Massachusetts stealth attack...

[jetset]

Anti Patrick law rally planned

ACADEMICS TAKE A STAND ON MASS. ONLINE GAMBLING PROPOSAL

Harvard law professor plans a rally this week

The Global Poker Strategic Thinking Society (GPSTS), the group formed at Harvard Law School to promote poker as an educational tool (see previous InfoPowa report), is co-sponsoring a rally Tuesday at the Statehouse in Boston with the Massachusetts chapter of the Poker Players Alliance to protest the proposed criminalisation of online poker in Governor Deval Patrick's gaming bill.

The group plans to demand that Governor Patrick explain who wrote the provision of the casino bill outlawing poker, which a Harvard Law Professor called "crazy and nonsensical."

"I don't think filling our expensive jail cells with poker players is what Massachusetts voters had in mind when they elected Deval Patrick," said Charles Nesson, the Harvard professor who founded the GPSTS.

Governor Patrick "owes the people of Massachusetts an explanation" as to how the anti-poker provision found its way into the bill, Nesson said. "We intend to keep pushing this until we get answers from the governor," Nesson added.

A public hearing on the highly controversial legislation, the Massachusetts Casino Expansion bill (H. 4307), which seeks to ban online gambling at the same time allowing the construction and operation of three massive land casinos, is scheduled for Tuesday after the 9:15 a.m. rally in front of the Statehouse.

Nesson plans to speak at the rally. If the bill passes, residents of Massachusetts who play online poker would face jail terms of up to two years and a maximum fine of $25 000. Massachusetts would be the only state in the country to explicitly make the playing of online poker a crime, and the law would even apply to players in online poker games where no money was at stake.

"There is another downside to the anti-poker legislation. Outlawing online poker also advertises to the world that Massachusetts is a state that discriminates against the Internet and new technologies, which is exactly the opposite of what the state needs for its economic development," Nesson added.

John Pappas, the executive director of the Poker Players Alliance, said that Massachusetts had become a bellwether state in terms of its policy toward online gaming. "People around the world are watching to see how the Massachusetts legislature deals with this issue because its significance goes far beyond gaming," said Pappas, whose organisation has over 900 000 members.

"We believe taking the extreme step of criminalizing online poker would be a strike against personal freedom, would tarnish the reputation of Massachusetts as a progressive state, and be opposed by millions of poker players around the country and world," he added.

Nesson has had a series of sharp written and verbal exchanges with casino owners and government officials trying to determine the author of the anti- poker provision. Nesson said a spokesman for Governor Patrick informed him that the governor was unaware of the provision, while inquiries to the Governor's press secretary have gone unanswered.

Said Nesson, "On top of the issue of creating bad law there is a good government question concerning how legislation actually gets written in this state. It should be a matter of concern to all Massachusetts citizens, regardless of their views about online games, how this narrow industry-backed provision found its way into the Governor's casino bill."

 

[jetset]

The rally

MASS. ONLINE GAMBLING BAN SLAMMED AT RALLY

Harvard Law Professor Charles Nesson and iMEGA representatives criticise online gambling ban clause in Governor's proposal

The Harvard university group Global Poker Strategic Thinking Society, the Poker Players Alliance and the iMEGA Internet freedom pressure group between them marshalled a protest rally this week outside the Massachusetts legislature's offices where a debate on allowing land casinos in Massachusetts as proposed by Governor Deval Patrick was taking place.

But it wasn't the land casinos that motivated the protest. Instead it was a clause tucked away in the proposal that would make online gambling in the state a banned pastime on pain of draconian penalties that was the focus for the rally....and no one was 'fessing up to its drafting.

Harvard Law Professor and founder of the Global Poker Strategic Thinking Society (GPSTS) Charles Nesson criticised the proposed casino bill for making it a crime for individuals to play poker on the Internet when he addressed the crowd in front of the Massachusetts State House. He had earlier submitted written testimony prepared for the Legislature's public hearing.

Nesson said, "Governor Patrick's Casino bill would make it illegal for state residents to play poker online, with penalties ranging from hefty fines to jail time of up to two years. How crazy is that? Who wrote the bill's strange provision to criminalize online games? The Governor's people say it wasn't him (even though it's nominally his bill). The Las Vegas casino interests say it's not them. Both questions should be put to the Governor..."

Nesson has been in contact with the Massachusetts Governor's office about the drafting as well as the chairman of the board of the Las Vegas Sands Corp, which is thought to have a hand in the creation of the bill, trying to get answers on who inserted the provision making it illegal to play online poker.

"I don't think filling our expensive jail cells with poker players is what Massachusetts voters had in mind when they elected Deval Patrick," Nesson said in a press release.

At the hearing Joe Brennan Jr., Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association chairman, expressed his organisation's opposition to the anti- Internet gambling provision in the bill. "It is ironic for a bill to legalize gambling in Massachusetts to outlaw and severely punish gambling online. It simply makes no sense," Brennan said.

"How can an activity that is legal in 48 of the 50 states be a criminal act simply because it utilizes the Internet? If an American has the right to choose in the "real world," shouldn't they enjoy that very same right when they are online?"

"Like many of the government's forays into cyberspace, these efforts are well intended but yield the considerable practical problems of unintended consequences," Brennan said. "In this case, Americans' right to privacy and freedom of expression are imperiled by overzealous lawmaking."


GOVERNOR PATRICK ADMITS CASINO BILL DEFEAT LIKELY

Blames "House leadership" for negativity regarding possible Massachusetts land casinos

Gov. Deval Patrick conceded after hearings in Boston this week that his plan to build three resort-style casinos in Massachusetts is heading for likely defeat in the Legislature, blaming "undue pressure from House leadership."

But Patrick, in his second year as governor, indicated he isn't giving up on the idea, saying he's still looking for ways to make the bill stronger.

"I have no illusions about the plans in the House for this legislation," he said Tuesday at a packed legislative hearing. "I'm simply asking that an open debate begin, rather than end, today."

The hearing could determine the fate of Patrick's bill for the current legislative session. Patrick says casinos would generate new jobs and revenue. Critics warn the proposal exaggerates the economic benefits and would bring increased crime and even worsen the foreclosure crisis if gambling addicts spend their mortgage payments on slot machines.

If the committee releases the bill with a recommendation that lawmakers reject it, it could come up for a vote as early as Thursday. House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi has pressed lawmakers to kill the bill, saying casinos would "absolutely cause human damage on a grand scale."

Patrick has said the casinos would create tens of thousands of construction jobs and 20 000 full-time permanent jobs and bring in $200 million in fees per license plus an estimated $400 million a year in new revenues.

"Casinos in Massachusetts will be neither a cure-all for all of our fiscal needs nor an end of civilization as we know it," he said to an overflowing crowd of mostly casino supporters in Gardner Auditorium.

Earlier in the day, DiMasi told a Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce breakfast he could not support the governor's plan because it would ultimately harm residents. "We will absolutely and no question have increased bankruptcies, foreclosures, divorce, broken families, increased property crimes, domestic violence and on and on and on," DiMasi said. "The cost of cleaning up the human devastation brought by casino gambling is too great."

DiMasi said he has seen strong public opposition to Patrick's plan, but those voices have not been heard as prominently as advocates.

"After six months of debate on this bill, I believe the evidence is not there, the case has not been made and time is running out," DiMasi said. "Right now, my answer is no."

A long list of supporters and opponents signed up with the state's Joint Committee on Economic Development to testify during the public hearing, which began at 10 a.m. and stretched into the afternoon. They included clergy members, environmentalists, online poker players and dozens of union backers.

Committee co-chairman Rep. Daniel Bosley, one of the fiercest critics of casino gambling, warned that allowing three casinos could open up a Pandora's Box of trouble. He pointed to the state Lottery - which began with a single daily number and grew into dozens of scratch tickets, Megabucks, Mega Millions and Keno - and said the state could quickly become just as addicted to casino money.

"The Lottery should be a cautionary tale," said the North Adams Democrat. "We love the revenues, but we hate how we get them."

Rep. Sarah Peake, D-Provincetown warned that the pull of the casinos could end up hurting some of the state's traditional tourist attractions, particularly in her Cape Cod district. "It will be good for tourism around the resort casinos, but it will be bad for other parts of the state," said Peake, who also owns a bed and breakfast.

Before the hearing, hundreds of casino supporters rallied on the Boston Common to urge lawmakers to support Patrick's plan. Many of the union members at the rally wore hard hats and carried signs saying "Casinos equal 20,000 jobs for Massachusetts and I need one of them."

Robert Haynes, Massachusetts president of the AFL-CIO union, urged his members to attend the hearing and push their state lawmakers to back Patrick's proposal. "I want to know which legislator is going to deny you a job, who's going to pay your mortgage when you can't pay, who's going to leave 20,000 workers in an unemployment line," Haynes said.

 

[jetset]

Update

MASS.STEALTH BAN HEADS FOR THE HOUSE (Update)

Economic Development committee votes against land casino proposal

In a 10 vs. 8 vote this week a key legislative committee in the Massachusetts legislature voted to recommend that lawmakers reject Gov. Deval Patrick's proposal to build three resort-style casinos in Massachusetts, all but dooming the bill this session. The proposal contains a 'stealth' clause seeking to ban online gambling in the state, seen by many as a protectionist move to sweeten the deal for land operators.

Observers say that vote has set the stage for a predictable outcome, and that a subsequent debate and vote in the state's House of Representatives will be a formality.

The Joint Committee on Economic Development rejection, which came after a four-hour delay and arm-twisting by House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi, sets up a vote in the House of Representatives almost immediately. If the bill is defeated then, it cannot be brought back until next year. One committee member abstained from voting and another member proved pivotal to the outcome.

Rep. Richard Ross told The Associated Press he dropped his support for the bill after the owners of the Plainridge horse trotting track in his district said they would rather take a shot at the House passing a bill to install slot machines at the state's four racetracks than seek to amend Patrick's proposal to allow those machines as well as the casinos.

"I got a loud and clear message from my district ... that they really wanted me to vote for the adverse report," Ross said. "Really, until the eleventh hour, 59th minute, I was on the phone."

Patrick's bill proposed licensing three casinos spread across Massachusetts. It called for a licensing fee of at least $200 million each, and he projected it would generate $400 million in annual revenues and thousands of permanent jobs.

The committee vote followed a marathon public hearing Tuesday, where members of the committee heard from opponents and supporters, including Patrick, who all but conceded the bill was heading for likely defeat.

Patrick blamed the expected defeat in part on pressure from House leaders, including DiMasi.

 

[jetset]

Back to the drawing board....

MASS. HOUSE REJECTS CASINO PLAN (Update)

Six hour debate culminates in a defeat (for now) for the Governor

Already burdened with a 'not recommended' tag from the Massachusetts legislature's Joint Committee on Economic Development, a bill proposing the introduction of three resort-style land casinos in the state was effectively rejected in a House of Representatives vote this week. The proposal, put forward by Governor Deval Patrick, included a clause seeking to ban Internet gambling.

After an impassioned six-hour debate, representatives voted 106-48 to send the bill to a study committee, effectively defeating the measure and ensuring it won't come back up for debate until next year at the earliest, reports Associated Press.

House Speaker Sal DiMasi engineered a pivotal committee vote against the bill. After the vote, he said "big money special interests lost," while the people of Massachusetts won.

Patrick predicted the casinos would have generated $400 million in annual tax revenue.

Robert Haynes, Massachusetts president of the AFL-CIO and a supporter of the bill, says he's profoundly disappointed in the vote and in the process.

 

[jetset]

Interesting stats on Mass. gambling

THE BAY STATE LIKES TO GAMBLE

State lost out on $233 million in tax last year

The recent furore in the Massachusetts state legislature over Governor Deval Patrick's rejected proposal to launch three land resort casinos and ban online gambling has focused attention on the state and its gambling proclivities, with a recent study indicating that neighbouring states are reaping big rewards from Massachusetts players.

A new study has found Massachusetts residents spent $1.1 billion at Connecticut casinos and Rhode Island slot parlours last year, generating more than $233 million in tax revenues for those states.

Researchers at the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth found that Bay State citizens spent $846 million at Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun in Connecticut, and $195 million at Twin River and Newport Grand in Rhode Island in 2007.

The fifth annual study by professor Clyde Barrow says Massachusetts residents made more than eight million visits to gambling facilities in other New England states in 2007.

 

[just play]

I think we (Massachusetts) are the biggest gambling state in United States.

I wonder how I would find that out?

 

[just play]

I mean in scratch tickets and numbers draws.

 

[jetset]

Update

IT AIN'T OVER UNTIL THE GOVERNOR SINGS (Update)

Massachusetts chief ploughs ahead with $189 000 casino study despite recent House defeat

The Boston Globe reports that Governor Deval Patrick is pushing forward with a $189 000 casino study, even though his plan for bringing casino-style gambling to the state is dead in the water until at least next January following a debate by the state legislature (see previous InfoPowa reports) .

Responding to questions about the study, Daniel O'Connell, state economic development secretary, released a statement this week saying that his office will allow Spectrum Gaming of New Jersey to complete its work.

Spectrum has spent about a month on the three-month contract, but the company has yet to bill the state for any of its work. O'Connell said the administration was sticking with the contract based on questions from lawmakers during the casino debate, which ended when the House killed Patrick's bill for three resort-style land casinos last week. The Patrick bill also contained a clause making Internet gambling in the state a felony.

"We have been encouraged by our colleagues in the Legislature to obtain a credible and objective analysis of the impact of expanded gambling in the Commonwealth," the statement said. "We believe the outcome of this analysis will prove valuable for future public policy decisions."

But one legislative leader said yesterday that the study will be stale by the time the issue reaches the Legislature in its next session, which begins in January, and recommended that the contract be terminated to save money.

"The administration should pay the consultants for the time already put into the study and be done with it," said state Representative Daniel E. Bosley, co-chairman of the committee that made a negative recommendation on the casino plan last week. "If the governor files his casino bill again next year, the study will be almost a year old at that time."

State legislators had earlier defeated the governor's casino plan by 108 to 46.

 

[jetset]

Update

MASSACHUSETTS CASINO BID MAY MAKE A COMEBACK

Governor Deval Patrick does not give up easily....

The furore in the Massachusetts Legislature earlier this year, which ended in the defeat of a proposal by Governor Deval Patrick to introduce three large land casinos to the state to improve tax revenues, could be on the cards again according to a report in the Boston Globe this week.

Online gambling observers will be watching developments closely, as the original proposal included a deeply buried clause banning online gambling in the New England state.

Patrick told a Brookline Chamber of Commerce audience that he may yet resurrect the proposal, adding that he wasn't basing his statement on the possible departure of House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi, a major gambling opponent, but on a confluence of other factors.

The governor cited an unyielding need for property tax relief; the possibility of slot machines at the state's racetracks and ongoing efforts by the Wampanoag Indians to build their own casino, opining that these factors will re-ignite the casino debate.

"There's a lot of interest in it, and issues that die in one session don't die a permanent death. They tend to come back over time," the governor said later.

Under one scenario, Patrick said, casino gambling supporters might try to expand the slot machine bill to include the resort-style casinos proposed by the governor. Patrick projected that his plan for three casinos would generate at least $600 million in licensing fees, $400 million in annual tax revenues and 20 000 permanent jobs.

Speaker DiMasi led the effort to kill the governor's casino plan earlier this year (see previous InfoPowa reports). The Boston Democrat argued the revenues would be offset by social and economic costs, including lost business at traditional tourist destinations.

More recently, though, potential successors to the House Speaker's chair have been jockeying for position as DiMasi faced allegations of ethical lapses. The Globe reports that DiMasi has said he's not leaving, and Patrick answered a flat "no" when asked whether his comments in Brookline were rooted in a suspicion the speaker would soon depart.