Attempt To Erase Cap on Political Contributions From Gambling in Louisiana Fails

In the latest twist in Louisiana’s legislative landscape, Senator Thomas Pressly of Shreveport reversed his decision on Thursday to pursue the removal of the state's prohibition on political campaign contributions by casinos.

This reversal was prompted by significant public attention and backlash following a report by The Times-Picayune | The Advocate. The report revealed that Pressly had discreetly added an amendment to a campaign finance bill, House Bill 906, two days prior, aiming to lift the longstanding ban without any public debate.

Pressly introduced the amendment during a Tuesday Senate committee hearing. He defended his action by labeling the existing ban on casino contributions as "unconstitutional" and inherently unfair, citing the disparity that allows video poker operators to make political contributions while casinos are barred from doing so.

However, Pressly’s justification overlooked a crucial detail: a 2002 decision by the Louisiana Supreme Court had already affirmed the constitutionality of the ban on casino contributions.

Public Backlash and Legislative Response

• The revelation of Pressly's amendment by the media sparked immediate public scrutiny and backlash.

• In response, Pressly requested that the amendment be removed from HB 906.

• The Senate acted upon his request on Thursday, eliminating the controversial amendment from the bill.

Subsequently, Senator Pat Connick, a Republican from Marrero, encouraged his colleagues to pass the bill in its amended form, which they did with an overwhelming vote of 29-5. The bill was then sent back to the House for final approval. Given the House’s prior approval of the measure with an 85-11 vote, final passage of the bill appeared imminent.

Casino Industry and Motivation

• During an interview, Pressly disclosed that he had introduced the amendment at the request of Penn Entertainment, which operates five of Louisiana's 15 riverboat casinos.

• Notably, this move lacked support from other casino companies in the state.

• The prohibition Pressly aimed to revoke applies to casino owners, key employees, and their spouses, and has been in place since 1996.

The Legislature enacted this prohibition in response to a series of scandals involving former Governor Edwin Edwards, who had presided over the legalization of gambling in Louisiana.

Historical Context and Scandal Legacy

• The ban on casino contributions was instituted as a legislative safeguard following notorious incidents during Edwards' tenure.

• One prominent scandal involved the Senate president distributing campaign checks to senators on the Senate floor from a riverboat casino owner.

• Edwards, having just stepped down as governor, was later convicted for accepting payoffs from companies seeking riverboat licenses from his appointed board.

These scandals underscored the necessity for stringent regulations to avert similar occurrences in the future.

In conclusion, the removal of Pressly’s amendment reaffirms Louisiana’s long-standing commitment to maintaining ethical safeguards in its gaming and political systems, ensuring that casino influence remains strictly regulated.