Lankford said he’s not convinced that won’t happen with Proposition A funding. Every time Webb City residents vote on a bond issue, he said, he still gets questions about the lottery money that was supposed to supplement Missouri school funding, but ended up replacing it.

Lankford said the goal of the issue appears to grant a monopoly to the casinos already operating in the state and remove loss limits. “It’s about the casinos, not schools,” he said.

The measure would remove the current $500 loss limit, which supporters say will put Missouri casinos on par with those in other states. They say Missouri is the only state with the limit and Missouri casinos are losing those gamblers — and revenues.

The Missouri Gaming Commission estimates that Missouri has already lost 30 percent of its casino patrons to neighboring states because of the loss limits. That same commission also estimates that Missouri casinos will lose $180 million to $200 million a year in revenues to the new destination casinos being built in Kansas if those loss limits are not eliminated.

The Missouri Gaming Commission has concluded that there is no direct evidence that loss limits deter people from becoming “problem gamblers,” citing findings from the Iowa gaming commission after limits were repealed there in 1994.

That statement is challenged by Casino Watch, a Missouri based casino watchdog group. Spokesmen for the group say monitoring that comes along with the limit helps enforce the Missouri Disassociated Persons list — people who voluntarily chose to exclude themselves from casinos because in most cases they are compulsive and addicted gamblers. They say the limits reduce the speed at which gamblers play the games and limit the amount of financial losses that families experience as a result of gambling addition.

Casino Watch has filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the ballot initiative. It argues the measure addresses two subjects while the constitution requires voters be given a single subject to change in state law via initiative petitions.

Evilio Silvera, executive director of the group, also said the ballot title is deceptive in that it links the initiative to schools when the proposal is entirely funded by the casino industry.

In addition to revenues from lifting loss limits, proceeds from a higher casino tax also would boost school funding, proponents say.

It’s estimated that Proposition A would bring an additional $130 million to Missouri schools, raising the total taxes the casinos pay to schools to $410 million. Proponents say the estimates are conservative, because they do not include projected revenues from the Lumiere Place casino recently completed in St. Louis or the River City casino set for construction just south of St. Louis next year. And they say the measure specifies the money can be used only for education, and cannot replace other education funds.

That predicted annual funding boost would take full effect in fiscal year 2010. The estimates are based on revenue reports provided by the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.

The casinos estimate that Proposition A will raise casino revenues to $1.952 billion a year, with net revenues of $1.542 billion after paying the higher taxes to the schools.

The measure has been endorsed by the Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce, the Urban League of Greater Kansas City, the Port Authority of Kansas City, Partners for Progress nonprofit in St. Charles and the Missouri Chamber of Commerce.

Staff writer Melissa Dunson contributed to this report.