Major national gambling interests spent $1.14 million in the first six months of the year to lobby on Beacon Hill, seeking to influence a handful of powerful lawmakers as they worked behind closed doors to craft the casino bill that was made public Tuesday, according to records compiled by the secretary of state’s office.
Most of that money was spent to hire lobbyists, who have pressed the interests of Wynn Resorts, Las Vegas Sands Corp., Penn National Gaming, and other gambling firms.
The biggest spender, as in past years, was Suffolk Downs, which spent $191,000 as it pushes to build a sprawling casino and hotel complex in East Boston.
Gambling lobbyists also gave to the campaign accounts of House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo and Senate President Therese Murray, who wield the most power over the bill, which would legalize three casinos and one slot parlor.
Though limited to one $200 donation a year, lobbyists at firms that represent gambling interests gave $13,875 to DeLeo and $7,550 to Murray in the last year and a half.
“It is naïve to believe there is no potential here for improper influence and corruption,’’ said former attorney general Scott Harshbarger, who heads Citizens for a Stronger Massachusetts, a group opposed to the casino bill.
“We’ve seen enough impact of that in Massachusetts and around the country, and to just treat it as, ‘well, that’s not an issue,’ is just unrealistic,’’ Harshbarger said.
Secretary of State William F. Galvin, whose office regulates lobbyists, said he is bracing for an influx of them as more gambling firms from across the country rush to take advantage of a lucrative opportunity in Massachusetts.
“My guess is the amount is going to increase,’’ Galvin said. “And we will be assessing penalties to those who register late. We will not tolerate them not being registered to lobby.’’
Galvin said it is no surprise that gambling promoters are spending heavily to influence lawmakers. During the first six months of last year, when it appeared that casino legislation was on the brink of becoming law, gambling interests spent $1.8 million.
“At the end of the day, this is all about money,’’ Galvin said. While opponents and supporters can argue about the merits and drawbacks of casinos, “one thing neither side will deny is there are individual private entities that will make a lot of money off of this,’’ he said.
The opposition to casinos, meanwhile, is being funded in part by David F. D’Alessandro, a former chief executive of John Hancock Financial Services, who said he has given nearly $50,000 to Harshbarger’s group since it was founded 18 months ago.
