Senator Lindsey Graham Introduced a Bill to Ban Online Gamlbing Last Week
In the past few months, several groups and institutions have polled Americans to see whether they want the federal government to ban online gambling across the board. In each study, the data returned that US citizens are against a comprehensive iGaming ban. Results ranged from 57% to 74% against a full ban on all online casino gambling and poker.
A month ago, the Coalition for Consumer & Online Protection released a nationwide poll in which 57% of respondents said they oppose a congressional ban on interactive gambling. In the poll, which was conducted by North Star Opinion of 1,000 interviews conducted between January 25 through 29 of 2014 via telephone, only 36% of those polled said they wanted the kind of comprehensive ban Lindsay Graham and his allies in Congress want.
Even more revealing, those who were asked the direct question of whether they thought states should be allowed to write their own gambling laws, 74% of respondents said “Yes”. While this is another way of asking the first question, 18% of those polled changed their position from support of a ban to opposition. This reveals that an overwhelming number of Americans view this as a state issue–not a federal one.
An informal poll conducted on over 3,000 people at The Star-Ledger’s online portal, NJ.com, had 54.05% of respondents saying Congress should not pass legislation banning online gambling. A significant 41.2% said the U.S. Congress should get involved in interactive gaming legislation, banning it. Another 4.75% of those polled responded, “I don’t know.”
Graham Says New Gaming Undermines South Carolina Laws
Opponents of legalized gambling on the Internet take a different view from the evidence. They believe a ban is needed to protect the citizens in their state. When he introduced the legislation, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham said, “In 1999, South Carolina outlawed video poker and removed over 33,000 video poker machines from within its borders. Now, because of the Obama Administration’s decision, virtually any cell phone or computer can again become a video poker machine. It’s simply not right.”
Defending state rights can be elusive, especially when a lawmaker appeals to the federal government for the power to uphold those rights. Lawmakers in New Jersey, Nevada, and Delaware have passed pro-online gambling legislation. If Senator Graham gets his way and a federal law is passed, he will be imposing South Carolina’s attitudes towards gambling on the people of those three states, who have shown they want interactive gaming.
Initiatives are underway in California, New York, Illinois, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Oregon to legalize online gambling in those states. Again, if Lindsay Graham and Diane Feinstein could see Restoration of the Wire Act passed through the U.S. Congress, it would take the decision out of those people’s hands and leave it in the purview of Washington bureaucrats.
Robert Menedez Opposed to Proposed Legislation
Robert Menendez and Cory Booker, the two U.S. senators from the state of New Jersey, have vowed to oppose the “Reform of the Wire Act” legislation. They say a ban on iGaming at the federal level would push the hobby underground, leaving it unregulated. Advocates of government-supervised gaming argue that the UIGEA has not stopped real money online poker and table games in America, but only driven it to offshore websites which are unlicensed, unsupervised, and untaxed. Gamblers send American money to Caribbean websites, instead of playing at US-owned sites and having their winnings taxed by U.S. states.
Senator Menendez says a federal ban would punish states which have taken proactive steps. Menedez said, “Blanket prohibition of internet gaming will empower black market operators at the expense of responsible states like New Jersey, which have invested in creating a secure internet gaming structure.”
South Carolina Protections Reexamined
It might be instructive to look back at Linday Graham’s quote on this issue. He said, “virtually any cell phone or computer can again become a video poker machine.”
Graham’s quote misstates the truth about gaming laws in New Jersey, Nevada, and Delaware.
States which have legalized gambling require users to download a software application called a geolocator. This tells a gambling website which state a person is currently in. Therefore, a person in New Jersey can use their cell phone or computer to play video poker, but people in South Carolina simply cannot use a cellphone or computer to do the same. Interactive gambling in New Jersey, Delaware, and Nevada do not impinge on the state laws of South Carolina.
Technology already protects South Carolina from intrusive gaming practices, but Lindsey Graham appears to be ignorant of that fact.
Protecting Problem Gamblers
Advocates of licensed gaming also argue that gambling addicts often have difficulty controlling their behavior. These are the players most likely to gamble at unlicensed online casinos and poker rooms. Sites with no governmental oversight feel no pressure to offer reminders and counseling resources. In such circumstances, problem gamblers and their suffering families are left defenseless.
New Jersey’s online gambling revenues have been short of the original $1.2 billion expected by Governor Chris Christie in this fiscal year, with $27.2 million in taxes collected since legal gaming began in November 2014. But the startup for online businesses can be slow at first, because gamblers sign up over time, websites must rise up the rankings, and brand loyalty must be built. Experts no longer expect the $1.2 billion in revenue, but online gambling is expected to provide a major boost for Atlantic City’s brick-and-mortar gaming industry.
