Sunday’s column:
“Due to (Senate President David) Williams’ utter mismanagement, this (gambling) issue now pits Republicans against Republicans, not Republicans against Democrats, as he would have us believe,” Lane’s End Farm general manager Bill Farish wrote in a column published by the Herald-Leader in late September.
“Sadly, Williams seems less concerned about helping our (racing and breeding) industry and more concerned about maintaining control over his Senate fiefdom,” the son of former President George W. Bush’s ambassador to Great Britain added later in the piece.
Last week, Williams drew criticism from Louisville lawyer John David Dyche, author of the recently released Republican Leader: A Political Biography of Senator Mitch McConnell.
Williams’ “hard-line posture and strong-arm tactics on gambling are counterproductive,” Dyche wrote in The Courier-Journal, adding that “Williams has put several GOP legislators in difficult political positions.”
Of the two blows delivered to Williams by fellow Republicans, Dyche’s was perhaps the more telling. Farish, after all, has a stake in the push to keep Kentucky racetracks competitive with their counterparts in states where purses and breeding incentives are supplemented by revenue from alternative gambling. His displeasure with Williams’ obstructionism on this issue could be expected.
Dyche, on the other hand, is one of Kentucky’s better known Republican pundits who tends to reflect mainstream thinking in the party.
So, when he writes about the need for Republicans to “put gambling behind them — preferably by letting the public vote on a constitutional amendment,” you have to believe he’s speaking for a lot of like-minded Republicans. And you have to consider the possibility that pressure from within his own party might force Williams to allow a floor vote on gambling in 2010.
If it does, it likely would take the form of a constitutional amendment, perhaps sponsored by one or more of the Republican senators from horse country who have been put at risk by Williams’ current stance.
The thing is, though, a constitutional amendment on the 2010 ballot is the last thing Democrats should want if they’re truly committed to winning back control of the Senate.
With former state Rep. Robin Webb’s win in a special election for the 18th District seat formerly held by Republican Charlie Borders, Democrats have reduced the Republican Senate majority to 20-17, with one independent. They hope to whittle it down a bit more in another special election later this year, assuming Williams’ oft-voiced prediction that Majority Floor Leader Dan Kelly will get a judicial appointment comes true.
(Republican Rep. Jimmy Higdon has already filed papers with the Registry of Election Finance for a 2010 race in Kelly’s district. Democrat Jodie Haydon, a former state representative, also has filed with the Registry. So, both parties apparently believe Kelly will get a judgeship.)
If Democrats succeed in picking up Kelly’s seat, they would go into the 2010 elections — which will determine who controls the post-census redistricting — down to just 19-18-1 with a few Senate Republicans from horse country at risk because of their anti-gambling votes earlier this year and at least one Republican seat open due to the announced retirement of Sen. Gary Tapp.
Under those circumstances, Democrats would have to be politically brain dead to go along with putting an amendment on the ballot that would draw conservatives to the polls to vote against gambling. Better to just sit back and watch the Republican squabbling on the subject continue.

Larry Dale Keeling, a columnist for the Lexington Herald-Leader, has spent most of his 35-plus years in journalism reporting on or writing editorials and columns about Kentucky’s politics and political issues. He now brings his experience and expertise on those topics to the KyKurmudgeon blog.
David Williams ‘utter mismanagement’ — not exactly a news flash. His mismanagement of the Kentucky Senate, aided and abetted by Damon Thayer and others, has been nothing if not disastrous for the Commonwealth.
Why do the Rs and Ds always avoid the common-sense answers?
Here’s a solution:
Implement a law that allows citizens of a county to circulate a petition, followed by putting a measure on the ballot as to whether or not to allow an area to be re-zoned to allow for Casinos to be built in that county. The people of the county are the ones that have to live with the casino. Why should a county be forced to have a casino? Why should a county that wants a casino be denied that casino?
Common sense. Let’s use it.
And ironically, the “Anti-spam word” for me is “Slots”. Ha!