HARRISBURG -- General Assembly leaders have begun meeting with Gov. Ed Rendell to work out a list of slots law amendments that can win passage in both chambers in the next month or so.

Whether they are successful could well depend upon how simple or complicated the proposed reforms turn out to be. The more items the bill includes, the more potential for controversy, making it harder to round up support from at least 102 House members and 26 senators.

A lot of touchy issues could come up for debate. Should casinos be banned from giving gamblers free drinks? Should smoking be banned at casinos? Should casino lobbyists and their relatives be banned from making political contributions?

Should a felony conviction from any point in the past disqualify a would-be casino operator? Should slots suppliers, the so-called middlemen between manufacturers and casinos, be eliminated from the law?

Or should the Legislature just stick to easier issues, like eliminating a current provision permitting elected officials to own up to 1 percent of a casino or gambling company?

"I think we can do a lot of these [amendments], but the question is -- how far do some people want to push the envelope?" said Christopher Craig, counsel to Sen. Vincent Fumo, D-Philadelphia, one of the main authors of Act 71 of 2004, the slots law.

"We're working to develop a solid, effective gambling reform bill that can pass both chambers and get signed into law by the governor," added Erik Arneson, an aide to Senate Republican Leader David Brightbill of Lebanon. He hoped for action "as soon as possible, in September or October."

The Senate Rules Committee held a three-hour hearing yesterday to discuss possible changes, and if a compromise bill is worked out, the Senate could vote on it by the end of September.

"The issue is to make Pennsylvania's slots law the very best it can be and ensure integrity on this issue,'' said Senate President Pro Tem Bob Jubelirer, R-Altoona.

Mr. Arneson said that although the Democratic governor "has vetoed gambling reform legislation in the past, we believe that public pressure will convince him that he needs to work with us this time."

Almost everyone agrees on some things, such as the move by Sen. John Pippy, R-Moon, to eliminate the 1 percent ownership provision. Most legislators also want to give the state attorney general new authority to check the backgrounds of casino applicants and investigate allegations of financial wrongdoing at casinos. Such investigatory power now resides with the district attorney of a casino's host county.

Mr. Rendell, who avidly supports slot machine revenue as a way to lower property taxes, has asked legislators to send him a bill doing those two things plus two others. He would give the seven-member Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board "exclusive power to regulate and control gaming operations," including the siting of all five non-racetrack casinos that will be built, one in Pittsburgh.

The governor also wants to ban casino owners, their top executives and their immediate families from making political contributions to state politicians.

Sen. Jay Costa, D-Forest Hills, wants to extend that ban to lobbyists for gaming interests. He said that in the past 18 months, lobbyists have contributed about $1.6 million to state political officials.

"I am asking the Senate to build a strong, sturdy, impenetrable wall to stop [such] contributions,'' he said at yesterday's hearing.

Sen. Jane Orie, R-McCandless, strongly pushed yesterday for eliminating the mandatory use of slot machine suppliers.

"No other provision of Act 71 is as onerous and unnecessary, as ripe for fraud and corruption and as distasteful to citizens as the mandated use of a middleman supplier," she said.

In November 2004 Mr. Rendell vetoed a bill that would have made several changes to Act 71, including elimination of the suppliers. But now he says he'll go along with getting rid of suppliers if the Legislature gives him his four priority changes.

Sen. Jeffrey Piccola, R-Dauphin, wants to ban "ex parte," or private, communications between gaming applicants and Gaming Control Board members, or at least require that a record, available to the public, be made of the dates and times of such conversations.

There also has been talk of making things harder for casino applicants who have felony convictions. Currently, only people with felony convictions after 1991 are banned from seeking slots licenses. One would-be casino operator in the Poconos has a fraud conviction dating to 1978, so if the ban were pushed back to an earlier date, his application could be affected.

Some legislators want to prohibit gaming board members from working for casino companies for at least two years after they leave the board.

Another amendment would change the type of majority vote on the seven-member gaming board needed to approve a slots license. Currently, at least five members, including all four appointed by General Assembly leaders, must approve a license. Mr. Piccola wants to downgrade that to a simple four-member majority.