If that event were held now, the backdrop likely would be a crumbling school flanked by trailers, showing outdated books and overcrowded classrooms.

As the pro-slots side shapes its message for the November referendum on slots, the benefits the money could have for horse racing have largely been pushed to the background in favor of a focus on the impact it could have on education funding.

When Mr. O'Malley first outlined his slots plan, which eventually became a statewide referendum in November on whether to allow up to 15,000 slot machines at five locations, including Anne Arundel County, the central argument for the legislation was bolstering the horse racing business.

The governor, joined by several people from the horse business, spoke in pastoral Glyndon behind a barn filled with strong, glistening horses.

"There will be aspects of this slots bill that are not totally of my liking, there will be aspects not totally of other people's liking, but I hope in the center that we can find a way to keep this great (horse racing) tradition alive in Maryland," Mr. O'Malley said at the time.

Also at the announcement was Thomas Perez, the secretary of the Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation. About a month earlier, Mr. Perez had released a report about how slots boosted the racing industry in neighboring states.

Expanded gambling, he said, is essential to maintaining the 18,000 horse-racing jobs and 600,000 acres of horse-related open space in Maryland.

"This is not about Seabiscuit or sentimentality," Mr. Perez said. "This is about survival for the horse-racing industry and the thousands and thousands of jobs that rely on it. The slots horse is out of the barn in other states, and frankly it is galloping past Maryland."

But the dominant argument of the major pro-slots group, called For Maryland For Our Future, has so far had little to do with horses; it is about getting more money for education.

The proposed constitutional amendment Marylanders will vote on doesn't even acknowledge supporting the horse racing industry as a "primary purpose" of legalizing slots. All three written objectives deal with using dollars for education needs.

A doorknob hanger recently circulated in Anne Arundel County by the organization features a photograph of smiling children and trumpets these slogans above a plea to vote for the referendum: "More Resources For Our Schools" and "No New Taxes." The theme is further emphasized over the group's insignia, with the silhouettes of two adults and children, one of which has pigtails, another of which is riding a bike with training wheels.

A similar display is found on the group's Web site, www.formaryland.org. The banner proclaims, "No New Taxes. Stronger Maryland Schools." Several YouTube video "endorsements" on the site are from teachers, including Tamara Johnson from Annapolis High School.

"We need to start keeping our money (already spent on slots) in our own state … That way we'll help our own students," Ms. Johnson says in the ad. "We need to think about our future, and our future is our children, and how we can fund education."

Multiple interests

The basis for these claims is found in the legislation that will take effect if the referendum passes. Between 48.5 to 51 percent of the total annual gross from slots will go into an Education Trust Fund, with $500 million a year expected to head into it by fiscal 2012, according to the state's Department of Legislative Services. Slots opponents say the ancillary costs of slot machines - bigger roads to accommodate traffic, more police and fire stations to deal with the facilities - will counteract any budgetary gains.

Fred Puddester, the former state budget secretary tapped by Mr. O'Malley to head the pro-slots campaign, said his group's message is simply reflecting the intent of the General Assembly.

"(Education funding) is exactly what the legislature passed," he said.

There are more pieces to the puzzle, however. Slots money, with fiscal 2012 projections, also would be divvied up to other interests with:

33 percent, or $336.3 million, to slots licensees.

7 percent, or $71.3 million, to horse-racing purses. This share would not exceed $100 million annually.

5.5 percent, or $56 million, to local governments. Baltimore city will get 18 percent of this piece through the Pimlico Community Development Authority for 15 years and another $1 million will go annually to the Rosecroft community in Prince George's County.

2.5 percent, or $25.5 million, to a race track renewal fund. This would end after an eight-year period and would not exceed $40 million annually.

2 percent, or $20.4 million, for administrative costs.

1.5 percent, or $15.3 million, for minority business investment.

Although emphasizing the benefits to horse racing could be a boon for getting campaign contributions, it is a "cultural liability" for a general election, said Matthew Crenson, a political science professor at Johns Hopkins University.

"Race tracks have never been hallowed places in American society," he said.

With out-of-state companies and owners standing to gain money from the infusion of slots money, Mr. Crenson said, it is in the interest of the pro-slots side to emphasize the educational benefits instead.

"The argument on behalf of horse racing isn't as compelling," he said. "That is the vulnerable point … People just don't think that is a major priority."

Mr. Puddester said his group is not trying to be politically expedient.

"I don't think about it being politically easier or harder," he said. "I think about it in terms of the facts in front of us today. There is nothing else to talk about."

The anti-slots groups, however, are going to question whether voters can believe those promises will come to fruition and make sure the referendum does not stray from its core subject: slot machines.

"Do you trust the people in Annapolis, the insiders, with their money?" said Scott Arceneaux, a senior adviser to the group Marylanders United to Stop Slots. "(The referendum) is about gambling."

He said the pro-slots side is following a common strategy by using a selective focus on a vote with wide consequences and ignoring factors such as a potential windfall for gambling interests. Horse racing was not going to be a way to "sell" the referendum, he said.

"They always want to make this about something that it's not," Mr. Arceneaux said. "Frankly, I think that is shameful."

The moral arguments could be a difficult sell, however, said Dan Nataf, a political scientist at Anne Arundel Community College and the director of the Center for the Study of Local Issues. Slots support consistently polls around 55 percent to 60 percent in Anne Arundel County, he said.

"You don't really need to frame (slots) that much," Mr. Nataf said.

Ultimately, voters probably will consider the fact people will gamble anyway, other states are benefiting from Maryland's money, and few communities will have to deal with the actual problems from facilities, he said.

"That is an easy thing to get your head around," Mr. Nataf said. "They'll see the fruits but they won't see the cost."