Online Casinos Directory

The state of Indiana has a great gambling industry. There are casinos and people come from neighboring states to support the industry. Their hefty bankrolls bring a lot of revenue to the state’s hefty list of expenses. Due to its popularity in the state, Indiana is putting together a legislative panel to study the various aspects of gambling in the state.

One of the solutions the panel came up with was to allow riverboat casinos to move inland. The move would keep gamblers from leaving the state to go to land-based casinos in neighboring states. Senator Luke Kenley said, “As in any other industry, particularly those that cater to retail consumers, it is all about location. We think their ability to go to a better location would increase their volume and the amount of business they could do.”
Indiana is hoping that making the move will capitalize on the power of gambling and bring the revenues available to new heights. Like most post-recessionary budgets, Indiana is struggling to make ends meet. The huge deficit is weighing heavily on the minds of legislators and bringing in more gambling money is a priority on the list of issues to cover. Everyone knows that gambling is lucrative, but how to channel the money and close out competition, is a hot topic.

Moving riverboats to land does have a price however, The legislative panel found that states need to charge riverboats for the move. The study also confirmed that taxes should remain the same for riverboat casinos. Indiana lawmakers have had to revisit their gambling laws because of increased competition from neighboring states. Ohio, in particular, is going to make a big jump into the casino industry, with four casinos planned, one each in Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Toledo. The added competition has Indiana legislators on edge and they are hoping to brace for the change. For a long time Indiana had a corner on the market of gambling, but now that Ohio is entering the market with four state-of-the-art casinos, Indiana lawmakers are worried. They know that only if they make serious changes in the market and continue to develop for customers, they may lose a great market share to Ohio.

Massachusetts is in the midst of debates over casino gambling. Governor Duval Patrick has been making moves to expand gambling within the state. He is a strong supporter of the move and sees the revenue potential as a huge advantage to state coffers. One thing that legislators all over the country know is that gambling is lucrative. There are huge dollars to be had in the market of gambling and with states under the stress of deficits, it’s a hard thing to pass up.

Recently, Patrick met with anti-gambling representatives to discuss the effects gambling has on society as a whole. Patrick said, “I think the points that were made when we met about refreshing the analysis of both the economic cost benefit and also the human impact are very well taken. I have commended that idea forward to the Speaker and the Senate President.” 

Part of gambling for the state is resting on the social cost of bringing it into the state. Critics believe that increasing gambling would have a huge effect on society. Not only will in increase crime, corruption and money laundering, but it also will increase the number of gambling addiction in the state. Those addicts will then be in need of care and counseling, but a good portion won’t get help. The fear is that the portion that doesn’t get help will fall into financial disasters like foreclosure, homelessness and other addiction-related issues. Without the proper safeguards built into the system, allowing gambling into the state will surely create additional problems for everyone involved.

The Speaker of the House is Robert DeLeo and the Senate President is Therese Murray. Both have supported the move to expand gambling in the state due to financial reasons. They know how hefty profits could be and want the state to give it a chance to help turn around the economy. Patrick relied heavily on his pro-gambling stand when campaigning for his office and voters were supporting. They believed too that gambling would be able to fund various state initiatives like education, expansion and public works programs. Many experts believe that it is why he won the vote.

Who would have though the question of smoking would meet up with gambling? First of all there is the smoking issue. Many people believe that smoking is a contributor to the rate of lung cancer and smoke-related illnesses. They also believe that smoking inhibits the breathing capabilities of those around smokers. Second-hand smoke has been a huge argument throughout the past decade or so and a lot of the push to eliminate smoking revolves around second-hand smokers. 

So where does gambling come into the mix? Casinos. The latest issue has started in the state of Michigan. Lawmakers are saying that second-hand smoke should be banned, but not in the state’s casinos. The decision was a compromise legislators made and will most likely be signed off on by the Governor within the next few weeks. The argument is under a lot of criticism since legislators seem to have completely opposing beliefs when it comes to non-casino public areas. 

Banning smoking in all areas except casinos is a bold move by legislators. Smoking is still allowed on the gaming floor, although it won’t be allowed in bars and restaurants. Republicans are trying to support their position that if smoking is considered to be illegal, then it should be illegal in all areas. This new smoking ban makes Michigan the 38^th state to try to ban smoking. Legislators have become more and more aware of the difficulties of this smoking issue. Employees are a focus of the concerns legislators have and they say that workers at casinos should not be exposed to smoking for the durations of their shifts. 

Casinos have worked to find exemptions from the ban. They want their customers to be allowed to smoke. Traditionally, a good portion of smokers visit casinos for gambling fun and casinos don’t want to lose that market, or any portion of it. They want to build a refuge for smokers. Other cities are reporting that when their areas banned smoking, there was a marked decline in customers and in turn, revenues. Michigan casinos know that their revenues are threatened if they are forced to ban smoking. They want to avoid that at all costs due to their numbers already being down due to the recession. Losing more money, could put them in such difficult positions they won’t be able to sustain themselves.

Pennsylvania is drawing criticism on a new move to include millions of dollars in gambling revenue in the state’s 2010/2011 budget. Why? Because gambling is not yet legal in the state. Lawmakers are taking a lot of slack because of their premature decision to include the revenue. They originally were on track to legalize and regulate gambling early last year and everyone thought that they soon would join the increasing number of states accepting gambling as a viable money-raising option to the market. Now—over 9 months later, a decision has still not bee made.

Part of the problem is that legislators are torn. It’s the age-old argument. On one side the money is attractive. On the other side, the social price of gambling is frightening. In particular, Pennsylvania’s critics of legalizing gambling are citing the threat it poses to the most vulnerable—the elderly and the underage. Both demographics are being noted as prone to gambling addictions. In particular the elderly are being singled out due to their limited incomes. For example, if an elderly person who relies on Social Security checks to get them through their month of expenses starts putting that money towards gambling, instead of bills, they could financially dissolve their life. It could lead to foreclosure, homelessness, and overall depression. Critics are asking if the state has the necessary resources to handle the added stress of people falling into problems in mass numbers.

So far there is no agreement regarding gambling or whether or not it should be legalized. Penn State University is an organization with a vested interest in the decision. Spokesperson for the company Lisa Powers said, “So far we are about $150 million behind and we have been dipping in reserves. Every day we do that it costs Penn State’s students and their families.” Due to the lag in a decision, state-funded programs at the university are in limbo. No one knows if they will get funding, or have to be cut from the budget altogether. All parties involved—whether on the support side or not—are waiting very impatiently for an answer. Hopefully the issue will be cleared up in a few short months of further negotiations and talks.

Internet gambling is the newest fad in the US market. Legislators everywhere are looking to gambling as a means of creating additional revenue streams for suffering economies. Senator Harry Reid has discussed the issue and committed himself to doing what is best for the state of Nevada under his lead. Regarding internet gambling, he has said that he will listen to the people and watch the market to see if both are ready to move forward. Since his commitment first began, however he has seen it as a detrimental move for the state’s economy and has been a staunch critic of the pastime. While other states are embracing internet gambling, Reid is not.

Though he is firm in his belief some experts are chiming in on his position. They believe that if he is truly trying to do what is best for his state, he will consider rethinking the internet gambling issue. Representative Barney Frank has been vocal and proactive about bringing internet gambling to the US market. He has fought hard to come up with an amendment to the UIGEA and has a code in place to legalize and regulate gambling.

Despite moves to legalize gambling, Reid is a formidable opponent to the move. His vote could become crucial to the upcoming battle in Congress over the question of internet gambling legalization. Many gaming analysts believe that the best move for the state of Nevada would be to bring legalized online gambling to the state. They say that if the state could flesh out a viable legislation to regulate it, Nevada would become a forerunner in the field. Casinos in the state already are split on the idea, however. For example, Wynn Resorts is against internet gambling claiming that it would considerably hinder its own company growth. On the other hand Harrah’s Entertainment has already made legal moves to prepare itself for internet gambling affiliations.

Regardless of what happens, it will take lawmakers time to sort through the issue of regulating online gambling within the state. Reid is left holding the bag too—he has to make a decision on the issue. Currently the issue is at the head of discussions and a decision should be coming soon.

When it comes to gambling, people have been doing it for years. Some people gamble on NFL games, some gamble on scratch tickets and some gamble on derivatives. A legislator in Washington is looking to extend gambling law to the practice of betting on the stock market. Senator Maria Cantwell is trying to make a move to equate gambling on the stock market and gambling on a sporting event. She is not alone in her quest and many believe that she has a valuable and valid point to the argument of gambling and its legalization.

Michael Greenberger, Law Professor at the University of Maryland, said, “She’s [Cantwell] is going for the jugular. It’s nothing else than betting. Las Vegas casinos were regulated, but betting on Wall Street wasn’t.” Though Cantwell’s argument is a unique one, she is gaining a lot of steam within the ranks of other legislators. Many believe that gambling on the stock market is still what it is: gambling. It should be regulated like any other practice of betting in the US. She wants legal gambling on Wall Street to officially become illegal.

Cantwell also made other bold statements, including calling the unregulated area of derivatives the impetus for causing the financial problems of the recession for the US. Her belief is that if the US is to recover and not fall back into another economic downturn, changes need to happen. She is now attempting to overturn the 2000 law that keeps states from using gambling laws to stop the derivative market. She believes that its power to detrimentally affect the economy is a call for strict regulation.

Over the past few months Senator Cantwell has become powerful among the ranks of the Senate. In fact, she is so powerful that Wall Street leaders have contacted her and requested an official “truce” on the issue. They state that they will accept some regulation, want 30% of their derivative market left unregulated by the government. Cantwell does not see that as a possibility and stated firmly that she believes that all of Wall Street should be regulated and won’t stop her quest until it is.

The expansion of online gambling is opening the door for many additional concerns in the market. A lot of critics of legalizing gambling believe that it will open the door for crime, corruption and addiction. Though studies have been done and there is no conclusive evidence yet to support the claim, there are still more instances of illegal activities regarding gambling cropping up in the US. For example, recently Murray, Utah was the location of a crackdown on illegal gambling operations. In the end five people were arrested for illegal activities at the Fortune Cyber café. Each person had a record and was charged with felony counts of money laundering.

Anyone who has watched the developments in gambling throughout the world also knows about the issues in Poland. Poland was rocked recently by a slew of politicians who were taking under-the-table money for gambling-related activities. The whole scandal was deemed “Blackjack-gate” by locals. It was a highly embarrassing time for the Prime Minister and recently the country decided to leave gambling to land-based casinos only. Off-cite casinos and gambling activities are now considered illegal and many have been closed down.

These are just two instances of recent media frenzies surrounding gambling in the world. The interesting thing is that gambling still isn’t legalized and laws regarding it are not yet completely formulated. If this is how the pastime is shaping up already, many critics are worried about what will happen once it is formally adopted into law. Maybe critics of legalizing gambling have a point—it could potentially open the door for a slew of other problems that countries are not yet ready to handle. One analyst stated that the best thing countries can do is prepare for problems. He believes that countries that are writing gambling rules should start factoring in funds for wider addiction services and stronger police task forces. Each one will be in place to handle problems that occur regarding gambling and its legalization. Without being prepared, societies are going to have more problems once gambling reaches their economies. Sure, there are millions of dollars at stake, but if most of the money needs to be used for keeping things in order, is it really an advantage?

The issue of online gambling seems to be divided in two segments. On one hand you have the legislators who believe that without the huge gambling dollars, budgets and deficits will continue to be unmanageable. On the other hand you have the ethical-based organizations that believe that gambling accepted into mainstream culture will inevitably usher in crime, corruption and addictions.  It has yet to be seen which faction is right because a lot of the way gambling is developing is an unknown. This is the first time the US is making a move to formally legitimize and regulate the pastime. No one really knows how the rules are going to turn out or if gambling is going to provide the consistent millions of tax-revenue dollars politicians are hoping for.

One caution many legislators are receiving is their quick decisions to rely on gambling revenues. Some legislators are already working projected revenues from gambling into their 2010 budgets. Critics are warning that this is a bold move—without knowing 1) if the gambling dollars are really going to reach projections and 2) if the gambling dollars will be consistent—it is difficult to then earmark money to various programs in coming years. For example, Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell proposed the state’s com9ing budget and gambling revenues have already been apportioned out to cover public works and education funding. Though this sounds like a good idea, many critics are encouraging Governor Rendell and other legislators to take a step back and realize that gambling money may not be as stable and reliable as they would like to think.

Although many people are interested in gambling and the numbers have not yet dwindled, there is still an unknown factor to how gambling is going to sort itself out in the 2010 economy. There could be major changes throughout the next decade on how many people are gambling, how much they gamble, where they gamble and what encourages them to gamble. No one knows the answers just yet and making gambling money a sure-fire cure for budget funding may prove to be an unwise decision for legislators to make. Even those in support of legalization and regulation of gambling are warning legislators to move ahead on the issue with caution.

“Californians have a right to know the truth about the size of the problem our state is facing and the steps we will take to solve our deficit. That is why I am proposing two May Revision Budgets today to ensure the people of this state are informed and are not surprised by what is coming,” said Governor Schwarzenegger. “With the continued global recession we face a certain $15.4 billion shortfall and, if $6 billion in February budget solutions are rejected on May 19 that number will increase to $21.3 billion.”

The above statement made by the Governor is indicative of the huge financial problem the state is having. To manage, lawmakers have been contemplating the legalization of online poker gambling. If the state could settle the issue, they would be one of the first US states to potentially successfully work gambling into the budget.

The battle over legalizing internet poker, however, is getting tricky within the state of California. Currently there are a group of casinos in California that want the blessing of legislators before they move along with their expansion plans. The group is citing the fact that millions of people in the country play online poker and many are moving to offshore websites due to the lack of legalization in this country. Patrick Dorinson, spokesman for the Morongo Band of Mission Indians, said, “About one million Californians are playing poker offshore now.” The casinos want to bring money back into the country and keep it in California. That is the stance they are taking as they petition lawmakers to make a formal ruling on the activity of internet gambling.

The group of casinos is also focusing on making sure that lawmakers build provision into law that will protect online players against any dangers that may come from playing on international casino websites. Indian tribes would have to sign off on any new laws to the state’s gambling industry. There are currently laws in place that protect the tribes against expansion, but they may be willing to rework those compacts for a chance to offer online poker to residents of the US and namely the state of California.

When it comes to legalizing gambling, no state has had the year that Massachusetts has. This past year the state has debated out the issue with two sides drawing stanch lines in the sand against each other. The state us under huge financial strains as a result of the recession. One of the distinctions of this state, however, is that prior to the recession, it had a huge budgetary problem. Way back in 2006 the state was having difficulties making the budget during its fiscal year. Then the recession happened and made it even worse. As a result, legislators are pushing hard for legalizing gambling in an effort to bring in the huge gambling tax revenue dollars.

One of the biggest issues the state has is that lottery gambling is down. In former years lottery gambling was one of the most lucrative activities the state supported. It relied on money from lotteries to fund various state programs. Unfortunately, the recession brought many changes to the state’s economy. Once the recession began the unemployment rate skyrocketed. Many people who formerly had the discretionary funding needed to pay for extras, like the lottery, suffered and had to cut extra spending out of their budgets. It hit the state’s economy hard and cut millions of dollars from their budget.

Another issue regarding the lottery is that the state cut a good deal of its advertising budget due to the recession. That drastically added to the problem of a lagging lottery sales number. It was a circle that had many problems—the state didn’t have the advertising budget to promote the lottery and without more lottery money, budgets declined.

Governor Duval Patrick is also in the midst of trying to defend himself against former ally Timothy Cahill. Cahill ran against Patrick for governor of the state. He took the platform during his campaign that Patrick never managed the state’s funds properly.  His primary stance during campaigning was to bash Patrick’s actions and lack of good planning with taxpayer money. Now that the two are squaring off, Patrick is left to piece together and repair the lottery industry. In the mean time, the state is working to expand its gambling casinos to bring in more money.