Prior to a Congressional recess to mark the tragic murders in Charleston, S. C., two members of Congress put bills in front of their respective bodies for consideration. Both of the bills were expected to come to the fore at some point and, in this case, the bills are on opposing sides of the argument.
As the Senate wrapped business for the week on Wednesday, South Carolina senior Senator Lindsey Graham once again joined forces with Utah Representative Jason Chaffetz in being the major drivers of a bill called “The Restoration of America’s Wire Act of 2015,” a bill that has been acknowledged to have been written by factions supportive of Las Vegas Sands Corporation chairman/owner Sheldon Adelson’s efforts to ban online gaming and poker. The Graham bill in the Senate is co-sponsored by several notable names in the Congress including California Senator Diane Feinstein, New Hampshire Senator Kelly Ayotte, Utah Senator Mike Lee, Indiana Senator Dan Coates, North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis and Florida Senator Marco Rubio.
Rubio was the first to catch flak for his support of the Adelson bill on the campaign trail. One of the multitude of candidates for the GOP nomination for President of the United States in 2016 (as is Graham), Rubio was holding a town hall meeting in Exeter, N. H., and was challenged by reporters following the event about his sponsorship of Graham’s bill. Although the Republican Senatorial Committee was the beneficiary of a $233,800 campaign contribution from Adelson and his wife in May, Rubio huffily stated, “People buy into my agenda…I don’t buy into theirs,” when questioned about his co-sponsorship of one of Adelson’s pet projects.
Rubio does have a past of not supporting gaming expansion. While Speaker of the Florida State House in the late 2000s, Rubio staunchly held against live gaming expansion in the state. In regards to online gaming and poker, Rubio said, “I believe that…that kind of gambling…is a tax on the poor and does little to develop the economy.”
While Rubio may have had previous convictions regarding gambling Graham, on the other hand, didn’t develop any until he wanted to run for President. Realizing that Adelson spent nearly $100 million on the 2012 campaign cycle (literally keeping Newt Gingrich’s campaign afloat at one point) and is prepared to spend more in 2016, Graham has become more of a war hawk on issues such as the Middle East and, despite never commenting on the subject previously, became an avowed anti-gambling advocate.
The news was a bit better in the House of Representatives where there is at least now a counterargument to Chaffetz’s version of RAWA. For the third Congressional cycle in a row, Texas Representative Joe Barton rolled out his bill, H. R. 2888 or the “Internet Poker Freedom Act of 2015,” to little fanfare on Thursday. The bill is exactly the same as bills previously introduced by Barton, calling for regulated national online poker system that additionally outlaws other online casino gaming in the U. S. and outlaws playing on sites not licensed under U. S. regulations.
“Poker is an All-American game,” Barton stated soon after introducing the new bill. “I continue to be supportive of the Americans who play poker online. My bill is needed now more than ever. It creates one federal standard that protects the integrity of the game and the financial interests of the players while protecting American consumers from nefarious and predatory overseas gambling operations.”
When asked what made his bill better that the state-by-state system that is currently creeping across the U. S., Barton replied, “The complex web of state and local regulations now being devised could still leave players at risk. I believe H. R. 2888 creates a federal standard and provides players proper protections (while) including safeguards for children and problem gamblers.”
Now that there are two bills in the House, at least some fair discussion can be had on the subject. A previous hearing on RAWA conducted by Chaffetz was little more than a one-sided rant on the subject from those who support shutting down online gaming and poker in the U. S. If Barton can present a hearing for H. R. 2888, at least the field can be leveled. As of now, there is no bill in the Senate for the regulation of online gaming or poker.
The odds of passage of any of these bills is slim and none, according to many Washington insiders. Many in the halls of Congress are becoming aware of the potential “crony politics” label that the Chaffetz and Graham bills have tainting them, while Barton’s previous two efforts haven’t gotten out of committee before dying at the close of their particular Congressional sessions. Especially with a Presidential campaign in the coming year – and the entirety of the House and one-third of the Senate up for election at the same time – it doesn’t appear that the federal moves to either regulate or prohibit online gaming and poker will go anywhere.
