They would both like to see the new Federal ban on Internet gambling overturned. At least D’Amato is getting paid to do something about it.
Am I the only one surprised at how easily Congress enacted the ban? One day it seemed as though Internet gambling was a quasi-legal, hugely profitable, generally accepted practice. Then, all of a sudden, Congress pulled the trigger and the CEO’s of gambling sites started getting arrested.
Where did the pressure for the ban come from? I assume some powerful combination of the casino industry, the gambling-is-immoral crowd, perhaps the state lotteries. Regardless, I am also surprised it has taken so long for a lobbyist of D’Amato’s stature to have been employed in a fight to overturn the ban. It is interesting to see how D’Amato invokes his own powerful combination of fear, economics, and even the high moral ground:
The money being spent to outlaw poker and enforce the ban, Mr. D’Amato said, could be better spent “in the battle against money laundering, trafficking in drugs, or trafficking in terrorism.”
and 
. You can also watch it on 
It seems doubtful that the casino industry would have really cared much about Internet gambling. It’s not as if casinos were struggling.
Much of the debate in favor of the legislation outlawing Internet gambling was couched in terms of protecting children. That makes me suspect that the anti-(all)gambling people were the primary supporters, figuring that the casinos were too strong to fight but the Internet gambling operations were more vulnerable.
It seems doubtful that the casino industry would have really cared much about Internet gambling. It’s not as if casinos were struggling.
Much of the debate in favor of the legislation outlawing Internet gambling was couched in terms of protecting children. That makes me suspect that the anti-(all)gambling people were the primary supporters, figuring that the casinos were too strong to fight but the Internet gambling operations were more vulnerable.
Prosa,
It is likely that casino’s were partly behind the movement to eliminate on-line gaming (no casino calls it gambling) because the overbroad law would likely get overturn at the WTO or by Congress that would allow them to partake in on-line gaming that they are currently procluded under current laws. So it is something like one step back to move 3 steps forward.
As for struggling, go look at casinos debt load to understand their need to increase their marketing reach for new customers.
Prosa,
It is likely that casino’s were partly behind the movement to eliminate on-line gaming (no casino calls it gambling) because the overbroad law would likely get overturn at the WTO or by Congress that would allow them to partake in on-line gaming that they are currently procluded under current laws. So it is something like one step back to move 3 steps forward.
As for struggling, go look at casinos debt load to understand their need to increase their marketing reach for new customers.
I also wondered who was behind the Online Poker Jihad. It’s pretty clear to me that Casino’s had the most to lose, and while I don’t think they were afraid of Poker, I think they were afraid of games like Blackjack and Craps, etc. going online, which might really affect their businesses. The amount of lobbying needed to get a bill passed in an already religious right leaning country was minimal given that on the other side of the argument was a disparate group of individuals who wanted to toil in anonymity (the players) and the companies running the sites tried to remain equally anonymous given that they were operating in the “grey zone”.
What really surprises me, is that states have lotteries with far worse odds, far worse pay outs and that represent much more egregious regressive taxes. I doubt the data is available, but I’d be willing to bet (not online of course) that a far greater percentage of income is gambled on the lottery (due to its appeal to the lower class) than is wagered in online poker.
I also wondered who was behind the Online Poker Jihad. It’s pretty clear to me that Casino’s had the most to lose, and while I don’t think they were afraid of Poker, I think they were afraid of games like Blackjack and Craps, etc. going online, which might really affect their businesses. The amount of lobbying needed to get a bill passed in an already religious right leaning country was minimal given that on the other side of the argument was a disparate group of individuals who wanted to toil in anonymity (the players) and the companies running the sites tried to remain equally anonymous given that they were operating in the “grey zone”.
What really surprises me, is that states have lotteries with far worse odds, far worse pay outs and that represent much more egregious regressive taxes. I doubt the data is available, but I’d be willing to bet (not online of course) that a far greater percentage of income is gambled on the lottery (due to its appeal to the lower class) than is wagered in online poker.
“As for struggling, go look at casinos debt load to understand their need to increase their marketing reach for new customers.”
Judging by what I saw in my first-ever trip to Las Vegas last August, the casino industry sure looks healthy. New hotel-casino developments seem to be shooting up everywhere.
“As for struggling, go look at casinos debt load to understand their need to increase their marketing reach for new customers.”
Judging by what I saw in my first-ever trip to Las Vegas last August, the casino industry sure looks healthy. New hotel-casino developments seem to be shooting up everywhere.