VIRTUAL LAS VEGAS: REGULATE OR PROHIBIT?
With online gambling becoming increasingly
accessible and popular, state and federal politicians are
asking themselves how to make the prohibition on online gambling
effective. Nevertheless, questions still linger as to whether
outright prohibition is truly the right answer.
Introduction
¶
Las Vegas has
officially entered the homes of millions of Americans. Online
gambling is posing a significant threat to traditional gambling
establishments, as we know them. However, along with this
gambling invasion, comes a divisive, policy-driven political
debate over what role the United States government should
take in this flourishing business. The question state and
federal politicians are asking themselves is not whether to
regulate online gambling, as it is currently prohibited in
America, but how to make that prohibition effective. Nevertheless,
questions still linger about whether outright prohibition
is truly the right answer
¶
Regardless of
its legality, online gambling is big business and it is growing
every minute. Over 1,200 offshore Web sites takes bets, and
some analysts estimate that these sites collectively earned
$2 billion in revenue last year. By 2006, these same analysts
project that this revenue amount will triple in size bringing
in $6 billion.1 One
might ask, if gambling is illegal how are Americans able to
still gamble online? Easy, the servers for gambling Web sites
are located in exotic locals, such as Antigua, that do not
prohibit online gambling. Until recently, the process for
foreigners to come in and obtain a license and run a gambling
web site from these countries was relatively painless. Now,
however, countries are becoming more conscious of the perils
of allowing such activities (e.g. fraud, money laundering)
within their country's borders and are taking more serious
measures to adequately regulate the industry.2
¶
Gambling has
been around since Biblical times, and so have the vices that
many believe are inextricably linked to this activity. Therefore,
gambling in the U.S. is only permitted to operate within strictly
regulated guidelines. But, these restrictions are really only
applicable to brick and mortar gambling establishments. The
Internet offers a brand new, and ever-expanding forum that
has seemed to elude the government's strict regulations. And
with other countries permitting online gambling, this business
is truly international in scope.
¶
The 50 individual
states all have laws regarding gambling, but it is becoming
increasingly clear that the federal government that must address
the issue of online gambling. However, the federal government
is not sure how to effectively address the problem. Congress
is resolved to prohibit online gambling in America, but that
resolve has not, as of yet, produced any successful legislation.
This is because Congress is split whether they should expand
already existing gambling legislation to incorporate newer
technology, or to create brand new legislation to specifically
address online gambling. No matter what course Congress takes
all realize that the federal government cannot eradicate online
gambling across the globe given the inconsistency in laws
among the several countries involved in online gambling. Faced
with this challenge Congress must try to prevent access and
participation on the sites by the American public.3
Policy Concerns
¶
The long-standing
concerns that many American's have harbored about gambling
throughout our history are only heightened by the anonymous
and private nature of online gambling. The probability for
dishonest online gambling operations is high considering they
lack all of the regulations their counterparts, brick-and-mortar
casinos, are governed by. Many say this lack of regulation
is the exact reason why online gambling, more so than the
traditional "casino" gambling, encourages the vices that society
seeks to erase.4
¶
For example,
when gambling online, minors do not have the protection of
casino officials verifying their age at the door, so as to
prevent them from succumbing to all of gambling's ills.5 Moreover,
the potential for fraud and the inability to recognize and
control gambling addicts online, provide further motivation
for the government to prohibit all gambling over the Internet.6 The
federal government, propelled by these concerns established
a commission to study the specific impact of online gambling.
This commission, referred to as the National Gambling Impact
Study Commission, produced a report that added several other
factors to the already long list of policy reasons to encourage
outright prohibition of online gambling.7 These
factors include, 1) the potential for abuse by gambling operators
who can alter, move, or entirely remove sites within minutes;
2) the ability of computer hackers or gambling operators to
tamper with gambling software to manipulate games to their
benefit; and 3) the provision of an additional means for individuals
to launder money.8 The
government considers the dual protection of anonymity and
encryption provided by the Internet to online gambling as
a source of many concerns and raises enough issues regarding
criminal activities that online gambling should be prohibited
and criminalized within the 50 states.9
Governmental Regulation
State Action
¶
For the most
part, gambling legislation is largely a matter of state law.
Two states, Utah and Hawaii, prohibit all gambling within
their borders, but other states are not as strict and even
cooperate in state-run lotteries. In the end, with the exception
of Utah and Hawaii, every state has legalized some form of
gambling.10 Gambling
on the Internet, however, presents a much different issue.
Many states that prohibit traditional gambling within their
borders are not as quick to embrace the idea of permitting
their citizens to participate in on-line gambling.11
¶
Online gambling
is banned completely by specific legislation in three states--Nevada,
Louisiana, and Illinois.12 Four
states--Minnesota, New York, Missouri, and Wisconsin--have
actually taken steps to litigate against parties involved
in online gambling by means of already existing laws.13 However,
for the most part, state regulation does not pose a significant
threat to online gambling establishments because their enforcement
has not generally been successful.14 Because
of this, many states have looked to the federal government
to address the public's concerns regarding online gambling
within their respective states.15
Federal Action
¶
A split exists
within the federal government as to what path the United States
government should take in fighting against online gambling.
Currently, according to the Department of Justice, there are
four federal statutes the government can employ to enforce
the illegality of Internet gambling within the United States.16 The
main law prevailing over online gambling is actually a law
that was, at first, created to curb interstate gambling.17 The
"Wire Act of 1961" specifically makes it illegal for gambling
providers to offer or to take bets from gamblers over telephone
lines or through other wire devices unless that specific act
is authorized by a particular state.18 The
term "through other wire devices" gives the Department of
Justice the leeway to prosecute interstate, or international
gambling transactions executed over the Internet. Additionally,
this law covers more than just the taking and/or placing of
bets on the Internet. It also embraces the knowing "use" of
the Internet in connection with a gambling business.19 The
government, through various prosecutions, has interpreted
this law as prohibiting "not only the act of gambling, but
also transmission of any information that makes it possible
to bet in the first place.20
¶
However, with
the further development of wireless communications, the effectiveness
of this bill in curbing online gambling may be in jeopardy.
In 1995, responding to this concern, Senator Kyl introduced
legislation, the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act (IGPA),
to specifically prohibit online gambling.21 This
bill died in committee.22 In
the years following, bills mirroring the IPGA were introduced
in both the House and the Senate, but with no success.23 This
legislative failure is due in large part to the significant
divide in Congress over the effectiveness of not only the
IPGA, but also the effectiveness of an outright ban on online
gambling. Many politicians express concerns that specifically
prohibiting online gambling through legislation such as the
IPGA will have no other effect than to turn away scrupulous
operators. In addition to this overarching concern, Congress
also expressed hesitation because of Indian tribe gaming issues,
and possible jurisdictional issues.24
¶
For now, online
gambling is still, technically, illegal in the United States
under the Wire Act, but this foundation is shaky at best,
and definitely does not eradicate online gambling, or even
come close to putting a dent in it. Why? Because prohibiting
online gambling in the United States forces the judicial system
to wrestle with international jurisdictional issues, along
with the online gambling itself. Prohibiting online gambling
outright would be much easier if this view was supported by
an international coalition. Much to the dismay of American
politicians, a coalition of this sort of organization is nowhere
near fruition; in fact, many foreign countries support online
gambling and profit from its existence.25
International Action
¶
A majority of
the international community permitting online gambling does
so in the form of a licensing program. Antigua and the Caribbean
Islands are two major countries operating such licensing programs.26 The
1994 Antigua and Barbuda Free Trade and Processing Zone Area
Act opened the window in Antigua for online gaming enthusiasts
to gamble online outside of American restrictions.27 Under
this act, a commission is established to create a tax-free
zone where industries, including gambling profits, are tax-free.
However, a business, including an online gambling operator,
must obtain a license from this commission to receive these
tax benefits.28
¶
To ward off
unscrupulous online casino operators, the Antiguan government
has buttressed this with The Antigua and Barbuda Standard
Conditions for the Licensing of Virtual Casino Wagering and
Sports Book Wagering in the Antigua and Barbuda Free Trade
and Processing Zone.29 These
regulations establish certain restrictions that specifically
prohibit the transfer of a license to a third party and the
falsification or willful omission of any information required
as condition for licensing.30 To
fight fraudulent sites, theses regulations also require the
testing of software used to operate online gambling sites.31 Antigua,
due to the great revenue they receives from the licenses,
has a strong impetus to attract legitimate online gambling
operators. Recently, however, Antigua uncovered money-laundering
problems with Russian banks involved in online gambling based
in their country.32 Antigua's
commission on betting and gambling immediately responded by
moving forward to update their current licensing system by
demanding more personal disclosures from license applicants
and more diligent reporting of suspicious financial transactions.33 Antigua,
and many other countries, have chosen to embrace online gambling,
regulate and legitimize it, and make it a profitable enterprise
for the country. This path is one many Americans think the
United States should consider, given the questionable success
the government has had thus far in preventing Americans from
"gambling in their living rooms."
What should the US do?
¶
Internet gambling
has been, and will continue to grow at an enormous rate. It
will never completely disappear, regardless of how many Senators
and Representatives beg and plead for this to happen. The
fact of the matter is that with the invention of a technology
that connects individuals worldwide in a matter of seconds,
come many new issues that are no longer under the complete
control of any one country. The Internet, and online gambling,
is an international undertaking, and therefore is not affected
by the actions of one country acting on its own. Any force
to prohibit, or even regulate the industry effectively must
be made via an international commission that takes action
as one entity. Seeing as this is an ideal concept that does
not seem possible in the near future, perhaps it is possible
to consider what, if anything, the American government can
do to address online gambling? Many answer this question with
one word: Regulation.
¶
There is a growing
sentiment in America that the Internet and technology associated
with it is growing at such an alarming rate, that it is outright
impossible to prohibit online gambling from occurring. Further,
if the government continues to outright prohibit it, instead
of acknowledging its existence and taking steps to regulate
it, the negative aspects that instigated this prohibition
initially will only be exacerbated, and not eradicated. The
United States government should, instead, focus on protecting
the gambler from his/her own vices, and from the fraudulent
actions of others. By taking an active role in regulating
the Internet gambling industry, the government can do just
this.
¶
If America were
to allow online gambling to occur within its borders, politicians
could establish regulation to address the policy concerns
associated with gambling. Measures could be demanded of web
sites to ensure and verify to appropriate authorities that
their gamblers are of legal age. Additionally, mandatory,
monitoring software could be implemented by the web site operators
that could aid in detecting gamblers showing signs of addiction.
Furthermore, to fund these concepts and any additional regulation
found necessary, the government could impose licensing fees
and collect taxes from these online gambling web sites, very
similar to the system already established in Antigua.
¶
The United States
has many valid reasons for placing an outright ban on all
online gambling. However no matter how powerful the reasons,
the ever-changing technology behind the Internet makes it
impossible. By addressing these reasons in the form of a regulation,
the government will at least have a fighting chance at ensuring
that these issues are even remotely addressed and considered
by both the gambler, and the online gambling establishment.
Denying the inherent power associated with online gambling
is no way for the United States government to act. If they
continue to do so, it is probable that the very citizens they
seek to protect from gambling's vices, will be inevitably
injured by them. Adequate protection will only come in the
form of regulation, not prohibition.
By: Cara Franklin
Footnotes
1. Judy DeHaven, Casino Executives Lock Arms Against Internet
Gambling, Newhouse News Services, May 25, 2001.
2. Tony Batt, Antigua Leading Way in Regulating Internet
Gambling, Las Vegas Review-Journal, April 30, 2001.
3. Laura H. Bak-Boychuk, Note: Internet Gambling is Avoiding
Prosecution in the United States as Easy as Moving the Business
Operations Offshore, 6 Sw. J. of L. & Trade Am. 363, 366 (1999).
4. Theresa E. Loscalze & Stephen J. Shapiro, Internet gambling
Policy: Prohibition Versus Regulation, 7 Vill. Sports & Ent.
L. Forum 11, 19 (2000).
5. Id.
6. Id.
7. Hon. James A. Leach, Testimony Before The House Committee
on Banking and Financial Services (June 20, 2000).
8. Id.
9. Id.
10. Jenna F. Karadbil, Note: Casinos of the Next Millennium:
A Look into the Proposed Ban on Internet Gambling, 17 Ariz.
J. Int'l & Comp. Law 413, 418 (2000).
11. Joseph M. Kelly, Article: Internet Gambling Law, 26 Wm.
Mitchell L. Rev. 117, 154 (2000).
12. Id.
13. Id. at 156.
14. Karadbil, supra note x, at 426.
15. Bruce P. Keller, Essay: The Game's the Same: Why Gambling
in Cyberspace Violates Federal Law, 108 Yale L. J. 1569, 1577
(1999).
16. Karadbil, supra note x, at 426-427.
17. Id.
18. 18 USC §§ 1081-1084 (West 1998).
19. Keller, supra note xv, at 1581.
20. Id.
21. Kelly, supra note xi, at 134.
22. Id.
23. Karadbil, supra note x, at 427-432.
24. Id. at 432.
25. Id. at 433.
26. Kelly, supra note xi, at 125.
27. Id, at 128.
28. Id.
29. Id.
30. Id.
31. Id.
32. Batt, supra note ii.
33. Id.