Nod from Justice clears hurdle for online gambling

Question of the Day

Is it still considered bad form to talk politics during a social gathering?

View results

A Department of Justice legal opinion that clears the way for states to offer lottery services and gambling over the Internet reinforces the District’s efforts to introduce poker and other games, but may threaten the city’s status as a first-in-the-nation pioneer in the industry.

Nevada, a state that knows a thing or two about gambling, shored up its role as a front-runner by issuing regulations for an online-poker program a day before the DOJ’s opinion made the rounds on Friday.

Gambling proponents say the opinion’s interpretation of the Wire Act of 1961 gives the green light to states looking to build revenue by offering non-sports gambling over the Internet to residents within their respective borders. They heralded its legal reasoning as a reversal of the federal government’s previous, tougher stance on Internet gambling, although the opinion was intended to address whether Illinois and New York can use out-of-state transaction processors to sell lottery tickets to its own residents.

D.C. Council member Michael A. Brown, at-large independent, placed the District at the forefront of sanctioned online gambling in December 2010, when he slipped an initiative authorizing a program called iGaming into a supplemental budget bill that passed into law.

“We always knew it was legal. It didn’t come as a shock to us,” Mr. Brown said Wednesday of the DOJ opinion. “But other states might beat us to the punch, and that would be a tragedy.”

The program’s implementation through the D.C. Lottery has stalled while officials fully vet the program through community meetings and council hearings. Critics say the program should have been introduced as stand-alone legislation from the start, so lawmakers could have examined the program’s merits in public before passing it into law.

Mr. Brown said the “vocal few” are holding the program back and argues the nation’s capital should lay the foundation for iGaming and reap the benefits of revenue and regulation.

“I’m hopeful we still will be the first to the marketplace,” he said. “Frankly [other states] have said, ‘We’re just going to take D.C.’s legislation and copy it.’ “

Lottery officials say they have no plans to change the main components of iGaming based on a series of community events they held to address concerns about the program, which allows pre-approved users to wager money and play on their home computers or on their laptops in certain public areas.

Council member Jack Evans, Ward 2 Democrat, scheduled a hearing before his Committee on Finance and Revenue for Jan. 26 to discuss how iGaming would work, what the lottery learned from the community meetings and if there are potential budget risks if the program does not go forward. The hearing will also examine a bill to repeal iGaming in the District, as well as the D.C. inspector general’s investigation into the program and the awarding of the overall lottery contract.

While other states formulate their own Internet gambling plans, Mr. Evans said being first in line is “not the driving force for me.”

“What matters to me is we get it right,” he said Wednesday.

Mr. Evans said he did not need the DOJ’s opinion to prove the legality of iGaming in the District. The city’s attorney general, Irvin B. Nathan, said in June that the program is legal as long as play remains within D.C. borders, and federal officials explicitly chose not to intervene in the city’s plans.

“Congress signed off on this, for better or worse, in our budget,” Mr. Evans said, referring to the congressional review of all laws passed in the District.

The DOJ’s opinion indicates federal officials may leave online gambling up to the states, although the American Gaming Association says the time is ripe to introduce nationwide legislation that protects consumers against fraud, underage gambling and money laundering. These protections “must be enacted to avoid a patchwork quilt of state and tribal rules and regulations that would prove confusing for customers and difficult for law enforcement to manage,” the association said Friday.

Story Continues →

View Entire Story

© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Comments
blog comments powered by Disqus
TWT Video Picks