An ‘Opinion’ in today’s edition of a Californian newspaper states: ‘The notion that the state can solve its budget problems by luring more suckers into a giant virtual casino is both false and deeply troubling.’ The writer may be firmly against gambling and online casinos in particular and yet the article inadvertently provides the greatest argument for the legalisation of the online activity.

In California the move is to allow online poker on the grounds that the federal Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act 2006 (UIGEA) legislation does not prohibit state-sanctioned Internet gambling. Card room operators and tribal casinos are supporting a bill that would create an online gambling enterprise run by the two groups and giving the state a percentage of the action. US-based gamblers, despite the ban, are estimated to spend US$4 billion annually playing on offshore sites.

Citing the addictiveness of online gambling, the article stresses the vulnerability of those under the age of 21 who could be attracted by the offer of ‘freebies and other youth-centered inducements.’ One of the virtues of a legal and well-regulated online gambling industry is that no such inducements can be offered and advertising campaigns can be carefully monitored to ensure gambling is not portrayed as an easy and glamorous way to make money.

Much-needed revenue for the state could be forthcoming from a ‘politically painless source’ and have the potential to offer safeguards to all players whatever their age. The availability of a regulated site that provides money for California itself is sure to be a winner, as few players would rather see their dollars go offshore and line the pockets of faceless operators.

The California Gambling Control/Intrastate Online Poker Legalization Act, first introduced in February this year, calls for licensing and registration of operators with the Commission, with a registration fee charged and subject to meeting the requirements of the Commission regarding elements such as the network. Licensed gambling establishments may not offer internet poker independent of that network. The bill also makes provision for measures to be taken to ensure player protection.

Of course nothing in America is ever simple and the tribal gaming operators are said to be in conflict over the benefits legal online poker could bring them. Constitutional, financial, legal, regulatory and other questions are being raised, including whether the bill would destroy the exclusivity agreements presently enjoyed by the tribes. Those in favour of the bill are hoping to get it through the California legislature by the end of the legislative year on 11 September and keep one million California players rather than see them go to proposed legal sites in Nevada or elsewhere. (E-08.21.09)

© Copyright 2009 CasinoCompendium



>>> return to archives
>>> return to frontpage