The House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations held a hearing on the Sheldon Adelson-backed Restoration of America’s Wire Act bill and most reports say the two-hour hearing amounted to exactly what was expected—a series of anti-gambling advocates railing against online gambling.
The bill, introduced by Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) would essentially outlaw online gambling in the U.S. The bill is seen as coming from Las Vegas Sands owner Sheldon Adelson, who is personally financing a lobbying effort to ban online gambling.
At stake is not only any future attempts to legalize online gambling in the country, but also the online gambling industries in three U.S. states—New Jersey, Nevada and Delaware—that have already approved online gambling in their states as well as online lotteries in a number of other states.
Critics of the hearing charged that the sub-committee—which Chaffetz sits on—had stacked the witness list with anti-gambling opponents. Several co-sponsors of the bill are also on the committee.
And to be sure, witnesses included Les Bernal, the Director of Stop Predatory Gambling, and Professor John Kindt of the University of Illinois, both vocal critics of gambling in general.
But some of the witnesses weren’t as predictable in their testimony.
Parry Aftab, the founder of WiredSafety and a specialist in internet security, and Andy Moylan, an advocate of states’ rights and the director of R Street, testified against the bill.
Though not taking a pro-gambling stance, Aftab raised concerns that by attacking legally sanctioned sites, illegal gambling sites would benefit.
Aftab also pointed to the success regulated online gaming sites have had in blocking underage play.
“The verdict is in—with the exception of a handful of incidents which were quickly addressed, all stakeholders are safer and minors are being locked out of online gambling sites,” Aftab told the committee.
Protecting minors from playing at online sites is a major reason given for the legislation by supporters.
Moylan on the other hand, saw the bill as a violation of state’s rights to decide for themselves on online gambling, which has been a major criticism of the bill from conservatives.
Committee members did little to challenge the witnesses, according to reports, though Chaffetz was unconvinced that geolocation software could keep out-of-state players from using another state’s sites. Chaffetz said he feels states that don’t allow gambling, such as Utah, need to be protected from online sites in other states.
But Chaffetz also reportedly left the hearing early without listening to witness testimony.
The hearing did not include testimony from any online gambling industry representatives or online technology experts.
As a House subcommittee, no real action on the bill was taken after the hearing, but there are movements to take the bill to the amendment process before attempting to hold a vote on the bill.
The hearing, however, has brought out a slew of opposition.
“Today’s hearing was about one thing—checking the box to advance Mr. Adelson’s bill,” said John Pappas, the executive director of the Poker Players Alliance, a vocal proponent of legalizing online poker said in a press release. “While the PPA has always encouraged a national discussion on the value of regulating online gambling, constructing a hearing at the behest of a political donor is an unfortunate waste of everyone’s time. This bill should die today, so members of the committee can focus on more pressing matters, and not on legislation that will deny states the ability to protect its citizens.”
The Coalition for Consumer and Online Protection, an organization funded by companies involved in regulated iGaming in the U.S., also came out against the bill.
“We encourage members of the subcommittee to see this bill for what it is—a disingenuous attempt by Sheldon Adelson to frame its passage as some sort of moral obligation when it does nothing to protect consumers who will continue to access the unregulated black market,” the coalition said in a press statement. “We also encourage the subcommittee to focus on the clear intent of Congress in the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, which made clear that the states had the power to prohibit or authorize gambling within their borders. This bill entirely ignores this fundamental states rights principle embodied in our Constitution.
Meanwhile, reports say state lottery officials from across the United States have been holding meetings with members of Congress to voice opposition to the bill. Again, the officials point to an infringement on state’s rights and the bill inadvertently helping illegal offshore sites, according to reports.
And finally, the California, Ohio and Virginia State Chapters of the Fraternal Order of Police have issued letters to their home state congressmen on the committee to urge opposition to the bill saying it does not protect consumers from illegal, unlicensed sites, among other concerns.
