Amendments proposed to Barney Frank

Some of the attachments put on Barney Frank's bill regulating Internet casinos last week are several items that create a protectionist environment for some gambling operators over others. While Frank and online gambling industry representatives agree moving the bill forward is the main concern, future disputes could also be forecast by observing the sophisticated manipulation of the Frank measure.

Democratic Representative Joe Baca of California asked for assurance that states and existing tribal agreements can be capable of exclude Internet gambling if desired. Republican Michael Castle of Delaware stated he's worried about online gambling's impact on state revenues, which receive income from lotteries and land gaming taxes.

But Frank responded sharply to the arguments over limiting the growth of online casinos inside the US. He mentioned that Baca's amendment was not a case against gambling or its inherent dangers, but a protectionist move to insure tribal casinos are guaranteed their profits, without reference to federal law on online gaming.

Baca's home state contains one of the richest and strongest tribal gaming organizations, which control a robust lobby within the state's political structure.

Still, the state right to opt out of the federal gaming plan was inserted within the bill.

This also spoke to Castle's concerns, protecting his beleaguered state from further losses of projected gambling revenue after the NFL blocked a legalized sports betting plan in court.

Frank clearly was unhappy with the chance of watering down of H.R. 2267 to serve special gaming interests.

The law "shouldn't protect any service from competition," argued the Massachusetts Democrat. He added that, while "states have the appropriate to revenue, people have the best to select" which gaming operator they want to patronize.

The struggle for control of gaming revenue by gambling operators has caused bills in Texas and Massachusetts to fail, despite majority support of gambling expansion. Internet casino companies hope this isn't the case for the way forward for Frank's bill.

Published on August 3, 2010 by MattMiller

Read More... [Source: Casino News]