fair and closing of a horse racing venue in Lincoln, Lautenbaugh said, the horse racing industry has suffered statewide. Allowing terminals to feature historic races would generate revenue to build a new track in Lincoln, he said.

“This is a jobs bill,” Lautenbaugh said. “We can’t afford to turn our backs on these people. We can’t afford to turn our backs on these jobs.”

A Judiciary Committee amendment, adopted March 7 on a 25-19 vote, eliminated the bill’s requirement that a county board adopt a resolution before the Racing Commission may grant a historic horse racing license.

The amended bill would establish a Historic Horse Racing Distribution Fund comprising taxes collected from the races and licensing fees, which would be $1,000 per machine. Half of the fund’s proceeds would be credited to the Racing Commissions Cash Fund to be used by the commission for equitable treatment of equine species and the other half would be directed to the Compulsive Gambler’s Assistance Fund.

Proponents of the bill said it would create and maintain jobs in the state – many of which are agricultural jobs.

Wilber Sen. Russ Karpisek supported the bill. He said lawmakers are quick to help other industries that seek assistance through tax breaks and other incentive programs, but seem unwilling to do the same for the state’s horse racing industry.

“We bend over backward for the big guy to come in here,” Karpisek said. “I don’t think we do enough for the little guy.”

Ogallala Sen. Ken Schilz also supported the bill, saying historic horse racing would allow the industry to help itself at no cost to the state.

But opponents argued that racing terminals are similar to slot machines and could be considered expanded gambling.

Scottsbluff Sen. John Harms said historic horse racing would not be enough to save the industry in Nebraska. Times have changed, he said, and young people are not drawn to horse racing.

“How much more do we want to expand gambling to save this industry?” he asked.

Omaha Sen. Beau McCoy also opposed the bill, saying racing terminals look like and are used as slot machines. Therefore, he said, historic horse racing would be an unconstitutional expansion of gambling and not pari-mutuel wagering.

Sen. John Nelson of Omaha agreed.

“However you configure this machine … the only thing different from a slot machine is that there’s not a lever there to pull,” he said. “It is an end run around what our [state] constitution expressly forbids.”

Lautenbaugh said the terminals can be configured in a number of ways and that the appearance of the machine is irrelevant.

“I have a cigarette lighter that looks like a gun,” he said. “That doesn’t make it a gun. What matters is what is inside.”

Opponents of the bill filed a number of amendments in an attempt to filibuster LB806 and Lincoln Sen. Tony Fulton offered a motion to indefinitely postpone the bill. He said the Legislature had many important bills waiting to be debated and suggested lawmakers vote to end debate on LB806 rather than spend hours on a filibuster.

The motion failed on a 14-28 vote.

An amendment offered by Harms, which failed 8-14, would have required that live racing be conducted at the licensed racetrack enclosure for 150 percent or more of the days assigned to the racetrack in 1988 in order to qualify for an historic horse racing license.

Following rejection of the Harms amendment, Lautenbaugh made a motion to invoke cloture – a procedural tool used to end debate and require an immediate vote on advancement of a bill.

The motion succeeded on a 33-11 vote, the minimum required for adoption.

Senators then voted 26-18 to advance the bill to select file.