Legalize online gambling

10 June 2006

Doesn’t the federal government have better things to do than outlaw Internet betting on the Super Bowl?

Los Angeles Times /
June 9 2006

THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES is due to vote soon on proposals to ban online gambling, and the deck seems stacked in favor of sound bites over sound policy. Federal law already outlaws businesses from using phone lines to place or receive bets across state lines, particularly when the bets are on sporting events. That restriction, although it’s not a clear ban on Internet gambling, has stopped the country’s major casinos from taking bets online. What it hasn’t done is stop Web users from gambling around the clock at offshore sites, often based in Central America and the Caribbean. According to one estimate, offshore sites offering poker games, sports betting and casino-style gambling collect $12 billion a year, about half of it coming from American wallets.

In response, the House Judiciary Committee approved a bill last month that would explicitly ban online gambling businesses of all kinds. Even worse, to cut off the money supply for virtual gaming, the committee also backed a bill that would impose significant new regulatory burdens on financial companies, which would be barred from supporting electronic wagers or payouts. The bills are expected to be consolidated and debated on the House floor this month.

All of which raises the question: Doesn’t the federal government have better things to do than try to block people from going online to make a wager on the Super Bowl or the Final Four?

Supporters of the measures insist they are trying to curb the spread of gambling addiction, protect minors and crack down on unscrupulous offshore operators. They may be right about online gambling’s link to self-destructive spending, given its isolating, rat-at-the-pellet-bar quality. But the fact that the House bills wouldn’t outlaw online betting on horse racing, which Congress allowed states to authorize in 2000, seems to belie the sincerity of the effort. And isn’t it a hallmark of a free society that we don’t outlaw otherwise inoffensive vices simply because some people harm themselves?

The complete article can be viewed at: Los Angeles Times

Related News

  • 04 November 2006


    LOS ANGELES TIMES By Molly Hennessy-Fiske and Janet Hook, Times Staff Writers November 3, 2006 BILLINGS, MONT. — Heading into the last days of the fight for control of Congress, both political parties moved Thursday to expand the battlefield, trying to revive campaigns that had been seen as lost causes. President Bush traveled to Montana to campaign for beleaguered GOP Sen. Conrad Burns, launching a final midterm drive for Republicans in mostly conservative states and districts.

    Read full article
  • 09 November 2009

    Regulation to Replace Failed Internet Gambling Prohibition

    Things are beginning to look up for the online gambling businesses. More and more are leaning to license and regulate the online gambling industry in the US! In an op-ed published in today’s Roll Call, Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO) argues regulating Internet gambling in order to protect consumers and generate up to $42 billion in new revenue is a “sensible approach.” Based on his experience of having started and managed several Internet-based companies, Rep.

    Read full article
  • 27 June 2007

    The EU’s First Steps towards Supporting Sports-Betting Services

    The European Commission is opening the door for sports-betting in countries close to home. We are hoping for the ripple effect to hit the US, where the online players can get back to a relaxing game in their own homes. Sweden and France have a request from the European Commission to amend their laws, following replies to letters of formal notice.

    Read full article