Online Gambling takes stab in the back

Online gambling takes a heart attack in the United States after the US Congress passed legislation prohibiting the use of credit cards, checks, and electronic fund transfers for it. Even though it was passed directly by the House, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act was attached as a rider to the port securities bill in the Senate, guaranteeing its passage.

President George W. Bush is expected to sign the bill into law within two weeks, thereby making it illegal for finance companies to collect credit-card payments from customers using Internet gaming sites.

As a result, most online gaming companies listed in London, have lost more than half their value today. PartyGaming lost as much as 62 percent. Sportingbet shed 73 percent, and 888.com slid 50 percent. All three are expected to suspend their business with the US once the act is signed. The industry has taken a beating after US authorities arrested BetonSports chief executive David Carruthers and Sportingbet chairman Peter Dicks over alleged illegal Internet gambling on sport.

Online gambling is a 15 billion dollar industry worldwide.

Author's Opinion

It seems that Las Vegas would benefit from such a ban since they would love everyone to travel just to their city and gamble there. I wonder if they have some sort of paranoia about losing their business to online gaming companies.

Also note that horse race betting, state lotteries, fantasy contests, and certain online gaming activities are exclusively protected under the new law. You have to assume that certain special interests were rewarded for their "contributions" to some members in Congress.

To suggest that the ban on online gaming is supposed to improve social stability in our society is a load of bollux! The argument that these Internet gaming sites are a front for money laundering, drug trafficking and terrorist financing is easily debatable. Are they saying that gambling in Las Vegas is "clean" gambling versus online?

The main sponsor of the legislation in the Senate, Senator Jon Kyl from Arizona, called Internet gambling a moral threat. He even called it an Internet version of crack cocaine. Strange that he is doing nothing about the Las Vegas gambling mecca nearby in Nevada. His state has its own lottery. Isn't that morally wrong too?

This is just blatant social and cultural authoritarianism. It encroaches on a person's individual freedom and unnecessary governmental interference in our private lives. How can this solve our social ills when other forms of gambling are sanctioned by the federal and state governments? An ineffective solution.

Americans will always want to place a small bet on a sports contest or playing a bit of cards for entertainment. Over time, it will take needless resources to prohibit and enforce the law on online gaming. It is similar to trying to prohibit alcohol during the Prohibition Era. Legalised gambling is a significant social and economic force in this country.

Let us have the right to gamble as we see fit. Banning online gaming outright does not solve the problem.

Related Articles

Bloomberg.com - House Approves Measure to Restrict Online Gambling in the U.S.

AP - UK Gambling Shares Fall on US Move

CNN.com - US ban sparks Web gaming crisis