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.
State Legislation
New Jersey: A995
Summary - A995 would authorize licensed land-based casinos in New Jersey to offer their games via the Internet.
Status - Sponsored by Assemblymen Vincent Prieto and Neil Cohen, A995 is the latest version of a bill that has appeared in the state's last three legislative sessions. A995 was introduced on Jan. 10, 2006 and referred to the Assembly Tourism and Gaming Committee. It has not moved since.
Outlook - Unlike a similar I-gaming bill that passed Nevada's legislature in 2001, this bill in its three previous manifestations in New Jersey has failed to garner much support among legislators and casino operators.
New Jersey: S1106
Summary - Senate Bill 1106, authored by Sen. Richard Codey, is identical to Senate Bill 1013 of the 2004- 2005 legislative session and Senate Bill 2376 from the 2002-2003 session, both of 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.
Status - The bill was introduced and referred to the Senate Wagering, Tourism & Historic Preservation Committee on Jan. 26, 2006 and has not moved since.
Outlook - Codey became president of the Senate last session so it would seem that any bill with his name on it ought to be taken somewhat seriously. The same bill he authored last year didn't even make it out of committee, however.
Illinois: SB 0198
Summary - SB 0198 would allow the Illinois State Lottery to begin selling lottery tickets to Illinois residents over the Internet. Rather than a permanent, statewide launch of lottery games via the Internet, the bill proposes a pilot offering so that the Illinois Lottery may test its online system over a small area for a limited time.
Status - Sen. John Cullerton introduced this bill on Feb. 2, 2005. It passed the Revenue Committee on Feb. 17 by a vote of 6-4. On April 14, a slightly amended version passed the Senate by a vote of 32-24-01, and then on April 27, it passed the House's Gaming Committee. After much debating through the month of May, the bill was amended and inevitably came to rest before the House Rules Committee, where it has resided since May 31, 2005.
Outlook - The bill's chief sponsor in the House, Rep. Lou Lang had been very publicly supportive of the initiative throughout early and mid-2005, but it has received virtually no attention in the last 16 months. Lang stated last year that the bill has the support of the Speaker of the House and could potentially serve as leverage during a tumultuous budget process, however Governor Rod Blagojevich presented the 2006 budget in February without a mention of the bill.
Georgia: HB 346
Summary - HB 346 would allow the Georgia State Lottery to begin selling tickets over the Internet. Georgia residents would be able to set up electronic accounts from which money could be used to participate in lottery games. The bill's main sponsor, Terry Barnard, attempted to pass a similar bill in the 2003-2004 legislative session. Although Georgia’s House approved that bill, it never received a vote by the Senate. Lottery retailers opposed it because they feared it would take away some of their profits. To alleviate their fears, Bernard altered this session's bill to provide a clause that requires customers who wish to play online to apply for an account at a lottery retail agency. Besides verifying that players are of legal age to participate in the lottery, requiring customers to register for an account at a retail agency would also enable the lottery to track which players originated from which agencies so that a portion of the profits could still be distributed to the agencies. Jim Tudor, a lobbyist for the Georgia Association of Convenience Stores, says that the state's lottery agencies are now neutral on the bill since the new clause has been introduced.
Status - The bill was passed by Georgia's House on March 10, 2005 with a vote of 98-48 (with 29 no votes). On March 17, 2005, the state's Senate Committee issued a favorable report on the bill and sent it to the full Senate, where it had already received two full readings by March 21, 2005. The bill remained virtually untouched until being recommitted by the Senate on Jan. 9, 2006. It has not been given any attention since.
Outlook - The bill appeared to have a fair chance of succeeding in early and mid-2005 but has garnered much attention since then. Its main opponents are the standard ilk that opposes any expansion of gambling because of its detrimental effects on society. There is also the legitimate possibility that the Department of Justice would weigh in on the bill if it begins to gain momentum. The DOJ has stated on several occasions that it believes all forms of online gambling violate the Wire Act, and no state has come as close as Georgia has to allowing the sale of lottery tickets over the Internet. In March of 2005, an effort in North Dakota to pass legislation that would make the state a licensing jurisdiction for online gambling was killed by a DOJ letter stating the department's opinion on the legality of such legislation. A similar letter would probably have the same affect on HB 346.
Minnesota: H.F. 3099
Summary - H.F. 3099 would legalize off-track betting in Minnesota and permit the state's racecourses to make wagering at Minnesota races available through some of the U.S. companies that offer horse race wagering over the Internet.
Status - Rep. Andy Westerberg and four co-sponsors introduced the bill March 2. It was presented for consideration on March 10 to the Gaming Division of the House Regulated Industries Committee, of which Westerberg is chairman. It was denied first on a tie vote, but was later reconsidered and referred to the full committee where it passed on a voice vote. It has not moved since.
Outlook - With only three months to go in the last year of its legislative session, the bill still has not received attention. Another problem is that Minnesota's Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that a previous attempt by the Legislature to authorize off-track betting parlors was unconstitutional. Perhaps giving credence to Westerberg's effort however is a study conducted by the Minnesota Racing Commission, which examined the possibility of allowing Canterbury Park racetrack and horse owners to accept a tiny share of bets that Minnesotans place through Internet betting services on races outside the state. At any rate, Westerberg doesn't seem optimistic for the bill's chances this year; he told Pioneer Press early this year, "I honestly don't expect it to pass this year."
Federal Legislation
HR 4411 - The Internet Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act
Summary - Following the passage of both Rep. Bob Goodlatte's, R-Va., Internet Gambling Prohibition Act (HR 4777) and Rep. James Leach's, R-Iowa, Unlawful Internet Gambling Prohibition Act (HR4411) by the House Judiciary Committee on May 25, 2006, the two author's of the bill merged their two bills. While Goodlatte's bill sought to update the language of the Wire Act to clearly state that all forms of interactive betting are illegal, Leach's bill focused on blocking the payment mechanisms that allow online gambling to take place. The newly merged bill retains both of these functions.
Status - HR 4411 appeared before the full House of Representatives on July 11, 2006 and was approved by an easy margin of 317-93. The bill has now advanced to the Senate, where it has yet to receive a first reading.
Outlook - Despite the overwhelming support for HR 4411 in the House, the Senate is a completely different story. Republican Representatives faced with allegations of corruption and fraud stemming from the activities of former lobbyist Jack Abramoff and former Speaker of the House Tom DeLay made passing online gambling legislation a top priority in 2006 as both a means to appeal to their conservative base and to rectify the errors of Abramoff and DeLay, who were both allegedly involved in the defeat of an Internet gambling bill in 2000. In the Senate, however, lobby reform has not been as important an issue, and online gambling has not been on the radar at all. It also seems that the passage of HR 4411 has awakened mighty forces, which were content to save their energies in combating the bill for a later battle in the Senate. While the approaches introduced by Rep. Leach to block payment transactions were largely overlooked in House debate on the bill, letters written to Senators on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Independent Community Bankers of America on July 28 guarantee that these issues will have to clarified to Senators if the bill is to succeed. Both letters stressed that the bill would impose impossible monitoring and enforcement burdens on the American financial industry and both therefore urge that Senators amend the bills to ease these problem areas. It seems apparent though; the bill will have a very difficult time in even attaining a reading before the Senate, where the calendar is already filled with higher priority issues, including defense appropriations, pension reform, minimum wage increases and estate tax cuts. And despite just returning from a month-long recess, the Senate will adjourn at the end of September to allow members to focus on their campaigns before November elections.
HR 5474 - The Internet Gaming Study Commission Act
Summary - HR 5474, authored by Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev. would create a bipartisan panel consisting of nine appointed members to conduct a comprehensive study of Internet gambling. The panel would be given 18 months to examine the legal issues associated with online gambling and make recommendations to Congress. Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., also had significant input on the creation of the legislation. It has 43 co-sponsors, including 41 Democrats and 2 Republicans.
Status - At the behest of the American Gaming Association, which announced its support for the formation of a Congressional commission to evaluate the impacts of Internet gambling in the United States, Porter and Berkley introduced HR 5474 on May 24. It was immediately referred to the House Judiciary Committee, which is giving online gambling a lot of attention this year. It will be up to Chairman F. James Senenbrenner to decide whether it will get a hearing and/or a mark-up.
Outlook - Insiders believe that this bill may receive more co-sponsorship this year and may be given media attention, but it most likely will not be the subject of any legislative action in the near future, at least not this session.