Justice Dept. policy may factor in internet gambling debate



A potential policy change in Washington is the latest thing state lawmakers have to consider when it comes to legalizing internet gambling at casinos in Pennsylvania.

A potential policy change in Washington is the latest thing state lawmakers have to consider when it comes to legalizing internet gambling at casinos in Pennsylvania.

The Senate Community, Economic and Recreational Development Committee and House Gaming Oversight Committee heard conflicting testimony last week about the impact of any decision by new U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions to reverse a 2011 federal legal opinion opening the door for states to legalize internet or online gambling. Sessions said he would review the Department of Justice opinion during his Senate confirmation hearing in January. New Jersey, Delaware and Nevada have internet gambling.

"With the fluid situation in Washington, internet gambling is an unreliable and possibly nonexistent source of revenue," said David Cookson of the Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling.

Philadelphia attorney Thomas Decker, a former member of the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board, doubts the opinion will be overturned, and said even should that happen, it would have no legal impact on state laws legalizing online gambling.

"Everyone is sort of waiting to hear what they (Justice) have to say," said Rep. Aaron Kaufer, R-120, Kingston, a House panel member. "The concern is this could all be for naught for all we know."

Senate Panel Chairman Mario Scavello, R-40, Mount Pocono, said he is not worried about a federal policy change. Scavello said he is more focused on getting a gambling expansion bill through the Senate and House. The state budget is built on an anticipated $100 million in new gambling revenue. However, lawmakers have yet to agree with the fiscal year nearing an end on how to generate the needed revenue.

The two committees scheduled another hearing March 20 on legalizing video gaming terminals in bars and fraternal clubs.

Still unresolved is passing a new state casino tax to pay for local impact assessments. The Supreme Court ruled in the fall that the assessment in place since casinos first opened is unconstitutional. The court ruled in favor of Mount Airy Casino Resort's complaint that casinos generating less revenue than others paid a heavier tax burden.

A major hurdle with gambling expansion is finding consensus among the 12 casinos that are heavily regulated and generate state tax revenue and revenue earmarked for property tax relief.

Two casinos already took positions against internet gambling. There is uniform opposition among casinos to video gaming terminals.

Mount Airy supports internet gambling.

"Internet gaming will provide a critical new source of tax revenue for the commonwealth and new local share tax revenue to assist local communities," wrote Mount Airy in written testimony. "Mount Airy is adamantly opposed to legalization of VGTs (video gaming terminals) as they will only serve to cannibalize the existing casino licensees."

The debate in Harrisburg is focused too much on state revenue needs and not enough on the impact of new gambling, said Kaufer. He is concerned that legalizing internet gambling will turn cellphones into slot machines.

"We are talking again about credit card gambling," he said. Kaufer said he thinks it would be easier to generate legislative support for legalizing fantasy sports or internet poker.

Gov. Tom Wolf wants to make sure any new form of legalized gambling does not siphon away revenue from the Pennsylvania Lottery and existing casinos, said spokesman J.J. Abbott.

Sen. Lisa Boscola, D-18, Lower Saucon Twp., said she is concerned that internet gambling will reduce slot revenue which is the source of property tax relief.

This article is a reprint from the Time-Tribune. To view the original story and comment, click here.


Sign-up for the OSGA Newsletter!

Every week get news and updates, exclusive offers and betting tips delivered right to you email inbox.