Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed

sponsored by
Business


Lawmakers push for easing Internet bet ban

WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration should consider relaxing laws against Internet gambling rather than risk setting a potentially expensive and "worrisome" precedent with European nations and other trade partners, eight lawmakers said in a letter on Monday.

The lawmakers were critical of the U.S. government reaction after it lost a World Trade Organization dispute with the tiny Caribbean nation of Antigua over online casinos. U.S. officials declared the administration never meant for Internet gambling to be covered by international trade agreements.


Most Popular Stories
  • BEST PLACES TO WORK: The readers have voted: These Southern Nevada companies know how to keep workers happy
  • REAL ESTATE: Homebuilders hunt for land
  • INSIDE GAMING: Sanitizing slots, cards a priority for casinos
  • NEVADA ECONOMY: State showing some life at last
  • Home sales, median prices rise in valley
  • TIVOLI VILLAGE: Work intensifies at mixed-use center, with first phase to open in December 2010
  • MARKETPLACE: Herbst Gaming reduces staff
  • NEVADAN AT WORK: Twenty-year veteran of openings prepares for CityCenter
  • Michigan resident is youngest to win World Series of Poker Main Event
  • Pinnacle CEO resigns




  • Arbitrators now are considering damage claims from Antigua, an online gaming haven that said a U.S. law seeking to block betting over the Internet was an illegal form of protectionism.

    Other members of the World Trade Organization, including the European Union, Japan and Australia, also are claiming compensation for lost online gaming revenues in the billions of dollars.

    Compensation "could prove expensive to the U.S. economy," the lawmakers said in a letter to Susan Schwab, the U.S. trade representative. "However, we are perhaps more concerned about what this withdrawal says about U.S. credibility as a trading partner."

    "We are very concerned about the precedent this sets" for nations that also might be tempted to withdraw from trade obligations that become politically difficult, they said.

    The letter was signed by eight House members, including Reps. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev.; Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee; and John Conyers, D-Mich., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

    The lawmakers, who variously sponsor or support bills to roll back or study the Internet gaming restrictions, urged Schwab to consider working with Congress on "possible legislative solutions."

    "Traditionally when a U.S. law has been found to be out of compliance, the administration has consulted with Congress," the House members said. But in this case, they said, the U.S. Trade Representative agency took a "drastic step" on its own.

    The letter comes after a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Internet gaming Wednesday that included discussion of the trade implications of restricting online bets. It seeks to frame the issue broader than merely whether online gambling is good or bad from social or moral standpoint, said a lobbyist familiar with the matter.

    "No matter how you might feel about gambling, this administration's action, or inaction, on this case sets a dangerous precedent for our trade obligations going forward," said the lobbyist. "This is an issue of more than just gambling."

    Contact Stephens Washington Bureau Chief Steve Tetreault at stetreault@ stephensmedia.com or (202) 783-1760.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 3 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Report abuse

    douglas wrote on November 20, 2007 02:21 PM: to be consistent, then absolutely, positively other "encroachments" on liberty must be abolished... minimum ages for "brick and mortar" casino patrons, minimum ages for alcohol purchase; minimum age for contracts; minimum age for driver's licenses; minimum age for voting... and the list goes on.

    since children can access the internet, including those "offshore" wagering sites, they would be discriminated against by any age restrictions in "live" casinos. "half the time my child knows more about the computer than i do, and she's 3 and 1/2", so says the spokesperson for the "video professor" c.d.'s.

    hey, i had a credit card and "bad" i.d. before i was 18. if the "new" proposal becomes law, it should be "legal" to gamble in any casino, internet or with some guy using a lap top and phone booth in nigeria.


    Report abuse

    Carlos wrote on November 20, 2007 12:37 PM: Lawmakers wouldn't have to lift the ban if they didn't backdoor the law against it, in the first place! They tied to a port security bill so they could appear to be tough on terrorism! What a joke, enforce the laws for illegals first! All illegals, not just the south of the border people! Why can't I vote online again?


    Report abuse

    Publius wrote on November 20, 2007 11:05 AM: I can figure no possible permutation for proving that a ban on online gaming/betting protects my liberties. Another overreach by big government trying to protect us from ourselves.

    This ban is nothing but a giant turd in the bonnet of the independent spirit wishing to excercise LIBERTY, harming nobody!