[SBRforum Staff]

Hypocrisy in US anti-gambling policy

By: Elihu Feustel
http://www.sbrforum.com
4/3/2007 4:43:41 PM

Senator John Kyl's 'Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforecement' attachment to last year's SAFE Port Act (HR 4954) was pushed through Congress without so much as a minute of debate. With carve outs for horse racing, state lotteries and fantasy sports, the bill only served to push gambling from a computer monitor to local bookies.

Senator John Kyl made waves last October by attaching his 'Anti-internet gambling enforcement' rider to the Safe-Port Act. The rider’s attachment caught most people unaware; it was never debated by any congressional committee, and had nothing to do with national security.

Speaking against internet gambling, Senator Kyl identified three harms from internet gambling that are much more insidious than from normal gambling:

1. You can play on the internet at any time of day;
2. Children can play on the internet, and;
3. The ability to bet with a credit card undercuts a player’s perception of cash.

I read Senator Kyl’s statement closely. I immediately drove to a gas station, and bought five lottery tickets with a credit card (they all lost). I then browsed the minutes from the most recent Indiana Gaming Commission meeting. As always, there are several casinos getting reprimanded and fined for allowing underage patrons to gamble. After that, I logged onto Youwager.com, where a US player can legally gamble on horse races via internet. How does a player fund his account there? With a credit card.

Gambling causes problems, not the internet. The issues Senator Kyl identified are no worse with the internet than with a brick and mortar casino or a regional lottery. While the main purpose of the bill was to muster support from the ultra-right, the bill had unexpected consequences (as new bills passed at midnight often do when they are not discussed or debated).

The bill illegalized certain financial transactions to internet gambling sites. The bill did NOT include adequate funding for enforcement. Consequently, the bill was only effective against those sportsbooks that voluntarily complied, mainly publicly traded sportsbooks, plus Pinnacle Sports. The books that exited the U.S. market were "legitimate" - - they always paid winners promptly. Privately owned offshore sportsbooks continue to do business as usual. For the average U.S. internet gambler (who will continue gambling), this law forces him to play with seedy illegitimate sportsbooks. He is more likely to have difficulties getting paid or getting robbed by these operations. While there are still a few quality sportsbooks available to U.S. players (The Greek, Cris and WSEX to name a few), the overall 'state of the industry' is much weaker than a year ago.

There were a few other peculiarities about the bill. It carves out an exemption for gambling on fantasy baseball. Coincidentally, Senator Kyl received $41,398 from MLB executives and the game's political action committee last year. It also allows internet betting on horse racing in some situations (if it is taxed, it is probably legal).

There was an unexpected effect of the bill’s passage: illegal bookies across the country rejoiced. Let’s face it, your street corner bookie simply could not compete with internet sportsbooks. Why would you use a local bookmaker when the internet is faster than a telephone call, and the vigorish is lower than using a local?

Internet sportsbooks let you bet on more things, offer lucrative promotions, and mostly paid like clockwork before this new law. With the demise of elite internet sportsbooks in the U.S., illegal bookies have been more than able to pick up the slack. Instead of a publicly traded sportsbook making a profit (and creating a paper trail), the bill creates opportunities for the criminals that have not existed since the prohibition.

Our leadership should take a consistent stance on gambling. If gambling is something that must be prohibited, why are there exceptions for lotteries, horse racing and local casinos? Simple: these make insane amounts of money for states. The de facto rule is gambling is prohibited, unless it can be taxed.

Instead of trying to score points with the ultra-conservatives, the U.S. leadership should legalize, regulate and tax internet gambling. Gambling will always be destructive in our society. But a regulated, taxed gambling world is much less damaging than the unregulated free for all of internet gambling prohibition.

Elihu Feustel is a professional gambler and an attorney licensed in Indiana.

[Seattle Slew]

Anyone can lose their life savings and run up thousands in credit card debt by playing horse racing online.

Anyone can lose their life savings by running up credit at Indian casinos. Some people have lost their pensions at casinos.

Same with the lottery. Run yourself right into debt.

Why doesn't Kyl bring forward people who have done that? Right, they don't fit his agenda. Just find people who have done it with online gambling that doesn't include horses.

Of all the gambling I've done, the two biggest money burners are casinos and horse racing. I never play casino games anymore and my horse bets are in moderation.

[bigboydan]

[Justin7]

Nice video.

[goldengoat]

good video

our government is so corrupt and evil it embarassing

it is so hypocritical of them to ban online gambling and it is so obvious the entire reason they did so is because they were not getting any profits out of it since it was all going offshore

this puke congressman is a disgrace to the true american spirit which has sadly become a distant memory

our government is run by corporations and who can bribe the congressmen the most

no wonder the whole world hates america, we are letting the most corrupt government in our nations history disgrace our name and heritage

[APCW Auditor]

Thanks guys, we really want to expose these politicians for what they are... hypocrites. Check out our other videos at: www.youtube.com/apcwauditor


JOIN THE FIGHT to save online gambling!
www.apcw.org

[nep1293]

So lets get 50,000 people to donate 1 dollar and give it to the senator. maybe he will create another exemption that way

[tblues2005]

the video makes sense, it shows how he isn't watching out for americans, he is watching out for his donaters. I sure advise everyone to sign up for this site and contact all of the politicans that will stand up for what is right, that is sure isn't the Republican party.

[LargeMouthBass]

If it takes less than $50,000 to sway an exemption, why aren't these online books and casinos doing anything about this? Couldn't they join together and at least come up with 6 figure bribe to idiots like John Kyl?