Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : Gambling, The Next Great Internet Industry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kidl who wrote (664)	7/26/2001 2:53:20 PM
From: Herc	Respond to of 827

Certainly I can see internet lottos offering a better payout because most of the expense is transferred to the lotto ticket buyer. And though I'm not a casino expert, I can conceive internet casinos giving a more favorable vigorish. Personnel costs with internet casinos will be practically nonexistent but is the major cost with brick & mortar casinos.

To: kidl who wrote (664)	7/28/2001 9:20:02 AM
From: Herc	Respond to of 827

Henry Waxman, D of CA., commenting on peer to peer (like Gnutella) sharing of hard core kiddie porn said "We're dealing with a technology that doesn't lend itself to any intervention that we know of at this point." I think this is what scares politicians so much about the internet. They can't control it. So they will lose their main source of power and, therefore, their source of campaign contributions.

To: kidl who wrote (664)	7/29/2001 10:55:02 AM
From: Herc	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 827

I was wondering why no one from Justice showed up. Also see the RGT article on MGM Mirage taking the plunge on an internet gambling casino based in the Isle of Mann. In the past internet gambling affiliates have threatened state licensure of their brick & mortar casinos. At last someone is taking the lead. It has long been my belief that once a state or big U.S. company takes the initiative then the feds wouldn't have the political power to intercede. <<Sunday, July 22, 2001 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Looking for leanings Committees analyzing Internet gaming seek Bush administration witnesses By TONY BATT lasvegas.com Gaming Wire WASHINGTON -- The absence of any witnesses from the Justice Department at a congressional hearing last week symbolized how reluctant the Bush administration is to enter the debate on Internet gambling. It is almost unheard of, particularly on an issue as controversial as Internet gambling, for a House or Senate panel to conduct a hearing without administration witnesses. The House Financial Services subcommittee on oversight and investigations is trying to recruit witnesses from the Justice and Treasury Departments for another Internet gambling hearing, sources said. But neither department has committed to appearing at the Tuesday hearing. Justice Department spokeswoman Susan Dryden said she does not think the department has taken a position on Internet gambling. Calls to the Treasury Department were not returned. Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., who plans to introduce legislation to ban Internet gambling perhaps as early as this month, is courting the administration's support. "We would definitely like to have the (support of the) agency that will be enforcing the ban," he said. "I think the (Justice) department is taking a fresh look at this compared to the last administration, and I think they're in the process of determining exactly how they'd like to address it." Goodlatte said he has met twice with Ashcroft about Internet gambling, and his staff continues to work closely with the Justice Department in crafting a ban. Although he would not discuss Ashcroft's comments, Goodlatte said he expects to gain the attorney general's support. Another possible reason for the Justice Department's silence on Internet gambling is that some of its top officials are not yet in place. Several nominees, including some expected to deal with Internet gambling, have not received Senate confirmation, sources said. Ashcroft cultivated an image as a zealous gambling opponent throughout his career as a Republican governor and U.S. senator from Missouri. But he was not listed among the 23 co-sponsors of a bill by Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz. that passed the Senate by voice vote in 1999. Ashcroft believed the Kyl bill had been compromised by too many exceptions to the ban, a knowledgeable source said. This may explain why Goodlatte's outreach to the administration goes beyond the Justice Department. He said his staff also is discussing an Internet gambling ban with the White House. Ken Lisaius, a White House spokesman, said there may have been discussions at the staff level, but he was not aware of them. Goodlatte is hoping the stance the Bush administration eventually adopts on Internet gambling is a significant departure from the Clinton administration. Under Clinton, the Justice Department opposed legislation to ban Internet gambling. Instead, the department advocated retooling the 1961 Wire Act to include Internet gambling in a ban on bets placed via phone across state lines. Goodlatte blamed last year's failure of his proposed Internet gambling ban on the Clinton administration's resistance. Running out of time in an election year, Goodlatte rushed his bill to the House floor under an expedited procedure, which required a two-thirds majority. The 245-159 vote in favor of the ban fell 25 short of the number required. The Internet gambling community is waiting to see how much more aggressive the Bush administration will be in the courts. "If they seek to prosecute (Internet gambling operators), that certainly would have an effect (on industry growth)," said Sue Schneider, chairman of the Interactive Gaming Council, a trade association for Internet betting sites. Twenty-one online gambling operators were indicted in March 1998 for violating the federal wire act. Jay Cohen, who helped run a sports betting site in Antigua, was the only operator who chose to return to the United States to face trial. He is out on bail while appealing his conviction in February 2000, which resulted in a 21-month prison sentence. Nevada lawmakers recently approved a bill allowing the state's gaming commission to develop rules that would govern how state casino operators operate Internet gambling sites. Brian Sandoval, chairman of the Nevada Gaming Commission, said he has not contacted or received any communication from the Justice Department regarding the state's Internet legislation. Sandoval said he wants to talk to Ashcroft about Internet gambling, but not until an East Coast law firm determines if the Nevada legislation conflicts with federal law. "We do not intend to defy any federal law," Sandoval said. Meanwhile, the casino industry appears divided on the impact of the Bush administration's silence on Internet gambling. Wayne Mehl, a Washington lobbyist for the Nevada Resort Association, said he was astounded when the Justice Department did not send a witness to last week's hearing in the House. "It absolutely makes it harder for the industry to take a position without information on what the Justice Department is willing to accept and what it will oppose," Mehl said. MGM-Mirage spokesman Alan Feldman said it isn't productive for the Bush administration to take a position until it is determined whether Internet gambling can be regulated. "That's what Nevada is trying to find out," Feldman said. "If Internet gambling can be regulated, we believe it should be licensed and taxed. If it can't be regulated to keep out players under the age of 21, the rest is moot.">>