Local legislators are predicting a full-fledged political brawl over Gov. Deval Patrick's proposal to legalize casino gambling.

The governor wants the state to license at least three casinos as a way to create jobs, boost tourism and raise revenue to repair roads and hold down property taxes.

Lawmakers said the proposal is going to meet with a lot of resistance, especially in the House, where key leaders are opposed to the idea.

"It's going to be a battle royal," said state Rep. Betty Poirier, R-North Attleboro.

She said House Speaker Sal DiMasi and economic development committee Chairman Daniel Bosley, D-North Adams, have long opposed casino gambling. "If the speaker digs his heels in on this one, you know very well its not going anywhere," she said.

But, state Sen. Scott Brown, R-Wrentham, said the proposal has a good chance because it has the weight of the governor behind it, whereas earlier failed bills proposed by lawmakers did not.

Sen. James Timilty, D-Walpole, said even if the legislative leadership opposes it, the rank and file could support it because of pressure from cities and towns needing the revenue gambling would generate.

Both senators said they believe the Senate is open minded on the idea.

State Rep. Jay Barrows, R-Mansfield, predicted that there is so much money at stake that the lobbying effort will dwarf the all-out push during the gay marriage debate.

"It will be a big battle," he said.

State Rep. Steve D'Amico, D-Seekonk, was the only local lawmaker to say he is philosophically opposed to casino gambling.

"To be quite honest, I have deep reservations about it," he said.

D'Amico said expanded gambling would result in more social problems such as personal bankruptcies, crime, family stress and domestic abuse.

He also said casinos would take customers away from local food and entertainment businesses and take revenue away from the state lottery. Some Massachusetts residents already gamble in Connecticut and Rhode Island, he said, but increasing the availability of gambling will increase the problems associated with it.

Poirier said she is not opposed to casinos, but is disappointed the governor did not propose allowing slot machines in race tracks like Plainridge Racecourse in Plainville.

She said she believes Patrick is proposing casinos to help pay for all the new programs he wants to initiate.

Timilty said casinos will add to the attraction of Massachusetts to tourists.

They will also supply revenue to help hold down property taxes and support a reconstruction program for the state's aging roads and bridges, he said.

An independent commission has estimated that the state needs $19 billion in infrastructure repairs and has recommended higher gasoline taxes to pay for the work.

Like Poirier, Brown said he was disappointed the governor did not propose allowing race tracks to have slot machine gambling.

However, he said he is encouraged that tracks like Plainridge can bid on the casino licenses.

If the process is a fair and open one, it would get his support, Brown said.

State Rep. Richard Ross, R-Wrentham, said he was concerned that three to four resort-style casinos would be too much for Massachusetts.

"I'm a little bit disappointed, I think, because I think it will be a lot harder to control," he said. "It's a small state, and you start talking about two to three large casinos, we'll reach a saturation.

"I think I would have liked to have seen the commonwealth take a more cautious approach about going into extended gaming."

Barrows said he is a little confused by the proposal. He said he wonders if casinos would just mean that residents would spend their money on gambling, rather that at a local restaurant or shopping.

He said the subject is a complicated one, and he needs to study the governor's proposal.

"My head is spinning," he said.