As we suggested here recently, Governor Quinn has not been a fan of the concept of increasing gambling in Illinois; his recent statements since the Illinois Senate voted to approve the current gamblig expansion bill have been somewhat cryptic. Although, he also called the bill "excessive", which suggests that he would have to swallow quite hard to accept the bill as-is. That then calls into question as to whether cutting down on the number of suburban casinos might be an acceptable compromise for him.
We still have no clear indication of where Quinn might go, but here is a good analysis of his various options, given the very broad power given to an Illinois Governor to basically legislate from the executive branch. As noted in the article, among Quinn's options are:
1) A total veto - rejecting the entire bill outright.
2) An amendatory veto - which allows the governor to suggest changes to the text of the bill.
3) A line item veto - which allows a governor to strike a specific appropriation in a spending bill.
4) A reduction veto - which allows a governor to reduce the amount appropriated in a spending bill.
An amendatory veto would allow Quinn to scale down aspects of the bill while preserving elements of the measure that he finds least objectionable - and most helpful from a revenue standpoint.
In the past, Quinn hasn't ruled out a Chicago casino, so perhaps an amendatory veto might preserve that component, while reducing the overall number of new casinos from five. Or maybe he'll curb the expansion of slot machines to Chicago airports. Or all of the above.
It will be very interesting to see if Link's beloved Park City casino ends up a victim of the sharp veto pen of Governor Quinn.