[cleaveland]

They can't fill the hotels/casinos in Las Vegas now. How in the world could they ever do it if everyone could legally play all their favorite games/gamble on virtually anything 24/7 online. What would happen to Las Vegas if that were the case?

[cala56]

This is not the reason

[pavyracer]

If they legalize it then the kids in college will fix games knowing they can gamble freely anywhere in the US using their smart phones. Imagine Cam Newton's dad with $200,000 cash he received from a booster telling Cam before the game how to fix the totals.

[cleaveland]

This is not the reason

Please tell us the real reason then.

[FuzzyDunlop]

Vegas is somewhat on board now post Black Friday, they get the government to clear the landscape completely of competition, then open. At least on the poker side, from people I talked with at the Series, the consensus is there will be a Bellagiopoker.com, Venetianpoker.com etc. where you can get physical cash from the physical location, book discounted trips out to Vegas through your cashier.

[blackbeSSt]

If they legalize it then the kids in college will fix games knowing they can gamble freely anywhere in the US using their smart phones. Imagine Cam Newton's dad with $200,000 cash he received from a booster telling Cam before the game how to fix the totals.

not just college kids. hell you can bet on 12 year olds in the little league world series. or high school football for that matter. theres easy money to be made if you know the right people in those sports

[cleaveland]

Vegas is somewhat on board now post Black Friday, they get the government to clear the landscape completely of competition, then open. At least on the poker side, from people I talked with at the Series, the consensus is there will be a Bellagiopoker.com, Venetianpoker.com etc. where you can get physical cash from the physical location, book discounted trips out to Vegas through your cashier.

Isn't playing poker a legal activity in US states? If the companies that own the casinos in Vegas open web sites just for poker that wouldn't hurt their Vegas business and it may help it as you mentioned.

However, if those companies opened websites where you could play all the casino games and sports bet THAT would hurt their Vegas revenues imho because the purpose of going to Vegas would be lost for most people.

Adding poker online doesn't hurt these companies and probably only helps but other types of gambling online will hurt their Vegas business imho.

[Br0nxer]

If they legalize it then the kids in college will fix games knowing they can gamble freely anywhere in the US using their smart phones. Imagine Cam Newton's dad with $200,000 cash he received from a booster telling Cam before the game how to fix the totals.

[no1here]

I see no harm coming to Vegas

[cleaveland]

I see no harm coming to Vegas

You really think it won't be much harder for them to try and fill the hotels and casinos when people can bet legally and freely from the comfort of their own homes 24/7 365 days a year?

[Rollins08]

Your off on this. First of all the majority of the public has never gambled online, nor do they even know they can gamble online. You go to casinos and there are tons of people playing 50 and 100 hands of blackjack that I know have never played online.

The reason gambling is outlawed is number 1)impossible to collect taxes on it, 2) the religous right of this country thinks it is bad for the county. Both of these are insane, but thats the facts.

[Swinging Johnson]

Here's why online gambling isn't legal:

* Unlike the posters who frequent SBR, online gambling is not even a blip on the radar screen in many people's everyday lives. It's like the legalization of marijuana for someone like me. I don't care either way because the last hit I took was 20 years ago. Therefore:

* Political candidates get no juice for running on a pro-gambling platform. In voters minds, gambling (particularly sports gambling) is a shadowy topic and it will not earn any candidate any political capital by associating with it.

* The only way it could gain steam is if an entrenched incumbent brought it up as a revenue enhancer (tax) which might be palatable to the electorate, positioning it as a special interest tax that would not be shouldered by the masses but by the bookmakers and ultimately the players. In other words, someone else pays but everyone wins is the only way it can be packaged.

* If it is delivered delicately and cleverly, and then presented as a reasonable and viable way to generate revenue then, once the public has digested it, alert them that opponents want to limit their right to choose and these same politicians have the gall to believe they know what's best for the American people. Then the general public will understand it is akin to the silliness that was Prohibition and the dominoes will fall, painting all those who oppose it as bible belt tub thumpers.

* Only when it becomes politically viable to back online gambling, will the politicians do it. Until then, there is no reason for that dog to hunt.

[notsosharp]

They cant fill hotels in Vegas because there are casinos in almost every major city now.

[cleaveland]

Your off on this. First of all the majority of the public has never gambled online, nor do they even know they can gamble online. You go to casinos and there are tons of people playing 50 and 100 hands of blackjack that I know have never played online.

The reason gambling is outlawed is number 1)impossible to collect taxes on it, 2) the religous right of this country thinks it is bad for the county. Both of these are insane, but thats the facts.

My point is that if it became legal to gamble online many of the people who go to Vegas wouldn't do it anymore and through lobbyists and the like big money can stop it from becoming legal.

Your statement "The reason gambling is outlawed" doesn't make any sense.

Poker is legal in many states (I tried to research it just now but couldn't find the exact number). Online poker is legal in many states too.

Horse track race betting is legal throughout the US I believe.

We have Indian casinos, Las Vegas, Atlantic City, and in doing research for this post I ran across this "Map of the United States of American with various popular casino destinations marked.":

http://www.worldcasinodirectory.com/usamap.htm

According to that site "The casinos in the United States offer all the most popular casino games like poker, blackjack and craps."

So, what do you mean when you say "The reason gambling is outlawed"?

That's not even close to accurate.

[RudyRuetigger]

completely wrong...what sites do you think will pop up if online gambling is allowed????

las vegas casinos will be richer than ever..and they know it too

[cleaveland]

Here's why online gambling isn't legal:

* Unlike the posters who frequent SBR, online gambling is not even a blip on the radar screen in many people's everyday lives. It's like the legalization of marijuana for someone like me. I don't care either way because the last hit I took was 20 years ago. Therefore:

* Political candidates get no juice for running on a pro-gambling platform. In voters minds, gambling (particularly sports gambling) is a shadowy topic and it will not earn any candidate any political capital by associating with it.

* The only way it could gain steam is if an entrenched incumbent brought it up as a revenue enhancer (tax) which might be palatable to the electorate, positioning it as a special interest tax that would not be shouldered by the masses but by the bookmakers and ultimately the players. In other words, someone else pays but everyone wins is the only way it can be packaged.

* If it is delivered delicately and cleverly, and then presented as a reasonable and viable way to generate revenue then, once the public has digested it, alert them that opponents want to limit their right to choose and these same politicians have the gall to believe they know what's best for the American people. Then the general public will understand it is akin to the silliness that was Prohibition and the dominoes will fall, painting all those who oppose it as bible belt tub thumpers.

* Only when it becomes politically viable to back online gambling, will the politicians do it. Until then, there is no reason for that dog to hunt.

I don't agree with you because the UIGEA was passed without hardly any notice by the people in congress (please read below). With that in mind, why couldn't a law making online gambling legal be passed in the same way?

The Act was passed on the last day before Congress adjourned for the 2006 elections. According to Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), no one on the Senate-House Conference Committee had seen the final language of the bill before it was passed.^[3][4] The Economist has written that these provisions were "hastily tacked onto the end of unrelated legislation".^[5]
Though a bill with the gambling wording was previously debated and passed by the House of Representatives,^[6][7][8] the SAFE Port Act (H.R. 4954) as passed by the House on May 4 and the United States Senate on September 14,^[9] bore no traces of the Unlawful Internet Gambling and Enforcement Act that was included in the SAFE Port Act signed into law by George W. Bush on October 13, 2006.^[10] The UIGEA was added in Conference Report 109-711 (submitted at 9:29pm on September 29, 2006), which was passed by the House of Representatives by a vote of 409-2 and by the Senate by unanimous consent on September 30, 2006. Due to H.RES.1064, the reading of this conference report was waived.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlawfu...nt_Act_of_2006

[cleaveland]

completely wrong...what sites do you think will pop up if online gambling is allowed????

las vegas casinos will be richer than ever..and they know it too

Please explain what you're saying. From what I've read lobbyists from the companies that own Las Vegas have stopped any legislation that would make online gambling legal.

[hostile takeover]

I like me a good conspiracy theory, but I don't think it's because of Vegas.

[VegasPlayer]

They can't fill the Casino's/Hotels right now because everything is high end and there are too many unchecked a**holes walking up and down the strip.

[RudyRuetigger]

Please explain what you're saying. From what I've read lobbyists from the companies that own Las Vegas have stopped any legislation that would make online gambling legal.

just look it up, some are trying to and some already have gotten into online poker.

[milwaukee mike]

online casinos help vegas.
other states legalizing gambling helps vegas.

just think of how many new rooms were added in vegas over the last 10-15 years since every other state legalized some form of gambling and since online gaming exploded - bellagio, wynn, mandalay bay, encore, city center, 2 palms towers, the list goes on and on.
and vegas is still running over 90% occupied.

[cleaveland]

just look it up, some are trying to and some already have gotten into online poker.

Online poker is different than other types of gambling because poker is legal in most of the US.

But, again, what I've read is that lobbyists from the companies that own Las Vegas have stopped any legislation that would make online gambling legal. You asked me to look it up but I've never seen what you're talking about so would you post some links that discuss how the companies that own Las Vegas casinos are pushing for the legalization of online gambling?

[cleaveland]

I like me a good conspiracy theory, but I don't think it's because of Vegas.

The power of lobbyists and the like is not a conspiracy theory, it's a fact.

[Rollins08]

I meant the reason online gambling is outlawed. Those 2 reasons are why online gambling is outlawed.

[cleaveland]

online casinos help vegas.
other states legalizing gambling helps vegas.

That's a nice theory but since never been tried I don't see how you can say that.

[RudyRuetigger]

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/04...ng-all-in.html



you are flat out wrong...the stance you are saying they have, they did have..about 2 years ago and earlier.

[ehp6737]

Cleaveland couldnt be more misinformed. To think the federal government is closing down sportsbooks and poker sites and seizing bank accounts to protect Las Vegas is ridiculous, especially since most of the tax revenue generated by casinos/hotels in Vegas goes to Clark County and the State of Neveda, not the federal government. We dont set federal laws based on the affects it will have on just one city, but rather the entire nation. Obviously legalized gambling would be bad for Vegas, but it would also create jobs and revenue in every other state. There are 2 main reasons why online gambling has not been legalized. ONE...the government has no way to regulate and enforce tax collection from online sportsbooks. If they did they would gladly legalize gambling tomorrow and collect billions in tax revenue. TWO...Legalized gambling could possibly lead to widespread point fixing, especially on the college level and amateur level. Hence calling into question the integrity of many sporting events. This is why the NFL has fought, and won, against legislation to legalize sports betting in Atlantic City as well as Deleware.

[bruceBRUCEbruce]

If they legalize it then the kids in college will fix games knowing they can gamble freely anywhere in the US using their smart phones. Imagine Cam Newton's dad with $200,000 cash he received from a booster telling Cam before the game how to fix the totals.

this is the dumbest post in the thread.

[cleaveland]

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/04...ng-all-in.html



you are flat out wrong...the stance you are saying they have, they did have..about 2 years ago and earlier.

I said legalized online poker sites run by Vegas casinos would be good for Vegas so that article is no surprise to me. Go back and read my posts.

[shari91]

Cleaveland couldnt be more misinformed. To think the federal government is closing down sportsbooks and poker sites and seizing bank accounts to protect Las Vegas is ridiculous, especially since most of the tax revenue generated by casinos/hotels in Vegas goes to Clark County and the State of Neveda, not the federal government. We dont set federal laws based on the affects it will have on just one city, but rather the entire nation. Obviously legalized gambling would be bad for Vegas, but it would also create jobs and revenue in every other state. There are 2 main reasons why online gambling has not been legalized. ONE...the government has no way to regulate and enforce tax collection from online sportsbooks. If they did they would gladly legalize gambling tomorrow and collect billions in tax revenue. TWO...Legalized gambling could possibly lead to widespread point fixing, especially on the college level and amateur level. Hence calling into question the integrity of many sporting events. This is why the NFL has fought, and won, against legislation to legalize sports betting in Atlantic City as well as Deleware.

While I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, living in a country where gambling is legal makes me think there are a couple of flaws with your theories.

1. How do other first world countries get around the issue of not collecting taxes from offshore books? They allow regulated sportsbooks to operate in their own country and collect revenue that way. When that happens, although some dedicated gamblers will still conduct some of their business offshore due to line shopping/bonus whoring/arbing, the majority would rather have the convenience of same day/hour free payouts, knowing their money is always safe, having a regulator to mediate disputes, being able to walk down the street to place a bet, etc... These countries still have casinos and sportsbooks that operate - these casinos are still busy. Some people just prefer the bricks and mortar experience and always will.

2. Other countries also have sports. There are ways to do everything possible to ensure there isn't any fixing: including having a regulatory body to monitor all betting movements on games, imposing possible career ending sanctions against those who are caught, etc...

I'm not sure what the answer is as to why gambling's not legal in the US. I wish I knew. But I think SJ's idea might be the closest of them all: Quite simply, not enough of the right people care to make it legal. And unfortunately those who oppose it seem to be more vocal and powerful when push comes to shove.

[cleaveland]

We dont set federal laws based on the affects it will have on just one city, but rather the entire nation.

Lobbyists determine what gets done in Washington in many cases. You used the NFL as example of successful lobbying yourself.

[Swinging Johnson]

I don't agree with you because the UIGEA was passed without hardly any notice by the people in congress (please read below). With that in mind, why couldn't a law making online gambling legal be passed in the same way?

The Act was passed on the last day before Congress adjourned for the 2006 elections. According to Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), no one on the Senate-House Conference Committee had seen the final language of the bill before it was passed.^[3][4] The Economist has written that these provisions were "hastily tacked onto the end of unrelated legislation".^[5]
Though a bill with the gambling wording was previously debated and passed by the House of Representatives,^[6][7][8] the SAFE Port Act (H.R. 4954) as passed by the House on May 4 and the United States Senate on September 14,^[9] bore no traces of the Unlawful Internet Gambling and Enforcement Act that was included in the SAFE Port Act signed into law by George W. Bush on October 13, 2006.^[10] The UIGEA was added in Conference Report 109-711 (submitted at 9:29pm on September 29, 2006), which was passed by the House of Representatives by a vote of 409-2 and by the Senate by unanimous consent on September 30, 2006. Due to H.RES.1064, the reading of this conference report was waived.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlawfu...nt_Act_of_2006

Cleaveland, I appreciate your passion but I can assure you the UIGEA was tacked on by the few anti-gambling power brokers (Senator Kyl) because they have taken an open stance about their prohibition on gambling. It lends them credibility with the right wing evangelicals and it has become their stamp.

The reason they did it is because it is consistent with their stance. There is no politicain out there willing to put his/her neck on the line for being pro-gambling. It wouldn't generate any points with voters (except the few who gamble and he'd be a hero at SBR) and would only rankle those who are against it. And trust me, there are many more right wingers against gambling than an organized block of pro-online gambling advocates.

In your initial post you said it's not legal because Vegas doesn't want it but then admonishes Rudy by acknowledging online Vegas casinos would be good for Vegas is backtracking. eph6737 is spot on when he states the feds dont give a damn about Vegas.

[Swinging Johnson]

Cleaveland couldnt be more misinformed. To think the federal government is closing down sportsbooks and poker sites and seizing bank accounts to protect Las Vegas is ridiculous, especially since most of the tax revenue generated by casinos/hotels in Vegas goes to Clark County and the State of Neveda, not the federal government. We dont set federal laws based on the affects it will have on just one city, but rather the entire nation. Obviously legalized gambling would be bad for Vegas, but it would also create jobs and revenue in every other state. There are 2 main reasons why online gambling has not been legalized. ONE...the government has no way to regulate and enforce tax collection from online sportsbooks. If they did they would gladly legalize gambling tomorrow and collect billions in tax revenue. TWO...Legalized gambling could possibly lead to widespread point fixing, especially on the college level and amateur level. Hence calling into question the integrity of many sporting events. This is why the NFL has fought, and won, against legislation to legalize sports betting in Atlantic City as well as Deleware.

eph...bookmakers would fall all over themselves to pay a licensing fee and pay taxes. No question it could be regulated and taxed. That's not even a debatable issue.

Secondly, the NFL prays to God every night gambling doesn't stop. More people gamble on the NFL than any other sport. It is the primary reason why it is so popular. The owners know it, the players know it and Roger Goodell knows it. But they must publicly come out against it to protect the "integrity" of the game. If point fixing is a serious issue (which it's not in the pro game) then why does the govt allow Vegas to take action? Why doesn't the NFL sue the US government for allowing their game to be corrupted? Because they want it, they need it and their revenues depend on sports gambling. It's the worst kept secret in all of sports that the NFL publicly opposes gambling but privately revels in it.

[cleaveland]

There is no politicain out there willing to put his/her neck on the line for being pro-gambling.

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, introduced the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act of 2009, on Wednesday, May 6, as he lived up to his promise to push for legalized, regulated gambling on the Internet.

http://sportsgambling.about.com/od/s.../frankmay6.htm

In your initial post you said it's not legal because Vegas doesn't want it but then admonishes Rudy by acknowledging online Vegas casinos would be good for Vegas

I didn't say online casinos would be good for Vegas. I said if they ran online poker sites it would be good for them. There's a big difference between online poker sites and online casinos.

the feds dont give a damn about Vegas

We're not talking about "the feds", we're talking politicians and lobbyists. Off hand, the only politician I know of who could have been called a "fed" was George Bush Sr. (former head of the CIA). That's a very rare thing.

[bruceBRUCEbruce]

There is no politicain out there willing to put his/her neck on the line for being pro-gambling. It wouldn't generate any points with voters (except the few who gamble and he'd be a hero at SBR) and would only rankle those who are against it.

while I agree with much of what you've posted in this thread, the above is not totally true at all.

the amount of states that have added "riverboat" casinos, Indian casinos, etc in the last 20 years is staggering. a large portion of those were added in red states.

and politicians have supported these additions-some of which were major points of contention in elections.