Skip to comments.Internet gambling could soon be imposed on all 50 states
Posted on 04/09/2014 9:32:31 PM PDT by ObamahatesPACoal
We need to have a debate about whether we really want a full casino attached to every smartphone in America. With the wave of the executive branch magic wand, unfettered Internet gambling could soon be imposed on all 50 states. When the Department of Justice (DOJ) unilaterally reinterpreted the 1961 Wire Act in December 2011, the DOJ circumvented the democratic process and opened the door for a massive policy change absent any significant public debate.
We unequivocally oppose the legalization of online gaming.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
but as long as the federales have seen fit to allow every Indian "sovereign nation" to establish huge casinos off their reservations and take in billions and billions in untaxed monies, then the hell with restricting online gambling....rather people waste their money there then waste it at the Indian casinos...
Failing to ban is not the same thing as imposing. Don’t like gambling? Don’t gamble.
Go start a war Lindsey!
McCain & his little Smithers know what’s wrong with America:
We’re all too free.
They’re gonna’ take care of that!
$50 says this won’t happen!
Give me 3/1 and you are on.
Virtual Indian reservations.
Linda Grahamnesty? [spit]
For 6 months to a year, you’re on. After that, no bets.
Wait! Why isn’t this imposed on all fifty-seven states?
Considering that their bill specifically exempts horse-racing, that's a flat-out lie. If they can't even be honest about the big stuff...
One more trick for the rich to get richer and the poor get poorer.
50 states? i thought obama said there were 57 states?
“DOJ circumvented the democratic process and opened the door for a massive policy change absent any significant public debate.”
Kind of like when Bill Frist snuck the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act through by attaching it, literally in the middle of the night, to the Port Security Act right before it was up for a vote?
The fact is the DOJ is simply reverting to the clear language of the 1961 bill which was about sports betting only. The previous “interpretation” that it covered other forms of gambling was made up. They had to drop it due to a court ruling.
“The U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the Wire Act prohibition on the transmission of wagers applies only to sports betting and not other types of online gambling. The Supreme Court has not ruled on the meaning of the Federal Wire Act as it pertains to online gambling.”
I suppose these guys have gotten their money from casino mogul Sheldon Adelson who is spending millions to try to stop online competition.
Where is “restricting gambling” in the Constitution?
Agreed. Either we believe in Constitutional government or we do not. Besides, even absent a Federal ban, it would seem that the states could impose bans.
First of all, I don’t believe that the power to regulate games of chance falls anywhere within the powers delegated to Congress by the Constitution. The tenth amendment would then apply; the power to regulate gambling would be a power of the states. States could still ban online gambling if the choose to do so.
However, it would seem to me to be a disconnect here. Either gambling is bad and should be banned or gambling is okay and should be permitted. Why is gambling inside a building (or via purchase of a lottery ticket) okay, but gambling on the internet a bad thing that must be banned? What’s the difference? The money that people lose in lotteries or at a casino is just as real as the money people would lose online. Why ban one and not the other? The only real reason I can think of is that the casino owners are politically connected and that the lotteries are government operated. Neither of those will be banned anytime soon. Given that, what’s the harm of permitting online gambling. I thought competition was a good thing.