If this bill fails, wouldn't it somewhat set the tone?
thedesertsun.com
------
"Opposition to anti-gaming bill mounts"
By Benjamin Spillman
The Desert Sun
July 13th, 2001
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opponents are moving to kill a bill that would ban Internet gambling in California.
Resistance from banking and gambling groups, as well as anti-gambling and social groups who normally favor betting bans, has mounted since the ban breezed through the Assembly, 61-2, in May.
Critics say the ban is unenforceable and has too many exceptions.
Backers of the bill say opposition has already slowed its momentum.
A staffer for its sponsor, Rep. Dario Frommer, D-Los Angeles, said he’s not sure whether the bill can be saved.
"There is so much big-money interest in this," said Dan Reeves, Frommer’s chief of staff. "You have all this support and no opposition, yet the bill will fail. You have all these people working in the shadows."
The executive director of the California Council on Problem Gambling in Palm Springs questioned the practicality of a statewide ban on Internet betting.
Taxpayer money would be better spent on education and prevention, not on chasing down Internet casino operators, said Tom Tucker, the head of the largest problem-gambling group in California.
Tucker is skeptical of a ban, but wants the state to address the social problems caused by Internet gambling. He is assisting a San Jose man whose wife committed suicide after she lost $70,000 betting online to testify on behalf of the ban.
"There wouldn’t be enough cyber cops available," Tucker said. "I think it is a feel-good bill."
Testimony on the bill is delayed until at least August because of opposition from the Internet gambling industry, Reeves said.
"The Internet is designed to be open," said Norm Towne, a lobbyist for the interactive Gaming Council of Vancouver, British Columbia. Towne said California should follow Nevada by licensing and regulating Internet casinos.
Frommer has already compromised with the horse racing, Indian gaming and credit-card industries. Credit-card companies wanted to limit provisions in the bill that would have exposed the industry to lawsuits.
In the course of bargaining, however, the lawmaker may have lost groups that normally support gambling restrictions.
Stand Up For California -- a group that opposes the expansion of gambling -- and the Committee on Moral Concerns publicly criticized several changes to the bill. They oppose exceptions for slot machines in Indian casinos that are linked together by telephone lines, betting on horse races by telephone and Internet-based sports fantasy leagues.
In a written statement, they said the exceptions are "making a variety of gambling options available to anyone, from their home or the nearest telephone." Reeves defended the compromises. The goal of the bill, he said, is not to infringe on gambling that already exists, but to stop expansion.
Indian casinos and horse racing are already regulated, and sports fantasy leagues are games of skill, not gambling, Reeves said.
A separate bill in the Legislature would authorize Internet-based horse betting.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benjamin Spillman can be reached at 778-4643 or by e-mail at Benjamin.Spillman@thedesertsun.com |
