Legalized Online Gambling: New Gold Mine for State Governments?
The Obama Administration has re-interpreted the Wire Act of 1961. Under the previous interpretation of this law, ALL online gambling has been prohibited, period. With the Justice Department’s new interpretation, the Wire Act only applies to bets on sporting events or contests. Everything else — lottery tickets, Internet poker, etc. — is now up to each individual state.
I. Nelson Rose, a gaming law expert, said:
“The United States Department of Justice has given the online gaming community a big, big present” and that the Justice Department’s new interpretation will eliminate “almost every federal anti-gambling law that could apply to gaming that is legal under state laws.”
Theoretically, state governments will be able to bring in another huge source of revenue by legalizing Internet poker or creating online lotteries.
Think it’ll work this way?
Labels: I. Nelson Rose, Justice Department online gambling, Obama Administration online gambling, Wire Act 1961
posted by Tom Harper @ 1:13 PM
7 Comments:
It was 60 minutes that found all those gambling servers on Caribbean islands a few years ago avoiding the government especially after someone found their program to be cheating in favor of the house.
So if my State can’t get the online retailers like Amazon to pay their sales taxes how could it expect a gambling site? The answer I guess would be the state running it’s own sites ...frightening uh?
BTW in States across the land, their schools are still waiting for their huge financial windfalls from the Lottery.
Erik
Erik: What ever could you mean? California's public schools are in excellent shape, and they owe it all to the state lottery :)
Seems like every time Team Obama does something good, I soon learn the good thing is bracketed by bad things. And I consider this a very bad thing.
I don't oppose people gambling if that's how they want to blow their money. I realize how much more harm than good prohibitions do. Still, with all the gambling opportunities available across the land, is this wide-open policy necessary or in any way worthwhile?
And, is there just a chance that on top of our annual $800 billion-plus trade deficit, this will be one more way to export dollars out of all proportion to any money that will come this way?
I also don't like legislating through reinterpretation old law. This is something Congress, with its record-low approval rating, ought to take up, not a handful of DoJ lawyers.
Online? Bah. Nothing, not even getting fleeced from the comfort of your own home can ever replace the giddy cosmic high of getting fleeced in the Space Casino That Saved Clevelandia, presented by Comic Sans. Opening, er, sometime soon, no, seriously.
SW: All good points. This is the kind of thing that sounds good in theory but might or might not pan out. In California about 10 or 15 years ago, legalized gambling was going to channel gazillions of dollars into the school system. And for some reason, California's public schools are as cash-strapped as ever.
Randal: True, if you're gonna get fleeced, you might as well lose everything in a fancy plush casino instead of at home.
Oh yeah, nothing but NOTHING could possibly go wrong with this could it?
Jess: A little skeptical, are we :)
Post a Comment
<< Home