Ohio Unemployment Rate Will Soon Be Helped By Casino Gambling

Voters in the state of Ohio had turned away casino gambling so many times in the past that pro-gambling groups had reserved hopes when they brought the issue in front of Ohio residents last November. The economy, however, proved to be the needed boost to get gambling approved.

Ohio has been sitting on one of the highest unemployment rates in the country since the economic recession. Voters expressed their fears of job loss when they approved four casinos resorts, one each in Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, and Toledo.

The path to new jobs started slowly in Columbus where business leaders came out against the Arena District location of the casino being built by Penn National. The gaming company agreed to change the location to the former Delphi auto plant, but voters needed to approve the move because the initial amendment had specific locations listed.

Earlier this year, Ohio residents approved the move, and now the state is preparing for construction of the four casinos. The construction jobs alone are expected to bring temporary work to thousands of Ohio residents. Dan Gilbert, owner of the Cleveland Cavaliers, has the rights to two of the casinos and he may choose to give the construction rights to local contractors.

Once the casinos are built, thousands of additional jobs will be created. The casino floor, bars, and restaurants will all need full time employees. How much these hirings will affect the unemployment rate is yet to be determined.

Ohio is one of many states across the US that has turned to casino gambling in the wake of the economic recession. The casinos have provided not only a way to increase employment, but also has brought millions of dollars in tax revenue into the states.

Thought this was so cool!!!

An online gambling fix

Congress cracked down on most forms of online gambling four years ago, concerned that the explosion in unregulated (and questionably legal) poker and sports betting sites was promoting organized crime, money laundering, underage betting and a host of other ills. The effect, though, was simply to drive U.S. residents to sites in other countries where online gambling is legal — no less convenient and, potentially, just as unregulated.

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) now wants to take the opposite approach; his bill (HR 2267) would create a licensing program for online gambling sites that would permit them to accept wagers from players in the United States. Rather than pretending that Americans aren't gambling online, Frank's bill would bring more protection to players and minors in states that are ready to stop the charade of prohibition.

Federal law has long banned betting remotely on "any sporting event or contest," with the exception of remote betting on horse races at off-track betting parlors and tracks. Nevertheless, online gaming had grown into a multibillion-dollar business in the U.S. by the end of 2005, prompting Congress in 2006 to bar banks and credit-card companies from processing transactions linked to Internet gambling.

Players have found it easy to circumvent the law by letting gambling sites credit or debit their bank accounts directly. Although some of those sites are reputable and well regulated by foreign governments, many are not. And if they breed crime, there's not much U.S. authorities can do to combat it. As professional poker player Annie Duke told Frank's committee last month, the 2006 law "does not keep a single child off an Internet gaming site, nor does it provide any protections for problem gamblers or mechanisms to prevent fraud and abuse; it only regulates the banks, not those who operate the games."

Frank's bill, which the Financial Services Committee approved last month, accepts that Americans gamble online but tries to bring more oversight to their wagering. Through its licensing mandate, federal, state or tribal regulators could require sites to use age-verification techniques to deter gambling by minors, implement programs to identify and block problem gamblers and guard against money laundering. The mandate would also deter criminals from operating sites, although as Nevada's experience with casinos has proved, licensing is an imperfect defense against unsavory owners.

By licensing operators in the U.S., Frank's proposal would make it easier for financial companies to block transactions with unlicensed gambling sites. The measure also would let states and Indian reservations continue to prohibit their residents from gambling online, although the likely result is that those residents would merely be barred from gambling at regulated sites. That's already the policy in the U.S., and it's just not working.

Online gambling legislation gaining traction

It's still a long shot, but the push to create a regulatory framework for online gambling is picking up steam.

According to a report on the politics news Web site NationalJournal.com, Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) is pushing Rep. Sander Levin to schedule a markup session for the Internet Gambling Regulation and Tax Enforcement Act of 2010 (IGRTA). McDermott's tax bill is a companion bill to Rep. Barney Frank's legislation that would create a licensing and regulatory framework for online gambling. Frank's bill was passed by the House Financial Services Committee last month.

Levin, who chairs the House Ways and Means Committee, has not decided whether McDermott's tax bill should be marked up, according to NationalJournal.com. If the tax bill is marked up and passed, a full floor vote on both the Frank and McDermott bills could be schedule before the House goes on break in October to campaign for the November elections.

While Levin hasn't decided whether to schedule a markup session, another powerful Democrat has indicated for the first time that he's willing to consider limited online gambling legislation.

The Reno Gazette-Journal is reporting Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is willing to support legislation that would regulate online poker -- and online poker only.

Reid told casino executives of his new position at a meeting last week, according to the Gazette-Journal.

This is the first time Reid has publically supported any form of online gambling. He is also the highest-ranking Democrat to support a form of online gambling.

The Frank bill takes a much more expansive view of online gambling than Reid does. Frank's legislation would license online poker, online casinos and online bingo. Sports betting would remain illegal.

Democrats May Lose Support If Online Gambling Bill Is Not Passed

Democratic leaders have for four years been championing the cause to overturn the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act. Although leaders such as Representative Barney Frank have appeared as allies to the industry of millions of Americans, they have done nothing to change the laws.

As the new election cycle comes into full swing, Rep. Frank and other Democrats are up against the wall on overturning the UIGEA. Frank has proposed legislation that has made it through the House financial services Committee, but he has yet to advance the bill to the House floor, and he acknowledges that may not happen before the mid-term election.

"I'm not optimistic," said Frank in an interview with The Hill, when speaking about the prospects of H.R. 2267 passing this session. It would be another delay and one that may start costing the Democrats votes in November.

For years, Democrats have held the vote of millions of online poker players that had hoped that by supporting these officials, the current laws would be changed. With nothing getting done, some supporters of Frank and other Democrats may turn their attention to the economy.

"If the economy is taking center stage and the Democrats do not have time to fit in our agenda of changing the online poker laws, then I am going to have to reassess who I vote for in the upcoming election," said Maury Bell. "It has been a frustrating four years, and I'm not going to allow them (Democrats) to hold my vote hostage any more on the hope that they might make my issue a priority."

This November, the Democrats are faced with the possibility of losing the majority in both the House and the Senate. The Senate majority appears more stable, with the Tea Party candidates likely to cost Republicans the majority in the chamber.

In the House, however, there is a real possibility that the Democrats would lose control. if that occurs, the chances of the UIGEA being overturned in the next two years would be slim. Even with bi-partisan support, it is likely that Rep. Spencer Bacchus and anti-online gambling regulation lawmakers would keep Frank's bill from passing.

There is still a chance that during the lame duck session that Frank's bill gains steam. There also is the possibility that the Democrats attach Frank's bill to a jobs creation bill before the November election. If that does not happen, it could mean the balance of power will shift in the House with thousands of people in the US possibly switching their allegiances during the election...

Netherlands to regulate egaming

 The Dutch government is planning to license and regulate all forms of egaming on a non-exclusive basis, according to media reports in the country this morning.

Newspaper De Telegraaf, crediting “sources in The Hague”, reported on its front page today that the Dutch government is planning to sell licences or establish a competitive tender process. “Total revenues of this [plan] are estimated at €100m, but that could increase up to €270m per year,” said the paper.

This follows the recommendation last month of the Dutch Ministry of Justice that poker should be legalised in Holland under a non-exclusive licensing system. However, today’s report suggests the Dutch government has now decided to regulate and tax all forms of egaming based on the Italian and French licensing model.

With the exception of sports betting offered by state lottery and betting monopoly De Lotto, all forms of online gambling are currently illegal in the Netherlands.

Despite losing a five-year court battle against De Lotto with Ladbrokes in June, Betfair recently confirmed to eGR that it plans to re-apply for a licence in the Netherlands “at the first opportunity”.

This followed the ECJ upholding its view that sports betting licences in the EU should be allocated in a transparent and equal manner, to allow Dutch consumers to benefit from competitive bids for the Dutch market.

Republicans Pushing To Ban Same Earmarks They Used To Ban Online Gambling

Republican lawmakers are showing their true hypocrisy this week as they push for the elimination of earmarks in Congress. Without the earmarks, the Conservatives may have a tough time getting bills through in the future without proper debate.

Back in 2006, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act was created by a Republican-majority Congress. The online gambling ban, however, would never had come to fruition had the Conservatives had to propose it as a stand alone bill.

Instead of allowing time to debate the merits of the online gambling ban, Conservatives attached the bill to a must-pass port security bill. This gave some liberal lawmakers no choice but to vote in favor of the port security bill, while in the process creating the UIGEA.

By many accounts, the UIGEA has been a colossal failure. The law criminalizes only the processing of online gambling transactions by financial institutions. The banks paraded officials into Congress detailing how hard of a task blocking the transactions would be. The financial institutions also told of how it would take millions of dollars to set up a system to block the transactions.

Legislators understood where the banking officials were coming from, but the problem was that their voice was not heard until after the UIGEA was in place. No research had been done leading up to passing the UIGEA, and no consultations took place. It was simply far right Republicans, finding a way to get online gambling banned by attaching it to an important piece of legislation.

Today, some of those same Republicans that were a part of playing the dirty politics in regards to the UIGEA, were calling for a vote to end earmarks. Just the idea that these Conservatives would call for the elimination of earmarks is somewhat amusing to those within the gaming industry.

"It is amazing that the use of earmarks are the reason that we have these ridiculous Internet gambling laws in the US that are not in line with most other countries, and now Republicans want to eliminate earmarks, is almost comical," said Gaming Analyst Steve Schwartz. "I know there will be millions of online poker players that will not fall for this lame political maneuvering. If they really want to get rid of earmarks, maybe they should start with the UIGEA."

Representative Barney Frank has the ability over the next month to return the favor to Republicans in Congress. With several major bills expected to be passed in the lame-duck session, Frank could attach his new online gambling bill to one of these major bills. If he does so, it is likely the UIGEA would be overturned, and US residents would finally have the freedom to choose what they wish to do with their entertainment money.

The chances of that happening, however, are slim. Over the years, Conservatives have used earmarks much more efficiently that liberals. That is why their latest attempt to ban a practice that they are largely responsible for facilitating, is, well, in the words of Schwartz, "comical."

Thanks for the info nan and let's keep our fingers crossed that one day we can legally play too...lol!!!