Following Wednesday’s introduction of a bill in Congress by South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham and Utah Representative Jason Chaffetz to reinstate the Wire Act of 1961’s coverage of banning online gaming, several organizations have come out against said legislation. In one case, the opinion was to be expected but, in another, the opinion was a bit of a surprise.
Almost immediately following the introduction of the bill, the Democratic Governors Association denounced the legislation as an infringement on states’ rights. In a letter sent to the leadership of both houses of Congress (Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Speaker of the House John Boehner and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi), the DGA chair, Vermont Governor Pete Shumlin, and its vice chair, New Hampshire Governor Margaret Wood Hassan, stated that the proposed bill was “unworkable and it must be defeated.”
“Gaming has historically been a right ceded to the states,” the letter stated. “This bill (from Graham and Chaffetz) would have severe and disastrous effect on state governments.” The letter points out that several states have online gaming and online lottery sales that are paramount to funding some of their services in particular states. The DGA says that the industry is worth approximately $20 billion, with the revenues generated by online gaming going to programs such as education, veterans’ care and problem gaming treatment programs.
Perhaps most importantly, the DGA letter cites that the new bill from Graham and Chaffetz would shut down operations in states that have already passed some sort of gaming legislation. The online gaming/poker outlets for the states of Nevada, Delaware and New Jersey would cease because they would not be “grandfathered” in if the Graham/Chaffetz bill is passed. It would also shut down online lottery operations in such states as Illinois, Georgia, New York, Minnesota and Michigan, among others.
The DGA counts among its membership the governors of three of the largest states in the country. California (Governor Jerry Brown), New York (Andrew Cuomo) and Illinois (Pat Quinn) have all considered the possibilities of entering into the intra-state online gaming or poker industry as, with their populations, they could conceivably have a sizeable enough pool of players to sustain themselves. Thus, it isn’t much of a surprise that the DGA has come out against the Graham/Chaffetz bill.
On Friday, another powerful organization was heard from and it was a bit of a surprise. The National Fraternal Order of Police, which has long been on the fence regarding online gaming regulation, came out against the proposed Graham/Chaffetz bill, citing several areas that proper regulation would cover. The president of the NFOP, Chuck Canterbury, wrote in an op/ed on the website TheHill.com, “The first question we ask when evaluating any piece of legislation is ‘will it make our citizens and officers safer? The answer to this in regards to a nationwide ban on all online gaming is an unequivocal no.”
Canterbury points out that the current system of unregulated gaming is a $3 billion industry that approximately 1 million Americans take part in. “The black market has no age verification to prevent children from playing,” Canterbury writes. “The black market has no requirement that operators be licensed. The black market has no oversight to require that games are fair.” He also looks at the likelihood of the potential for identity theft through offshore sites, fraud or other breaches of U. S. law.
“A national ban on all online gaming would just drive online gaming further and further underground and put more and more people at risk,” Canterbury continues. “The solution is clear: we should maintain states’ rights to regulate online gaming within their borders and reinvest that revenue to make sure the systems are safe for all consumers.”
“We want to keep our citizens and our officers’ safe,” Canterbury concluded. “And the best way to do this is to drive black market online gaming into the light and scrutiny of a regulated system that is safe, fun and fair.”
The Graham/Chaffetz bill will face long odds if it is to be passed. Although Chaffetz would have an easy route to reaching the House floor (it is thought that the bill will be heard in the House Judiciary Committee, of which Chaffetz and several cosponsors are members), but it would still have to be brought to a vote by Boehner. Graham’s route is more difficult as he would have to get it by Reid, who is looking to open up a U. S. based online poker industry while tamping down on other online gaming.