Print
E-mail
Share
digg
Newsvine
Facebook
Stumble
Technorati
reddit
Fark
twitterWhy casinos in Nevada won’t go online (for now)
Chris Morris
Thursday, Aug. 20, 2009 | 2 a.m.
Sun Archives
- Will Web poler bust spark fight or flight? (6-15-2009)
- Poker players swarm site seeking input on big issues (5-19-2009)
- Web betting is wedge for Big Gaming (11-25-2008)
- Bush administration moves on Internet gaming band (11-12-2008)
- Gaming’s new frontier (11-23-2007)
- Online gaming in the shadows (7-17-2007)
Sun Coverage
While Nevada officials pass on an opportunity to pursue Internet gambling for state residents, gambling interests in California, the nation’s most populous state and one of the world’s largest regional economies, are pushing legislation to allow online wagering in that state.
California’s efforts, made possible by a loophole in federal law, come as the federal government begins a comprehensive crackdown on offshore Web casinos by taking down the middlemen who pay gamblers from American bank accounts.
Many Internet gambling experts think California, rather than Nevada, will emerge as the online gambling leader.
That possibility springs from the federal loophole, which allows states to opt out of congressional efforts to regulate online gambling and, instead, regulate it for their own state residents — and generate tax revenue.
California is at the forefront in pursuing in-state Internet gambling.
By preventing online operators elsewhere from tapping California residents, California — struggling under a crippling budget deficit — wouldn’t have to share tax revenue with the feds or other states.
That’s OK with Nevada regulators and legislators, who are more intent on bringing gamblers to Nevada than allowing intrastate online gambling.
In California, a bill draft proposed by a coalition of casino tribes and card rooms has emerged alongside a similar bill introduced in Congress this month by Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J. The Menendez bill, which expressly legalizes Internet poker nationally, follows a companion bill introduced by Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., to legalize Internet casinos.
Both federal bills give states 90 days to “opt out” of the federal regulatory system — a potentially lucrative opening for states to regulate and tax local Web casinos.
In Nevada, authority to legalize Internet gambling rests with the Gaming Control Board and Gaming Commission, which would have to adopt online betting regulations.
Three major hurdles established in state law stand in the way.
Nevada regulators would need the blessing of the Justice Department — an agency that has been adamantly opposed to Internet gambling for more than a decade.
(The Justice Department told the Control Board in 2002 that all forms of Internet gambling are illegal.)
Second, regulators would have to determine that Web gambling technology provides “reasonable assurance” that minors or people in places where Internet gambling is illegal can’t take part.
Third, regulators would need to determine that online gambling is consistent with Nevada’s public policy of fostering “the stability and success of gaming.”
The last finding is perhaps the most problematic.
In 2001 the Nevada Legislature passed a law authorizing the state to explore Internet gambling regulations. At the time, legislators envisioned gamblers nationwide betting in Web casinos operated by Nevada companies, with the state collecting millions in tax revenue. It would be hard to justify Internet gambling for state residents only, given how much gambling exists, Gaming Control Board Chairman Dennis Neilander said.
That wouldn’t expand the market so much as cannibalize it, with business potentially siphoned from smaller casinos — the majority of Nevada’s operators — to bigger casinos and chains that are best positioned to create Web gambling empires.
Even if regulators could jump all these hurdles, they won’t — at least not for some time.
They cite a 2008 survey by UNLV’s International Gaming Institute indicating Nevadans had little interest in either gambling online or regulating the activity.
“I was surprised at the results of that study, but gaming is so convenient in Nevada that maybe that’s why there’s not much appetite for it,” Neilander said.
While Nevada stands back, California is moving forward.
The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, pushed by conservative Republicans in Congress, further criminalized Internet gambling by making it illegal for banks and other financial institutions to process online bets. But it also opened the door for states to legalize Web casinos within their borders.
The law was widely criticized by offshore casinos seeking to operate legally in the United States, as well as online gambling advocates including Nevada legislators who have supported federal bills to regulate Web casinos. While overseas operators of Web gambling sites have been affected, U.S. companies, including Nevada casino giants, remain poised to capture Internet gambling business under a future regulatory scheme.
The law has moved offshore Web casinos further into black market territory while allowing bets that are “initiated and received ... within a single state.”
Meanwhile, the government has stepped up efforts to crack down on offshore Web gambling operators, clearing the playing field for U.S. gambling companies to set up shop on the Web.
This month, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York indicted Douglas Rennick on multiple charges including bank fraud, money laundering and illegal gambling operations — part of an ongoing sting operation that has involved the FBI for at least the past three years.
The government contends that Rennick opened accounts with multiple banks under false pretenses, then transferred Web casino winnings from a Cyprus bank account to U.S. bank accounts used to pay American gamblers. Authorities are demanding the forfeiture of $566 million in Internet gambling receipts — the largest amount ever sought by the Southern District in an Internet gambling case. If found guilty, Rennick, who could be used to ensnare other middlemen or Internet operators, faces a maximum penalty of 55 years in jail and $1.8 million in fines.
Abdicating the opportunity for Internet gambling might seem an unusual move for Nevada, but the state’s small population doesn’t offer much return on investment, observers say.
By contrast, California — 14 times more populous than Nevada — could become a $2 billion market for online poker sites licensed there, said Tony Cabot, a Las Vegas gaming attorney specializing in Internet gambling.
Efforts by more populous states to legalize Internet gambling could lead to its acceptance as a mainstream activity and, ultimately, federal regulation, he said.
Regulations are more likely to pass on a state-by-state basis than on a federal level, Cabot said. Legalization efforts in Congress have significant support but are too easy for special interests — including competing gambling operators and industry opponents — to short-circuit.
There’s still a chance that Nevada could capture Internet gambling action from more populous states.
If a state like California fails to opt out within the time frame specified in the Frank and Menendez bills, then Nevada operators, should such federal legislation become law, could operate licensed online poker games aimed at states “that can’t get their act together,” said I. Nelson Rose, a California-based Internet gambling attorney.
Discussion: 11 comments so far…
Post a comment
- Most Read
- Discussed
- Most E-mailed
- Wonder drug for men no success story
- CityCenter: One man’s concept of a real city
- Bellfield tolls again for UNLV in 76-71 win over Louisville
- Metro corrections officer remembered for his love of family
- Notebook: UNLV prospect Polee likes what he sees, and hears, at the Mack
- Live game blog: Bellfield, UNLV come through late, upset No. 16 Louisville
- Man, 18, arrested for DUI in crash that kills woman, 24
- Man fatally shot during robbery attempt of woman
- Bishop Gorman crushes Reed to head to state championship
- Pitino doesn’t consider loss to UNLV a total loss
Blogs
The Greene Room
MWC Winners and Losers: Week 13
The Kats Report
If the message is 'rock out,' then KISS is indeed a message band (1 Comment)
Could a savior of shuttered Las Vegas Art Museum be ... Peter Max? (6 Comments)
For Paul Stanley and KISS, rock and roll is not over (6 Comments)
Twenty years ago today, Human Nature took root on the farm (1 Comment)
Robin Leach's Las Vegas Celebrity Watch
Photo Gallery: Donny Osmond’s triumphant return to the Flamingo
The Kats Report
'DWTS' champ Donny Osmond still deft afoot in return to Flamingo (8 Comments)
Calendar »
- 30 Mon
- 1 Tue
- 2 Wed
- 3 Thu
- 4 Fri
-
DJ showdown at Prive
Prive | 10 p.m. to 11:59 p.m.
-
Rok Box with Mike Carbonell at Tabu
Tabú Ultralounge | 10 p.m. to 11:59 p.m.
-
DJ Riz at Jet
Jet | 10 p.m. to 11:59 p.m.
-
Football specials at Diablo's
Diablos Cantina
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
Casino's in Colorado last month reported a 16% increase in revenue as the state opened higher limits and table games to their residents.
Las Vegas loses more and more of the nations gamblers to alternatives in other states and counties. Missing out on the internet gambling may come back to haunt Nevada if they don't jump now.
surely if a british person went online to play poker or whatever on say luxor website, they could be offered deals on rooms, thus advertising another way, bringing people into vegas who might have not bothered, internet gambling allows so much in the way of communicating with the outside world for so little cost.
I believe what the article is referring to is online gambling for State of Nevada residents only.
This article isn't why CASINO's can't go online - its why the residents of NV can't. Sites like TVG and Bodog don't allow NV residents to gamble due to the state law forbidding it. I assume thats because the casinos have lobbied against it as having the residents here actually come into the casinos means they get the profit rather than let people place bets from home.
LOL! The greed of the Nevada casinos will bite them in the end! They're lobbying attempts to keep the casino revenue to themselves is only pushing them further from an inevitable future segment of the US market.... online gaming.
The US is missing out on many different sources of revenue from this robust industry.
If you gamble at casino games online, you seriously need your head examined.
Online gambling is so rigged. All casino games are rigged actually but online it seems alot worse. I have heard some real horror stories.
We strongly agree that if every state had their own laws for online gaming (mainly poker) and meet the federal regulation of online poker (once regulations are set) then each state could benefit. We here at MakePokerLegal.com are dedicated, (along with our members)to the regulation and legalization of online poker. Poker Players around the United States should make their voices heard. We have the contacts and the forums (not to mention our own 100% US legal poker room)to assist you in contacting the correct people. Then maybe one day, all the states could wake up and see the great potential to assist in this troubled economy.
Thank You for your time readers,
Ty Warren
MakePokerLegal.com
The notion that anyone requires government permission through legalization/regulation to exercise their private right to gamble is laughable.
Everyday millions of Americans exercise their private right to participate in sex, drugs and gambling i.e. vise absent of government permission, regulation i.e. intervention.
Those advocating only "legalized" gambling criminalize individuals choosing to exercise their right to private vise participation.
Moral governments don't pimp vise.
Support government morality -- exercise vise privately.
Eventually there will be casinos adjacent to every major city in the US, in every state. There's simply too much potential revenue available--states are missing out on it.
As a resident of California, I find it ridiculous that California doesnt legalize intra-state online poker. Here is why:
1) Live poker, either in licensed card rooms or private homes (if no rake taken) is already perfectly legal
2) We already have the most regressive form of gambling, the state lottery
3) We have a huge budget deficit. The license fees and taxes from online poker would bring in substantial revenue. Yes, it may cannabalize the lottery a little, but not very much in my opinion as lottery players and poker players are really a different type of gambler.
4) By establishing legal sites first, it gives California the foothold if other states, or federal law, finally allows online poker to be "legal"
It is only a matter of time before all online casino gambling and poker games are regulated and taxed as they should be. It has been a mistake for it not to have happened yet. I read an article [ http://onlinecasinosuite.com/casino-news... ] about how gambling revenues in Vegas have been plummeting, while online casinos have been cashing in. Regulating, licensing and taxing online gambling is in the best interests of the Govt, the gaming companies, and the players. I say it's time to make it happen.