kennex
1205
2016/03/25 13:08
#318459
Manne wrote:
The 2016 US election is still a few months off, but the race to secure party nominations has been ongoing for about five years (or it seems like that, at any rate).
With Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump looking likely to head the way for the Democrats and Republicans, online gamblers in the US are thinking: what will a new president mean for me?
Will Hillary come down hard on the land-based casino chains? Will Donald’s historical connections to big casinos in Atlantic City make him anti-online gambling? Let’s take a look at what could be in store for American when they wake up in November after a very long and hard-fought battle.
Donald Trump (Republican)
Bookies’ Odds: 9/4
Intro: The startling rise of Donald J. Trump has shocked a Republican Party seemingly unable to deal with his popularity. Does the GOP attack the property mogul and risk alienating the grass roots who are voting for him, or does it fall behind a solid alternative candidate who has a chance of derailing him?
At the moment, it looks like no alternative is forthcoming. But could Trump actually pull it off? And if he does, what does it mean for America’s gambling industry?
Any History: The multi-billionaire has made a name out of ambitious property developments in New York and beyond. Trump Towers now graces many of the world’s cities, but he’s been involved in casinos since the early 1980s.
Trump opened the Trump Plaza and Casino in Atlantic City in 1984, and went on to have major stakes in other casinos around the US. The Trump Hotel opened in Las Vegas in 2005, and Tower 1 opened there three years later.
His Atlantic City Trump Taj Mahal casino, meanwhile, enjoyed a 24-year lifespan before going bankrupt in 2014. It was saved from closure in 2015 before being ultimately taken over by Carl Icahn in March this year.
More recently, attempts to get Trump online in partnership with Betfair faltered after Trump Plaza’s demise in New Jersey. The intent to go online, obviously, was there.
Predictions: A history of casino-building means Donald Trump won’t be infringing on any land-based firms if he becomes president. Trump also can count on the backing of governor Chris Christie, who jumped ship from his own nomination bid to put his weight behind him.
But could his interests in land-based properties, like Sheldon Adelson, give him a taste to take on the Internet firms? At the moment, everything is up for grabs.
Key Quote: “This [legalized online gambling] has to happen because many other countries are doing it and like usual the U.S. is just missing out.” (Donald Trump, 2011)
Marco Rubio (Republican)
Bookies’ Odds: 18/1
Perhaps Trump’s closest rival is Marco Rubio, the Florida senator who seems to slip in and out of the race every week.
His state has a long tradition of poker rooms, and recently expanded its laws to include big-stakes action. But Rubio has gone on record in general opposition to “expanding gambling on the Internet.”
However, Rubio has been a big supporter of Adelson’s RAWA, but he does seem in favour of a carve-out for online poker.
Predictions: Rubio – who has enjoyed support from RAWA exponent, Sheldon Adelson – may push for an outright online gaming ban. Realistically, however, if in power he would probably favor the status quo of allowing individual states to go it alone.
Key Quote: “On the issue of Internet poker, the only difference between the poker games and the others [games of chance] is that it involves an element of skill associated with and compared with just a slot machine online.” (Marco Rubio, 2015)
Ted Cruz (Republican)
Bookies’ Odds: 50/1
The Republican long shot did well on Super Tuesday but is unlikely to overtake Trump in the race for the GOP nomination.
Predictions: Cruz is all for supporting the rights of individual states. That means a big ‘Yes’ for intra-state online gambling – if the states want it, and a big fat ‘No’ for anything remotely associated with RAWA.
Hillary Clinton (Democrat)
Bookies’ Odds: 4/7
Hillary Clinton has made no secret of her desire to follow her husband’s footsteps and become the second Clinton to enter the White House.
Clinton’s well-oiled campaign machine is now pushing her well towards the Democrat nomination, and she stormed to win seven states to Bernie Sanders’ four on Super Tuesday. However, her rival still holds a lot of support from young and disillusioned voters.
History: More known for campaigning on healthcare issues and women’s rights, Clinton was secretary of state when the Obama Administration cleared the way, in 2011, for online gambling on an intrastate level.
In 2000, Clinton was in favor of the building of a new casino near Niagara Falls. In 2008, she also supported – having already voted for UIGEA (the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act), a move towards online gaming regulation. In customary Clinton fashion, proper safeguards to protect children and problem gamblers were also highlighted.
In her failed 2008 bid for the Democrat presidential nomination, she gained plenty of support from top Vegas executives.
Predictions: If Hillary makes it to the White House – and let’s assume she will finally receive the Democrat nod – she is unlikely to back the rampant RAWA (Restoration of America’s Wire Act) put forward by Republican-backed Sheldon Adelson. Could a federal online gambling bill be next?
Key Quote: “For many places in the country, it [gambling] seems to be an important part of what they are trying to do to revive and maintain an economic base.” (Hillary Clinton, 2008)
Bernie Sanders (Democrat)
Bookies’ Odds: 28/1
The democratic socialist wouldn’t seem to be an ally of gambling, having voted for banning Internet gambling by credit card back in 2003. The Unlawful Internet Gambling Funding Prohibition Act paved the way for UIGEA three years later. He, like Hillary Clinton, voted for UIGEA/SAFE Ports Act to be implemented in 2006.
Pr
Join:
2007/02/24
Messages:
1205
So how can it be, therefore, that “offshore” operators accept Canadian facing business without suffering any legal consequences, unlike several of them did a few years back in the United States? The answer is simple – by way of the “Foreign Operators Principle”. The Foreign Operators Principle provides that as long there are no substantial links with Canada, whatsoever, (referred to as a “nexus” by Canadian courts), Canadian authorities have no jurisdiction over these offshore operators, and therefore, cannot enforce Canadian law, permitting them to continue to operate and earn revenues that, in the eyes of the various provincial governments, belong to Canada.
Seeing the success that many of the world’s largest gaming sites were experiencing and without any ability to stop it, or at the very least, slow it down, several Canadian provinces sought out to run their own provincial online gaming websites – like the old saying goes, “if you can’t beat them, join them” – and in 2010, the Quebec government announced its plans to open the very first government-run online gaming site, www-EspaceJeux-com, in hopes of earning a piece of the billion dollar gaming industry.
Despite their efforts in attempting to operate an online gaming platform, Canada’s provinces continue to face three major problems:
1. As an operator rather than a regulator, provincial governments compete with offshore operators that have been around for nearly two decades and that have far more knowledge, know-how, tools and experience, then they do, but above all else, have a large and unrestricted player base to draw from;
2. As an operator rather than a regulator, provincial governments must “take the heat” for any and all complications arising from play on their site, rather than condemning a privately-run offshore operator thus avoiding any negative publicity; and
3. Even though they are operating as a business, at the end of the day, they are still a government, and therefore must operate within the confines of their budgets, whereas offshore operators, being private entities, do not have these same limitations. This results in far inferior marketing campaigns, and also in not being able to attract some of the industry’s leading experts.
It is no surprise that Canada’s provincial governments are well aware of the monetary benefits of online gaming; however, the billion dollar question remains as to whether they should recognize the legitimacy of this industry and strictly regulate it, or continue on as operators.
Many Quebecers, including politicians, were against the launch of www-EspaceJeux-com as they felt it would only lead to societal issues. As a result, not really knowing much about online gaming, then Quebec Minister of Finance, Mr. Raymond Bachand, created the Working Group on Online Gambling tasked with the mandate of (i) examining the social impact that online gaming has in Quebec, (ii) analysing the measures used to block illegal gaming operations, and (iii) consulting with industry experts to learn more about the always-evolving online gaming industry, all to determine whether the online launch would be better or worse for the province – additional revenues and stricter responsible gambling programs vs. creation of new problem-gamblers.
Canada’s federal government also realized there was a problem with offshore operators, but to them, it wasn’t based on social concern, rather financial. In September of 2011, Senator Joe Comartin introduced Private Member’s Bill C-290, which sought to abolish the “parlay-system” and allow for “single-sport betting”, to compete with the offshore operators that were operating pursuant to the Foreign Operators Principle; it was said that the Canadian provinces were losing out on approximately ten billion dollars worth of revenues that were being wagered offshore.[1]
Unfortunately, Bill C-290 never made it passed the goal line, and the provinces continue to compete with offshore sportsbooks.
In the summer of 2014, following the acquisition of Rational Entertainment Enterprises Ltd., the parent company of Poker Stars and Full Tilt, by Montreal-based Amaya Gaming Group for $4.9b, rumors started circulating that Quebec was in fact leaning towards a regulated framework that would result in the issuance of interactive gaming licenses to private operators. It wasn’t until November of 2014, that this rumor started to look and feel more like an actuality, when Mr. Bachand’s commission released their report, “Online Gambling: When the Reality of the Virtual Catches Up with Us”,[2] whose most significant recommendations called for the Criminal Code of Canada to be amended to allow for the issuance of interactive gaming licenses to private operators, as well as the restriction of Loto-Quebec’s mandate to the management of gambling operators, while leaving the oversight of public health and socioeconomic/legal questions to an autonomous body.[3]
Shortly after releasing the report, the Province of Ontario also stated that they too were suffering financial hardships with their online gaming website, www-PlayOLG-com, as a result of the presence of offshore operators, but would be waiting patiently on the sidelines to see if and how Quebec responds to the recommendations made by the Working Group on Online Gambling, before they take any such measures.
Whether or not Quebec and Ontario will lead