Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : Littlefield Corporation (LTFD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jimmy who wrote (7506)	2/20/1998 6:18:00 PM
From: T.K. Allen	Respond to of 10368

Jimmy: Bill #947 has been placed on the Senate calendar. All that means is the full Senate can take up debate of the bill when, and IF, they desire. That could be anytime from the next session to next month to never. There is a companion (meaning very similar) bill (Bill #4577) which has passed the House (this is the one Mims referred to in the CC). There are 46 Senators, so based on what we KNOW, a vote on Bill #947 is, AT BEST, a dead-heat - 23 YEAs (sponsors of 947) and 23 NAYs. If there were a tie vote, the tie would be broken by the Senate President. The Senate president is the President ex-officio who is the Lt. Governor. Obviously, the Lt. Governor would vote YEA. Also, I find it difficult to believe Gov. Beasley hasn't been able to arm-twist at least one other Senator to vote YEA. Therefore, opponents of 947 (pro-gaming) have no choice but to filibuster to raise the vote ante to 29. The wild card is public sentiment. If, as Mims claims, 67% of the voters favor keeping and taxing video poker if the taxes are used for education, then there "should" be more pressure on Beasley to blink first. I wonder where the poker-tax-for-education bill is? I must admit, the situation makes me very nervous. TKA