In a rambling op/ed piece in the National Review, Texas Governor Rick Perry – a potential candidate for President of the United States in 2016 – explains his opposition to proposals for federal and state regulation of online gaming and poker.
Perry, who has embraced the “states’ rights” approach that is favored by many in the Republican Party, starts the editorial off by once again enumerating the ways that he and others believe that any regulation of online gaming and poker. “The debate over internet gambling has focused on the negative effects that widespread internet gambling will have on families, state economies and state budgets, and the policing of criminal enterprises and terrorist organizations,” Perry writes. Although many of these subjects are covered in the fact that regulation is the best way to deal with them rather than an outright ban, Perry’s next thought creates another “bogeyman” that many like to dredge up.
Perry states that, by enacting regulation of internet gaming, the formal introduction of any government oversight of the industry would violate what is called “net neutrality” issues. “Net neutrality” states that governments should not impinge on issues of the internet – including commerce, communication and other areas – as that would bring the potential for the government to further weasel their way into citizens’ private lives. “We already know the government has tracked our political activities, monitored our phone calls, and will soon have access to our most personal medical information,” Perry opines. “Once the government starts actively monitoring one aspect of our Internet commerce, is it credible to believe that it will stop there?”
“This may start with monitoring age and location for purposes of regulating Internet gambling, but it will not stop there,” Perry continues. “The gambling industry is already heavily regulated, and rightfully so. Legalizing Internet gambling would expand this heavy regulation to the Internet and create a new breed of government Internet-content cops.”
Perry believes that the states could not be trusted either with the regulation of online gaming and poker. “By nature, the internet is a global network transcending state boundaries,” he writes. “Fifty states with 50 different laws regulating the internet would put up digital roadblocks at every state border, putting a huge burden on commerce.”
“The proponents of Internet gambling are at the edge of a slippery slope, the bottom of which is a Federal Department of Internet Regulation with broad and intrusive powers,” Perry concludes. “Internet-gambling advocates like to style themselves as “defenders of the Internet,” but their legislative solutions tell another story.”
Perry doesn’t seem to understand, however, that his argument actually enhances federal regulation of the industry in that there would be a seamless structure rather than the state-by-state approach. Using the example of the airline industry, Perry states that, if there were 50 different regulations, planes would “have to stop” to confirm they are in compliance with a state’s laws before entering said state. Besides the lunacy of the statement, Perry actually is pointing out that a federal solution is the best way to handle the online gaming and poker question rather than an outright ban on the industry.
Rich Muny, the Poker Players Alliance’s Vice President of Player Relations, has led a fight against Perry’s op/ed through comments on Facebook and Twitter. Muny pointed out the contradictions in Perry’s thoughts on the governor’s Facebook page. “Are you really now arguing that Washington should strip states of their rights just because you have an unfounded fear of an impact on Texas?” Muny writes. “Are you now planning to ask Washington and the states to tell Texas what to do? As for your concern for Internet freedom, your desire to ban online poker across the U. S. – even in states wishing to allow it – is the nadir of Internet freedom.”
In 2012, Perry made an ill-fated run at the Republican nomination for President. After starting his campaign as a favorite of the Tea Party segment of the GOP, Perry suffered many missteps on the campaign trail and in debates that quickly removed him from consideration. Perry has reportedly been retooling his debating style and campaign approach as he looks to 2016 following the close of his term as Texas governor.
While Perry has been one of the more vocal governors in opposition to regulated online gaming and poker, his op/ed may have actually enhanced the pro-gaming side in demonstrating solid reasons for a federal approach.