Online Casinos Directory

Many states are in the midst of debating out gambling. Legislators are fully aware of the billions of tax revenue dollars that are available through gambling and want to capitalize on it. Part of the push is the struggling financial state most states are in. Since the recession, states have had to manage budgets that are down farther than they have been in history. The recession left huge deficits and financial distress for people to deal with and that includes state legislators. Though they have debated various solutions to the problems, there are few options other than gambling that would consistently bring in the millions needed to turn things around. Gambling is a market that is not only wildly lucrative, but also growing exponentially. Because of that, legislators believe that it is the most viable option for bringing in the money needed to sustain public works programs, expansion, education, road construction and other initiatives.

New Jersey is a state that is now debating gambling, but rather than taking the issue to congress, the state’s legislators are holding meetings to make changes. These meetings are a forum to debate the pros and cons of gambling and how to effectively implement gambling into the market if it is legalized. This is a major concern for many anti-gambling believers. They are concerned about the implementation of gambling and believe that legislators are not ready to handle the issues legalizing gambling would bring. For example, one main problem is addictions. They believe that if gambling is legalized it would inevitably bring an increase in the number of addicts in communities. The questions are: Do legislators have enough addiction resources for addicts? Can the current facilities handle the added problems and people who will need help? Do casinos advertise enough help for those who think that they may be in need of future addiction services? These are just some of the concerns that are going to be addressed at the forum New Jersey is holding and hopefully tangible answers will be found. Without them, the state could be entering into more trouble if it decides to legalize gambling. The proper regulatory system is a primary focus.

The question of poker play is still up for debate in many different areas of the world. Sure some are ready to accept the hobby as a legal activity, but others are still holding out. The question of legalizing gambling is still not a slam-dunk by any means. For example, even in the US the question is being debated. There is a strong contingency pushing for legalization of online gambling and its regulation. They believe that there are billions of dollars available and the US would be foolish to continue to rely on the UIGEA for its gambling stance. The UIGEA of course bans financial institutions from handling gambling transactions. As a result, millions of gamblers in the US moved to offshore companies for their gambling needs. It means that they are still going to gamble, but if they can’t do it legally within the state’s borders, then they are going to do it anywhere they legally can.

On the other hand there is a strong portion of the US legislature that believes in denying gambling. They believe that it will inevitably bring in too much crime, corruption, addiction, and money laundering for the US to handle. They believe that the ethical cost will be too hefty and the US will regret the move despite the billions of dollars gambling may bring in. The same debate is raging all over the world. Hong Kong for example is having the same problem, but opting on the side of caution. Police closed down Hong Kong Poker House recently and ended up arresting almost 200 people in the process. The location was raided by the police force about ten minutes after wagers began and those arrested had to pay out about 300 HK dollars to et in on the tournament. It is a sign of how patient the country is with poker and gambling in general. The move was not without controversy though. Insiders at the location stated that there was no “real” money being used and it was simply a “chip game.” that has yet to be investigated, but it still sends a clear cut message to the community as to how gambling and poker are going to be dealt with by law enforcement.

If you look at any US state, legislators are in the middle of heavy debates over the question of legalizing gambling. It is interesting to see the developments in the issue, but overall there are still staunch sides to the issue and they are holding up well against eachother. On one side you have those who are against legalization of gambling. A good portion are completely against the activity’s legalization, but another portion is looking at the issue more conditionally. They believe that gambling should not be legalized without the proper regulatory laws put into place. They aren’t completely against gambling; they are just worried that without the proper laws, gamblers won’t be protected at all. They worry that legalization of gambling will bring an increase in gambling ddiictions without the adequate programs to help people, crime with inadequate police protection to handle it and poverty with no public works programs to aid in fixing the issues. Their belief is that rules need to be put into place that protect players, casinos and the communtiies surrounding gambling organizaitons before any legalization issues are addressed. Currently legalization codes are not adequate to dictate what gambling rules should be.

On the other hand there are the legislators who believe that gambling should be legalized. Their position is that online gambling is a billion-dollar business and the states cannot turn away this kind of revenue at this time. Most states’ economies have been ravished by the recession and without some viable option to help them recover, they are going to continue to have to manage deficits. Gambling is the only billion-dollar money generating activity on the table right now and the legislators are pushing for its legalization. Some states are already earmarking gambling revenues for various public works, development and expansion efforts in years to come. They confidently believe that the money will be brought in once gambling is legalized and regulated under adequate laws. Only time will tell which side wins out, but most likely legalization will happen. State legislators are not going to want to put off the kinds of revenue that is avaliable if they make the move to legalize gambling for good.

As half of 2010 is almost gone, the question of online gambling has yet to be settled. Though there are still strong debates, it seems as if the choice is going to come down to revenue potential. The Ways & Means Committee of the House of Representatives met earlier this week to discuss the ramifications of regulating US online poker. Though it may be difficult to convince some politicians to jump on the bandwagon, others are already well on their way to supporting the move.

Representative McDermott said that prohibition is what has forced a lot of change in the market of online gambling. Namely customers who want to wager online have had to move their playing to offshore companies. This has threatened the online security of players and cost billions of dollars to be fueled into other economies. The bottom line is that if people want to gamble online, they are going to find ways of doing it. If the US doesn’t allow it, they will move to other parts of the world to wager. The global marketplace is making it simple for online users to find any solution to any problem they have in terms of finding ways to gamble.

The Congressional Joint Committee on taxation projected that if online gambling is legalized and regulated, it could potentially bring in as much as $72 billion in revenue over the next decade of time. That is a huge number and with struggling economies from one end of the country to the other, it is a hard proposition to turn down. The hearing of the committee was orchestrated to focus on the financial results of the change in gambling legislation. Though the question of legalizing gambling is still up for debate, there is more evidence to push forward now that the huge tax revenue dollars are available.

In addition to discuss the changes legalizing and regulating gambling would make, the hearing was also called together to prove that there is no current federal law that makes online gambling illegal. Though the UIGEA, or Unlawful Internet gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 was meant to explain internet gambling, it failed to ever define what falls under the category of “gambling.” It is hoped that new discussions define gambling and define what the procedures should be to legalize and regulate gambling as an online market.

Massachusetts is another state that has gambling on its agenda. Since the recession one state after another has been toying with the question of gambling—both online and land-based. Deficits post-recession are huge and legislators are worried that there are few money-generating options to bring in cash needed to overcome financial distress. Without some changes in revenue most states will have to continue to cut programs like education, expansion and various public works planning for the upcoming fiscal year. Since the recession one program after another has been cut down and that is causing a lot of stress for communities. Massachusetts is looking to gambling expansion for a solution to the budget problems.

There was recent controversy though regarding gambling. Online poker was up for debate. Some wanted to deem it illegal and operators were worried that they would then be facing criminal charges. The Massachusetts House of Representatives recently approved a bill that eliminated controversial language dealing with online poker and the state’s continued goal of expanding gambling. This new move brought online gambling closer to being legal and left operators innocent of any wrongdoing. One entity that was particularly thankful for the move was the PPA, or Poker Player’s Alliance. The company was first in line for legal action if online gambling had been made illegal. They released a statement citing their approval of the change in law.

The PPA noted that there were key players who swayed the minds of legislators and were able to help move the cause of legalizing online gambling along. State residents dialogued in mass numbers with state representatives to voice their opinions on the issue. In the end their overwhelming collective voice was a major influence on the outcome. PPA officials stated that the move was the greatest “grassroots” promotional campaign the issue could have received at the most opportune time. Had the PPA been found guilty of braking gambling law, it would have been fined up to $25,000 and operators would have been facing up to a maximum of two years in jail. This new bill is just the start and full legalization of online gambling is expected to happen within the year. Only time will tell what happens to the issue in Massachusetts but most likely it will join in on the gambling fun when it is legalized within the borders.

When looking at the state of gambling throughout the US, some states stand out as forerunners in the market. Gambling is a difficult market to move into immediately because there are no former blueprints to follow. Many states are writing the rules as they go in terms of legalization and regulation of online gambling. Some rules have not yet worked, and have already had to be amended and others have worked and are being strengthened in coming years of implementation. Iowa is one state where casino gambling has taken off and it is a state that is still in the midst of debates over the issue despite its success in the industry.

Bob Vander Plaats, gubernatorial candidate, is coming into his campaign with an anti-gambling stance. He has been very adamant about his disdain for the industry. His main criticism is that the state is well on its way to becoming too dependent on gambling for its revenue-generating activities. His fear is that like Las Vegas, Iowa could potentially make a big mistake by relying on gambling. Las Vegas has built itself up as a gambling Mecca over the years, but once the recession happened, the city was hit hard. It relied mostly on gambling and tourism as its almost sole revenues. Now, it is difficult for the state to regroup and it has yet to recover. During the height of the recession, the city’s legislators noted that 60% of homes in the city were either in foreclosure or owners were already defaulting. Vander Plaats main argument is that if Iowa relies on gambling, it will fall into the same problems as Las Vegas did if any type of financial turmoil happens in the market.

It will be a difficult position for Vander Plaats to stand on because much of the benefit of gambling cannot be denied. Expansion of gambling within the state of Ohio could mean that millions of dollars may be brought in. The state, like others in the US, cannot reasonably deny the huge potential dollars that could be available. Thus far the state has benefited from gambling and it will be hard to change public perception of the value of gambling.

Massachusetts House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo is pushing forward with his plan to expand gambling in the state. He stated that ideally the state should look to increase the money from gambling revenue including slot machine gaming and racinos, or race track/casino combinations. He believes that combined, they are the perfect antidote to a state that is struggling with its budget. Since the recession, the state has suffered greatly, as have most states, and the reality of gambling is making waves in almost every economy.

DeLeo recently made a speech on job creation and the good it would bring to the economy at the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce. He stands firm that the money would be a positive advantage for the state to bring in. A part of the revenue from gambling would be allotted to a special fund to help manufacturers with investments. The reason is that if they are struggling, added revenue can help them to sustain jobs and keep people working without having to use future cutbacks. It also may encourage other people to continue investing in the state and fuel it with more money. DeLeo’s proposal for bringing gambling to the state is vague and that is much of the reason why it has not gained the huge support it was hoping for when it was first introduced.  DeLeo plans to support a bill to the House in coming months that promises to be controversial once it hits the floor.

The question of gambling is a difficult one that every state is wrestling with. They all believe that there is a hefty amount of revenue to be had by bringing slots and race tracks to the state, along with various other types of online gaming and wagering. There is an opposition however that sees the issues increases in gambling would bring about. They cite a greater crime rate, corruption, money laundering and addictions as the main reasons why the states should be careful and not think of gambling as a sure-fire fix to the budget problems created by the recession of 2008/2009. Despite concerns though, there is a strong backing of legislators who continue to push for legalization and regulation of gambling. They see the revenue as a much-needed move if the economies are to survive into the 2011 fiscal year.

The EU has long been trying to regulate online gambling and open the doors to assure free trade. Now, Ireland is a country that is taking a stand and causing some problems within the market. The Irish government has decided to introduce reforms in gambling regulations that will hopefully help to bring in more revenue to the country. This money is being directed to the Greyhound and Horse Racing Fund and is being earmarked to protect the animals involved in each of the entities. Due to the changes, shops in the country of Ireland are now subjected to a 1% tax rate that is going to apply to all online sports betting and online casino websites. Now, that tax rate is on the verge of increasing to 1.5%. It has been estimated that the change will bring in an additional 90 million Euros for the country and for the industry of sports betting overall. Ireland is also hoping that the increase will help to keep local businesses up and running. Since the recession, the Horse and Greyhound Racing Fund has seen a reduction in funding from the government of 13%. This 13% decline is a hefty part of their revenue and means the difference between the companies remaining and having to close.  It is hoped that the added tax will help to bridge the gap and save the industry from folding.

If this increase in taxes was not made, the fear was that the Irish betting industry would close down. Experts cite that online operators are not based in the country and that may provide for a difficult argument. Though they provide a service to sports betters in the country, it may not help the overall economy. Local sports betting locations are struggling since the recession to remain open. The changes, however could force Irish internet gaming companies out of the mix if they are unable to manage the changes in cost due to the added taxation. It is hoped that the tax will increase revenue and cause the markets of Greyhound and Horse Racing Fund, to remain in the industry. Only time will tell what will happen with the industry but hopefully the changes will be positive ones.

The state of Pennsylvania is already including tax-revenue dollars from gambling in its budget for the 2010 and 2011 fiscal years. The state anticipates bringing in millions in revenue from gambling and is eager to already earmark the money for programs and plans for its future. There is one issue though: Gambling has not yet been approved and made legal in the state.  That is a big “issue” of course and many experts are criticisimg the move to count on money from gambling when laws are not yet in place to adequately carry it out through 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.

Legislators are still debatin gthe issue with 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.”

The question of whether or not to legalize online gaming is still up for debate in California. The debate rages all over the country though. Legislators everywhere are voicing their opinions on the issue. On one side there are legislators who believe that without legalizing gambling there are few ways to manage the budget or handle the huge deficits states are under. The money potentially available via tax-revenue dollars on gambling is a difficult thing to pass up in today’s post-recessionary economy. On the other hand are those who believe that the money is good, but not enough to justify the other cost of bringing gambling into various jurisdictions. They believe that legalizing gambling would inevitably bring in money laundering, crime, corruption and addiction in mass numbers.

California is voicing its debate and compulsive gambling experts are saying that legalized online gambling would create more and more problems for the state. California’s first-ever statewide conference on problem gambling drew academics, therapists and government regulators to debate out the issue. Opponents believe that the amount of government funding available is not enough for the potential demand legalizing online gambling throughout the state would create. The two-day meeting during National Problem Gambling Week is continuing as discussions continue in the Capitol on the Morongo Band of Mission Indians’ proposal. The tribe is proposing the creation of a tribal intrastate internet poker consortium in which people would be able to use their laptops and iPhones to play online poker. The state would profit via a portion of the proceeds from the plan though details of the financial plan have yet to be decided on. Of the state, Whittier College Professor I. Nelson Rose, a gambling law expert, said, “It is desperate for money.”

Approximately 24 employees of the county Department of Mental Health’s Substance Abuse Program have been certified by the state to treat problem gamblers thanks to a grant from the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians, which runs a casino near Temecula, officials said.”I think it would be a tremendously bad idea,” William W. Harris, a prevention services coordinator for the county, said of legalizing online card games. Therapists, he said, already see patients — mainly young and homebound people — who play online poker through illegal offshore sites.