- Joined
- Jan 14, 2008
- Messages
- 63,474
The District of Columbia is not thrilled that its residents are traveling to Maryland, Pennsylvania and West Virginia to gamble in casinos. Starved for cash, like states across the country, the district wants some of the millions in revenue that gambling generates each year.
So district officials want residents to gamble closer to home — inside their homes, actually. Or in cafes, restaurants and bars. By year’s end the district hopes to introduce an Internet gambling hub that would allow Washington residents to play blackjack, poker and other casino-style games.
“They can do it from Starbucks, a restaurant, bar or hotel, or from a private residence,” said Buddy Roogow, executive director of the D.C. Lottery, who expects the new games to eventually raise $9 million a year. “That’s real money in D.C.”
It’s an idea gaining currency around the country: virtual gambling as part of the antidote to local budget woes. The District of Columbia is the first to legalize it, while Iowa is studying it, and bills are pending in places like California and Massachusetts.
But the states may run into trouble with the Justice Department, which has been cracking down on all forms of Internet gambling. And their efforts have given rise to critics who say legalized online gambling will promote addictive wagering and lead to personal debt troubles.
The states say they will put safeguards in place to deal with the potential social ills. And they say they need the money from online play, which will supplement the taxes they already receive from gambling at horse tracks, poker houses and brick-and-mortar casinos.
“States had looked at this haphazardly and not very energetically until the Great Recession hit, but now they’re desperate for money,” said I. Nelson Rose, a professor at Whittier Law School, where he specializes in gambling issues.
When it comes to taxing gambling, he said, “the thing they have left is the Internet
Murky legal arena
Federal efforts over the last year to legalize online gambling have failed, so the moves by the District of Columbia and the states have put them into a murky legal arena with a potentially big obstacle. The Justice Department in recent years has vigorously pursued operators of offshore Internet casinos, shutting down their sites and arresting their executives when they travel to the United States.
The agency’s position has been that these operations violate federal laws including the Wire Act of 1961, which prohibits wagering over telecommunications systems that cross state or national borders.
New York is exploring whether to allow people to draw from an escrow account when they decide to buy into a single drawing — say, when the jackpot reaches alluring levels.
Illinois, which passed a law two years ago allowing it to put its lottery online, asked the Justice Department about its plan but has not heard one way or another, suggesting it can move ahead, said John Cullerton, president of the State Senate.
He said Illinois had budgeted to gain some $200 million in additional revenue from moving the lottery online and allowing people to buy into it who “don’t want to wait in line at a 7-Eleven.”
“We’ll be selling to new players, not the same old players,” he said. “That means more roads and bridges.”
'We need money'
Officials in other states sympathize with the logic.
“We need money,” said Matt Fitzgerald, legislative director for Michael Rush, a Massachusetts state senator, who last month introduced a bill to allow the state lottery to test an expansion into other “games of chance,” but not poker.
It’s not all about revenue. In Iowa, which is running a budget surplus, lawmakers say they want to legalize online poker to create a regulated forum for a popular activity.
MSNBC SOURCE
This story, "Starved State Budgets Inspire New Look at Web Gambling," first appeared in The New York Times.
So district officials want residents to gamble closer to home — inside their homes, actually. Or in cafes, restaurants and bars. By year’s end the district hopes to introduce an Internet gambling hub that would allow Washington residents to play blackjack, poker and other casino-style games.
“They can do it from Starbucks, a restaurant, bar or hotel, or from a private residence,” said Buddy Roogow, executive director of the D.C. Lottery, who expects the new games to eventually raise $9 million a year. “That’s real money in D.C.”
It’s an idea gaining currency around the country: virtual gambling as part of the antidote to local budget woes. The District of Columbia is the first to legalize it, while Iowa is studying it, and bills are pending in places like California and Massachusetts.
But the states may run into trouble with the Justice Department, which has been cracking down on all forms of Internet gambling. And their efforts have given rise to critics who say legalized online gambling will promote addictive wagering and lead to personal debt troubles.
The states say they will put safeguards in place to deal with the potential social ills. And they say they need the money from online play, which will supplement the taxes they already receive from gambling at horse tracks, poker houses and brick-and-mortar casinos.
“States had looked at this haphazardly and not very energetically until the Great Recession hit, but now they’re desperate for money,” said I. Nelson Rose, a professor at Whittier Law School, where he specializes in gambling issues.
When it comes to taxing gambling, he said, “the thing they have left is the Internet
Murky legal arena
Federal efforts over the last year to legalize online gambling have failed, so the moves by the District of Columbia and the states have put them into a murky legal arena with a potentially big obstacle. The Justice Department in recent years has vigorously pursued operators of offshore Internet casinos, shutting down their sites and arresting their executives when they travel to the United States.
The agency’s position has been that these operations violate federal laws including the Wire Act of 1961, which prohibits wagering over telecommunications systems that cross state or national borders.
New York is exploring whether to allow people to draw from an escrow account when they decide to buy into a single drawing — say, when the jackpot reaches alluring levels.
Illinois, which passed a law two years ago allowing it to put its lottery online, asked the Justice Department about its plan but has not heard one way or another, suggesting it can move ahead, said John Cullerton, president of the State Senate.
He said Illinois had budgeted to gain some $200 million in additional revenue from moving the lottery online and allowing people to buy into it who “don’t want to wait in line at a 7-Eleven.”
“We’ll be selling to new players, not the same old players,” he said. “That means more roads and bridges.”
'We need money'
Officials in other states sympathize with the logic.
“We need money,” said Matt Fitzgerald, legislative director for Michael Rush, a Massachusetts state senator, who last month introduced a bill to allow the state lottery to test an expansion into other “games of chance,” but not poker.
It’s not all about revenue. In Iowa, which is running a budget surplus, lawmakers say they want to legalize online poker to create a regulated forum for a popular activity.
MSNBC SOURCE
This story, "Starved State Budgets Inspire New Look at Web Gambling," first appeared in The New York Times.