MIAMI (FBW)—If the Sunshine State had a mission statement it should be “Florida is a family-friendly, wholesome, prosperous place” and “gambling doesn’t have a part in that,” former Gov. Jeb Bush told Florida Baptist Witness in an exclusive interview.

Bush agreed to the interview because the primary topic was gambling. The interview is the only one he has given since leaving office in December 2006 after serving two terms as Florida’s governor.

In the hour-long interview March 14 at his modest Miami office, Bush also discussed current political issues—the Democrat Party’s Florida and Michigan delegate dilemmas, Sen. John McCain’s prospects for victory in November and a “21st century conservative philosophy” McCain should advocate. A story covering these topics was published in the March 20 edition.

Bush has declined other interviews—although “asked to do a lot of them” —to allow his successor Gov. Charlie Crist to “create his own path.” As former governor it’s “important” for him to “get out of the way” and “let go,” Bush said.

While speaking warmly about his friendship with Crist, his desire for Crist’s success and making clear several times he didn’t want to be perceived as judging his successor, Bush nevertheless offered views on gambling expansion that diverge from Crist’s actions and positions on various gambling policies.

Bush said gambling expansion is a “narcotic” state leaders should reject even though the “allure of gambling is probably even stronger today” with the state budget deficit.

Gambling can be opposed for moral, economic, fairness or social costs reasons, but the “combination of all of them” make for a “very compelling argument” against expansion, Bush said.

“I think gambling is a vivid example of a culture that demands immediate gratification,” giving an “impression that you can achieve things without work” and “that luck matters,” Bush said. As such, gambling is a “deterrence for true economic development.”

According to Bush, “the bottom line is that this is a money-making enterprise for a select few that do really, really well at the expense of the communities” where they exist.

Gambling expansion is not “unstoppable” if there is “public leadership” that makes the case against it and mobilizes citizens, he said.

Voters’ approval in 2004 of a state constitutional amendment permitting local referendums in Broward and Miami-Dade counties on Las Vegas-style slot machines at its pari-mutuel facilities should not be interpreted as a mandate for statewide gambling expansion, Bush said.

Bush theorized the amendment’s narrow adoption was because voters believed that gambling would be limited to South Florida and would not affect their own communities.

“It’s kind of like, don’t tax me, don’t tax thee, tax that fellow behind the tree,” Bush said.

“That argument created this current expansion,” he said, adding, “I don’t think a majority of Floridians” would welcome more gambling in their own communities.

Bush argued the recent openness in the Legislature to gambling expansion is not a sign of a dramatic shift in public support for gambling. “I don’t think people’s attitudes have changed,” he said.

“Maybe my departure had something to do with” recent legislative support for gambling “because there was a general feeling” among legislators during his tenure that gambling bills would fail due to his strong opposition.

Still, voters’ approval of the 2004 slots constitutional amendment has triggered gambling expansion, including most prominently Gov. Crist’s 2007 compact with the Seminole Indian Tribe. In the 25-year compact, the Seminoles have agreed to pay the state hundreds of millions of dollars in exchange for exclusive rights to Las Vegas-style slot machines outside of South Florida and to certain games currently illegal in the state, including baccarat and blackjack.

Bush talked about his “good faith” negotiations with the Seminoles, required under the federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), which did not result in an agreement—“which I didn’t lose any sleep over, frankly.”

In contrast to Gov. Crist’s decision to not seek legislative approval for his compact with the Seminoles, resulting in a legal challenge to the compact by House Speaker Marco Rubio currently before the Florida Supreme Court, Bush said legal advice from within his administration and from outside experts caused him to believe the Legislature should have a role in deciding a policy with statewide implications.

Reflecting on that advice, Bush said: “We concluded that we did not have the authority, unilaterally; that the Legislature had the right to ratify it. And frankly, at the time, if we had negotiated a compact I wanted that … since I’m opposed to gambling.”

Bush added, however, that if he had been given advice to “go it alone, I might have done it.”

He said his negotiations with the Seminoles started shortly after taking office and continued throughout his eight-year tenure.

Bush said that he saw the compact negotiations as a “possible opportunity” to limit further gambling expansion, an argument employed by Crist in defense of his compact.

Asked about the inclusion in Crist’s compact of certain games currently illegal in the state, Bush said, “My concern with something like that—because we discussed these things with the tribe as well—is that it creates another push-back from the pari-mutuels,” adding “it appears that there are efforts right now to expand gambling” because of the compact.

“I’m opposed to the expansion of gambling, either geographically or through additional games. Period,” he said. “Our intent was to limit gambling, not to expand the number of games and so we never made a proposal that did what Gov. Crist has done.

“There is a caveat here, which is, to be fair to him and to his team that had to do this, they may have had pressures given time constraints; there may have been other factors,” he quickly added. “So, I don’t want to pass judgment on his efforts,” Bush said.

Bush later emphasized: “I don’t want to have my conversation here taken out of context because I do not know all of the facts that may have emerged in the last two years. I think it’s important to be fair to Gov. Crist in that regard.”

Bush strongly asserted that IGRA—the federal law regulating Indian gambling—“needs to change. I think it’s absurd that the Indian nations get this status that undermines state policy. It’s a vestige of a bygone era, frankly.”

Speaker Rubio, Bush said, should be commended for speaking out against gambling expansion repeatedly in recent months, even while the Legislature has been faced with a significant budget shortfall causing some to advocate gambling as a means of balancing the budget.

“I applaud Speaker Rubio” for rejecting gambling expansion, Bush said, noting doing such would be a “permanent” solution to a temporary budget shortfall and would be a “grave mistake. Period.”

Noting he doesn’t “envy” state leaders’ difficulty in balancing the budget, Bush said there are four options in addressing a budget deficit—using reserves, cutting spending, raising taxes and finding new revenue, like gambling.

He said using reserves is a “legitimate way to deal with a temporary shortfalls,” while adding, “you can’t rely on that exclusively because that just defers the problem.”

Although new gambling revenue is a “serious consideration,” Bush said it should be rejected because of other problems it creates. Additionally, he predicted revenue estimations for gambling will not be met which “creates grounds for additional expansion.”

Rubio’s denunciation of gambling expansion is “good” because “he does have the power to stop the expansion. And that would be a good thing for our state. I really do believe that,” Bush said.

Asked about some state government observers’ belief that Rubio’s gambling opposition and other disagreements with Gov. Crist is political posturing on the speaker’s part, Bush reflected on his own experience in “having conflicts with speakers and [Senate] presidents.”

The former governor who believes in strong executive leadership said disagreements between governors and legislative leaders are part of the “natural tension” the Founders were “incredibly smart” to build into government because it “creates the vetting of ideas; it forces the people that may not agree to validate their own beliefs and to challenge them … and to find common ground.”

He criticized reporters who overly emphasize political ambition as motive for such conflicts, rather than legitimate policy disagreements.

“There’s a natural tension between the executive and the legislative and it doesn’t necessarily mean that people are posting up for personal ambitions. It’s OK to have disagreement,” he said.

Disagreements should be “reported on, but it doesn’t have to be blown out of the proportion than it really is,” he added.

Told of a comment by Rubio published in a Witness op-ed last July in which the speaker said “voters must send a message that there is an electoral price to be paid for supporting gambling,” Bush agreed politicians should be held accountable for gambling votes. Rubio’s op-ed responded to a Witness editorial criticizing him, Crist and Senate President Ken Pruitt for allowing pro-gambling legislation to become law in 2007.

Gambling expansion is “not the sole issue” on which voters should cast their ballots, Bush said, “but it’s becoming more important because of the growth of these entities that are now cropping up all over the place. … That’s fair game. That’s a timeless principle of politics.”