According to an article by Howard Stutz in the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley wrote a letter to Senator Patty Murray (D – Wash.) and Representative Jeb Hensarling (R – Texas), co-chairs of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, urging them to remove the legalization and regulation of online poker from consideration for fear that it would irreparably harm his state’s lottery.
The Committee, dubbed by many the “Super Committee,” has been tasked with finding $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction measures over ten years. The group of six Republicans and six Democrats have until November 23rd to do so, or else $1.2 trillion in automatic cuts will be made. The other ten members of the Super Committee are Senators John Kerry (D – Mass.), Max Baucus (D – Mont.), Pat Toomey (R – Penn.), Rob Portman (R – Ohio), Jon Kyl (R – Ariz.), and Representatives Chris Van Hollen (D – Mary.), James Clyburn (D – S.C.), Xavier Becerra (D – Cal.), Fred Upton (R – Mich.), and Dave Camp (R – Mich.).
O’Malley wrote, in part, “Such proposals would diminish significant sources of revenue for the states when we have already had to endure significant revenue reductions.”
He added, “(Internet poker) would also jeopardize the dollars for K-12 public education, community colleges, and four-year colleges and universities that are generated by new slots locations in our state.”
Needless to say, the poker community is up in arms over O’Malley’s plea, not just because the Governor is opposed to online poker legislation, but because the reason for his opposition is deemed to be flawed. Poker players view poker and the lottery as two separate types of games: poker is a game of skill, whereas the lottery is 100 percent luck. In poker, players are competing against each other while the house takes a small piece of the action, whereas in the lottery players are competing against the state and the government takes a gigantic portion of the buy-in, way out of whack with the actual odds of winning. Lottery sales, poker players believe, would not be hurt by nationwide legalization of online poker because most poker players rarely play the lottery, if at all, and vice versa.
Since the Las Vegas Review-Journal published the article, poker players have been posting on Governor O’Malley’s Facebook page, criticizing his actions. One player wrote, “I am a Maryland resident and an online poker player, and the legalization and regulation of online poker is very important to me. The argument that regulating poker will reduce revenue from lotteries has no basis in fact, as people interested in playing lotteries and people interested in playing poker have little to no overlap. Poker in Maryland would in fact increase tax revenue, as tens or hundreds of thousands of Marylanders would be paying tax on poker winnings. Please reconsider your position towards the poker bill.”
Another said, “As an elected official, I hope you are capable of injecting logic into your stance on the effect of regulated online poker and state lotteries. Any objective analysis of data would lead you to conclude that the overlap between the two markets is non-existent and regulation of internet gaming will only add to revenue.”
One damning piece of evidence against O’Malley’s viewpoint is that in August, the Maryland Lottery proudly announced that its 2011 fiscal year had set a sales record for the 14th consecutive year. Of course, the golden age of online poker fell squarely in this period, which shows that growth in online poker does nothing at all to hurt lottery ticket sales.
Online poker legislation will take center stage tomorrow as the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade will hold a hearing regarding the legalization and regulation of online gaming. Rep. Joe Barton (R – Texas), sponsor of HR 2366, the “Internet Gambling Prohibition, Poker Consumer Protection, and Strengthening UIGEA Act of 2011,” is a member of the committee.