[farmhouse1]

By Michelle Minton
May 13, 2014, 5 a.m.


Should lawmakers in Washington override state laws and impose their values on the states? Some members of Congress seem to think so, and they are trying to impose a retroactive federal ban on Internet gambling, including in three states that have already legalized the activity. Not only does the proposal trample states’ rights, it will fail to eliminate illegal online gambling while making consumers less safe online, eliminating millions of dollars in tax revenue for states, and favoring a special interest. It is also based on a blatant misrepresentation of existing law.

The Restoration of America’s Wire Act, sponsored by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, would rewrite the Federal Wire Act of 1961 to criminalize all “wire” communications related to gambling. Chaffetz and Graham insist that the original intent of the 1961 Act was to ban all forms of online gambling. However, in 2011 the Department of Justice looked at the statute and determined that the letter of the law only applied to sports betting.

Following the 2011 DOJ decision, Nevada, Delaware and New Jersey passed laws to legalize and regulate online gambling within their borders. Graham and Chaffetz insist the DOJ flip-flop is an example of the Obama administration bypassing Congress and “ignoring the law” — even though the Wire Act specifically mentions sports betting. In fact, the Graham/Chaffetz bill would excise language mentioning sports betting and add new language to extend the prohibition to “Internet” communications. In 2002, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit agreed with the DOJ’s reading of the law, but that hasn’t stopped these lawmakers from attempting to rewrite a 50-year-old statute to stop states from legalizing online gambling.

Supporters of a ban on Internet gambling claim to be concerned about a host of social ills legalization would visit upon our society, including children gambling, increases in addiction, and crimes like fraud and money laundering. However, a ban would make all those problems worse, by moving online gambling into the black market.

As we have seen, bans on Internet gambling cannot stop the activity. In 2013, prior to states authorizing online gambling within their borders, Americans spent almost $3 billion on illegal, offshore gambling websites, according to the American Gaming Association. However, many countries have had legal and regulated online gambling for decades without experiencing a decline in their quality of life. Even in the United States, where consumers have had access to online gambling since the 1990s, the rate of gambling addiction has remained stable for 30 years.

It’s downright puzzling for supposed champions of federalism and states’ rights to get behind an effort for Congress to override laws democratically decided upon by states. When discussing the Affordable Care Act in a 2009 op-ed for CNN, Chaffetz, a member of the 10th Amendment Task Force (which aims to spread the word about the importance of states’ rights) noted, “Each state has unique demographics, resources and health challenges,” and that “federalism works because it allows state and local governments to tailor their policy solutions to the needs of their population.”

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, a co-sponsor of the Senate bill to ban online gambling declared federalism as one of the three principles that ought to guide the conservative agenda in a speech at the Heritage Foundation last year. According to Lee, each state has “a functioning, constitutional government. And just as important, each state has a unique political and cultural history, with unique traditions, values, and priorities.” Lee also derided “progressives” who “insist on imposing their values on everyone.” Yet, when it comes to online gambling, Chaffetz and Lee seem perfectly happy to impose their values on the states.

Even more troubling than the hypocrisy behind the Wire Act rewrite, the bill was actually written by a lobbyist for casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, a major GOP donor with a financial interest in protecting his brick-and-mortar casinos’ market share.

Banning online gambling may win some Republican legislators points with a few donors, but in the long run it will do more harm than good to their credibility and more importantly to Americans’ freedom and safety.


Michelle Minton is a fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and the author of “Republicans’ Bad Bet” a CEI publication analyzing the recent Congressional proposal to ban online gambling.


penetrating republicans

[farmhouse1]

New Jersey says sports betting law infringes on states' rights
Supreme Court could decide soon whether to hear case





N.J. Gov. Chris Christie wants to legalize sports betting over the objections of NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell.
By: The Associated Press | More Experts
Published: Jun 03, 2014


ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. — New Jersey is bolstering its legal arguments as it tries to get the U.S. Supreme Court to consider its effort to overturn a ban on legalized sports betting in all but four states.


In a filing submitted Tuesday, the state says the federal law needs to be reviewed immediately.


Theodore Olson, who won the Bush v. Gore election case in 2000, says the ban impermissibly restricts states' rights. He also says the high court needs to consider the way the law treats states differently.


The law restricts sports betting to states that met a 1991 deadline to pass laws approving it: Delaware, Montana, Nevada and Oregon. At the time, New Jersey was given the chance to become the fifth state but failed to act during a prescribed window.


Major League Baseball, the National Football League, the National Basketball Association and the National Hockey League, along with the National Collegiate Athletic Association, all support the ban, saying it upholds the integrity of the games in the public's mind.


In his filing, Olson wrote that the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act needs to be reviewed by the court immediately. He noted that sports betting was overwhelmingly favored in a non-binding referendum put before New Jersey voters.


"New Jersey's citizens voted overwhelmingly in favor of sports wagering, and their representatives seek to respond, through the enactment of positive law," Olson wrote.


No federal law directly prohibits individuals from betting on sports, the state argues. Rather, the law makes it illegal for a "governmental entity" to license or authorize sports wagering activity. New Jersey argues that Congress has no authority to regulate the approval or disapproval of activities expressed by individual states.


The state has been trying to overturn the federal law banning sports betting in the other 46 states since 2009, when a state lawmaker sued the federal government over the ban. Most recently, Gov. Chris Christie decided in 2012 to try to overturn the ban, knowing it would be an uphill fight.


New Jersey wants legalized sports betting as a way to generate new revenue and customers for its struggling casinos and horse racing tracks, as well as to garner taxes from money now flowing to illegal betting operations.


The Supreme Court could indicate this month whether or not it will hear the case.

[Hareeba!]

Ah! The Land Of The Free ... at least to own deadly weapons!

[jjgold]

USA a mess, one of worst Countries to live now

[swordsandtequila]

USA a mess, one of worst Countries to live now

Beautiful thing is you have the right to leave. Or better yet, the right to do something about it. Or just keep making provocative posts to generate page views.

On another note, Adelson needs to die off already. Greedy pos who owns half the republican party.

[flailing]

Beautiful thing is you have the right to leave. Or better yet, the right to do something about it. Or just keep making provocative posts to generate page views.

On another note, Adelson needs to die off already. Greedy pos who owns half the republican party.

They will still come after you for 10 years once you renounce your citizenship. Many banks have stopped taking U.S. citizens living outside the U.S. as customers. That was due to ACTA. In fact, there are significant controls on U.S. capital flowing in and out of the country.

Screw these douchebags. They really want me to vote Libertarian again don't they.

[swordsandtequila]

Never mentioned renouncing citizenship; there are many Americans living abroad. I was just busting JJGhost's balls for being a dipshit.

[jjgold]

We'll never be able to fight the government they always win.

It's only going to get worse not better that's why you see very few books for American players anymore