DiMasi’s comments were his first extensive remarks on the contentious issue since Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick last month unveiled a proposal to auction off licenses to operate three casinos in different parts of the state.

In a speech Friday to hundreds of local business executives at a Boston-area hotel, DiMasi derided the state’s headline-grabbing casino debate as “nauseating” and all but vowed to block any action on a gambling bill this year.

The House speaker’s comments are closely watched, with DiMasi, a Democrat who hails from Boston’s North End, considered the most powerful man in the Massachusetts Legislature.

“It really is nauseating to see everybody becoming obsessed with casinos,” DiMasi told executives gathered for an Associated Industries of Massachusetts breakfast forum.

The House speaker also made clear he sees no chance of a bill passing by the end of 2007. DiMasi said a formal discussion of the proposal can’t happen until the governor officially files a gambling bill, not expected for at least another few weeks. And it is now too late in the year for the kind of in-depth review needed.

“You are not going to get it done this year, I will tell you that,” DiMasi said. “I have concerns about every single aspect of the proposal,” he said. “To say the least, I am sceptical.”

At a minimum, the House speaker’s verbal salvo stakes out a tough negotiating stance with Gov. Patrick over his proposal to sell off licenses to operate three resort casinos in the state.

Yet there are growing questions as to whether DiMasi, who has ruled the House with an iron grip for three years, can force his own members to tow the line on this key and controversial issue.

The Boston Herald reported last week that a poll of 110 House members found 58 percent either supporting the governor’s casino proposal or remaining on the fence.
That is a dramatic reversal from last year, when the House voted almost 2-1 to defeat a bill that would have legalized slot machines at the state’s four dog and horse tracks.

DiMasi, who has emerged as the leading gambling skeptic at the State House, played a key role in orchestrating that lopsided vote.

But some key political dynamics have since shifted. During the last major Massachusetts gambling debate in 2006, the state’s previous governor, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, vowed to veto any gambling legislation that came across his desk. That provided a key backstop to DiMasi and other opponents of the slot machine bill.

This time around, the state’s new chief executive, Gov. Patrick, is shaping up to be a strong supporter of using casinos to spur job growth and economic development. He is also a fellow Democrat, hailing from the same party that controls both House and Senate in Massachusetts. For DiMasi, that could further complicate any effort to block gambling, with the House speaker forced to appear to be trying to work with a key player in his own party.

Meanwhile, support for casino gambling among the general public in Massachusetts also appears to be on the upswing. A Boston Globe poll of voters across the state found 53 percent in favor of Gov. Patrick’s casino proposal, with 34 percent opposed and 12 percent undecided. The survey of 500 adults found that support for casinos cut across class, income and geographic lines, the paper reported over the weekend.

However, DiMasi appears to be digging in for a long fight, laying out an extensive argument, in his speech Friday to Boston area business leaders, against the governor’s casino plan.

The House speaker offered up an alternative proposal for stoking the state’s economy, pointedly calling for new investments “in the industries we know.”

He called for new incentives to spark job growth in areas ranging from the high-tech sector to manufacturing. While he did not mention casinos directly in his speech – leaving that to comments afterwards – the call for investments in other industries was meant as a deliberate counterpoint.

“Let’s invest in the industries we know,’’ DiMasi said.  “We can’t just concentrate on any one industry.’’

DiMasi also raised concerns about the health of the Massachusetts State Lottery, revealing a major, and previously undisclosed, $120m budget gap at the state agency. That was also apparently designed to raise doubts about Gov. Patrick’s casino plan, resurrecting long-standing concerns that expanded gambling could reduce Lottery revenues, a major cash cow for state government.

Despite the attack on his casino plan, Gov. Patrick declined to do battle.

“The governor has said this is a complex issue and he appreciates the speaker’s willingness to give this proposal the thoughtful and thorough legislative review it requires,” said Kyle Sullivan, a spokesman for Gov. Patrick.

Still, DiMasi’s opposition may not be final, with the House speaker careful to say he has not yet taken a formal stance or declared the governor’s proposal dead on arrival.

While he opposed previous efforts to put slot machines at racetracks, DiMasi, in a recent interview, noted the governor’s proposal, centered on resort casinos, is a significantly different proposal.

In fact, some observers believe the House speaker’s comments could simply set the stage for some legislative horse-trading with Gov. Patrick over the next several months as the casino proposal is debated and hashed out.

The new governor has several ambitious proposals that need legislative approval, including a $1bn package of tax incentives and grants targeted at the biotech industry. That bill alone could provide a rich source of material for potential trade-offs and deals.

“I think there are a lot of people who want to give the governor the benefit of the doubt,’’ said Daniel Bosley, a Democrat from Western Massachusetts and one of DiMasi’s top lieutenants.