Rep. Jim Gerlach (R., Pa.) is among the local lawmakers on the committee who also voted yes. "Poker is not a crime," bill supporters told Gerlach in a modest Twitter-based lobbying campaign, his spokesman Kori Walter told me.
How'd this happen? Casinos, among others, used to oppose online competition.
But gambling operators such as Harrah's Entertainment Inc., which runs an online poker operation with international customers, ended up lobbying for the bill. That's because it was altered to make it difficult for offshore online-gambling operators, who violated previous U.S. bans, from getting licenses.
Plus, the government gets a big cut: The bill gives 2 percent of your bet deposit to the U.S. Treasury, and up to 6 percent to state or American Indian tribal treasuries. States can opt out if they really want to, Mills says.
The feds will also collect a separate wager tax and levy income taxes on gambling profit.
In all, supporters say that online gambling will add $42 billion over 10 years to the U.S. Treasury, and $30 billion for the states and participating tribes, Mills said.
The bill blocks credit card bets, so you can't gamble with money you don't have, but allows debit card debts that would drain the family savings account.
With online-gambling pioneers effectively blocked from getting licenses, Mills expects casino operators will dominate the legal online-gambling business - and that they'll use it to expand gambling services in their existing buildings.
That could mean less need for massive casino hiring. Jobs have been a leading justification for allowing casinos in job-scarce areas such as Atlantic City and Philadelphia.
Isn't the logical conclusion of this process to shut the casinos and let people gamble from their home computers, handheld devices, and neighborhood bar or restaurant computers?
