Even Maryland Comptroller Peter Franchot thinks it’s a bad idea, saying, “Slots are the wrong way to pay for education. This is a regressive tax that brings crime, corruption, and the destruction of entire communities.” Still, union spokesman Daniel Kaufman says he is not sure.

“Frankly we haven’t really seen any hard evidence that’s the case.”

Chad Hills of Focus on the Family Action says the union could not have done due diligence.

“(It) did not look very hard. It’s readily available if you type in ‘gambling addiction’ on Google.”

Kaufman says they are hoping to get between four and six hundred million dollars a year if the slot referendum passes muster with voters in November. Doug Stiegler of the Family Protection Lobby says any money will come from those who can least afford it.

“Even where it’s being located shows that they’re going to be putting it into areas where the poor people can get most access to it.”

And what comes in the front door will be taken out the back.

“The money coming from the slots will not go to education, it will go to the general budget and education will get more or less depending on the budget, not on slots.”

Kaufman admits that could be the case.

“We can never 100 percent guarantee, unless it’s written into the constitution (the legislature) can pass new laws and make changes.”

Still, it’s a gamble the teachers union is willing to take. Then again, it’s not betting with its own money.