Staying on top of interactive gambling bills as they move through the United States' federal and state legislatures no longer entails hours of research, thanks to this monthly update on U.S. state and federal legislation.
All the materials and information contained in Interactive Gaming News and this article are copyrighted unless otherwise noted. Any unauthorized use of materials on this site may violate copyright, trademark and other laws and intellectual property rights of Interactive Gaming News, a River City Group LLC publication. Materials from this site may not be copied or distributed, or republished, uploaded, posted, decompiled, or transmitted in any way, without the prior written consent of Interactive Gaming News. The materials in this site could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. The materials in this site are provided "as is" and without warranties of any kind either expressed or implied, to the fullest extent permissible pursuant to applicable law. All usage requirements are spelled out in full in the Terms of Use section of this site.
In 2004, a dozen Internet gambling-related bills, most of them prohibitory, endured the harsh lawmaking process at both the state and federal levels long enough to mature into legally binding laws. The only one to become a law was Washington's Senate Bill 6481, which permits account wagering in the state.
As the federal legislative session, and most of the states' legislative sessions, ended at the close of 2004, so too did the life of most of the bills IGN has been monitoring. New Jersey is the only state monitored whose legislative session extends through 2005 and is, therefore, the only state whose bills don't have to re-start the legislative process.
Two state legislators in Indiana have already introduced versions of virtually the same bills they attempt to pass every year. Meanwhile, at the federal level, U.S. Congress is almost certain to see yet another incarnation of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Funding Act. Last week, Rep. Michael Oxley, R-Ohio, Rep. Spencer Bachus R-Ala., and Rep. James A. Leach, R-Iowa--all Members of the House Committee on Financial Services--wrote to the Christian Science Monitor to assure its readers that they "will continue our efforts in the newly convened Congress to deny offshore gambling interests access to the U.S. market."
State Legislation
| New Jersey |
AJR-66 |
Bill Summary |
This bill, proposed by Assemblymen Joseph Azzolina, would create a 21-member Internet gaming study commission that would be charged with recommending a course of action regarding online gaming in New Jersey. |
Bill Status |
The bill was introduced Jan. 13, 2004 and immediately referred to the Assembly Tourism and Gaming Committee.
Outlook |
Assemblyman Anthony Impreveduto, who co-sponsored a similar bill last year, told IGN that the bill was created to provide the Tourism and Gaming Committee with more information about the Internet gambling industry before considering other bills on I-gaming. The current legislative session in New Jersey extends into 2005 so even though the bill received very little attention in 2004, it could still garner consideration next year.
|
New Jersey |
A-429 |
Bill Summary |
A-429 would authorize licensed land-based casinos in New Jersey to offer their games via the Internet. |
Bill Status |
A-429 is a version of a bill that was filed as A-568 last year. It was originally filed by Assemblyman Tony Impreveduto during the 2000-2001 legislative session. The bill was introduced on Jan. 13, 2004 and referred to the Assembly Tourism and Gaming Committee. |
Outlook |
Unlike the I-gaming bill passed in Nevada, A-429 has failed to garner great support among legislators and Atlantic City casino operators.
|
New Jersey |
S-1013 |
Bill Summary |
Senate Bill 1013, authored by Senator Richard Codey, is nearly identical to last year's Senate Bill 2376, which Codey also authored. The bill clarifies the definition of illegal gambling to include Internet gambling and voids credit card debt incurred through illegal gambling. The bill also includes a clause establishing that only the state may sue to recover gambling losses. |
Bill Status |
The bill was introduced and referred to Senate Wagering, Tourism & Historic Preservation Committee on Feb. 9, 2004. It hasn't since seen any action. |
Outlook |
Codey became president of the Senate this session so any bill with his name on it is going to be taken seriously. New Jersey sources indicate, however, that I-gaming is not a top priority in the state.
|
| Indiana |
HB 1191 |
Bill Summary |
House Bill 1172 would make Internet gambling by consumers a Class B misdemeanor. The act of operating or promoting an online gambling service would become a Class D felony. Authored by Representative Jerry L. Denbo, the bill would require Internet sites to shut down if a law enforcement agency were to determine that a site promotes online gambling. Internet service providers would also be required to restrict access to sites that promote and offer online gambling. |
Bill Status |
The bill received its first reading on Jan. 6, 2005 and was then referred to the Committee on Public Policy and Veterans Affairs. |
Outlook |
The bill has appeared for the last three years and failed every time. It places obligations on Internet service providers that they are not likely to welcome.
|
Indiana |
SB 92 |
Bill Summary |
SB 92 makes it a Class D felony for an operator of an Internet site to use the Internet to engage in gambling activities. The wording of the law gives interactive computer services (Internet service providers) a right of action against any person that transmits information for the purpose of online gambling. Internet service providers may block access to gambling sites and will not be held liable for action voluntarily taken in good faith to block the receipt or transmission of information if it reasonably believes is related to illegal gambling. |
Bill Status |
The bill was introduced on Jan. 4, 2005 and then sent to the Committee on Corrections, Criminal and Civil Matters. On January 13th it was adopted by the committee. |
Outlook |
Like the I-gaming bill sitting in Indiana's House of Representatives, this bill could incite the wrath of Internet service providers if it makes it far in the ratification process. Also like the House Bill, this one has appeared and failed for the last three years. However, in being adopted by the Committee on Corrections, Criminal and Civil Matters, the bill has already progressed further than its predecessor did last year.
|
|