IPcentral Weblog
  The DACA Blog

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

Internet Gambling & the Hypocrisy of Focus on the Family
(previous | next)

Declan McCullagh of CNet News reports ("Congress May Roll Dice, Legalize Net Gambling") that some in Congress are reconsidering the wisdom of prohibitions on Internet gambling, which we have discussed here many times before. Declan notes there's another hearing on the issue today and Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) will be discussing his continuing effort to allow Internet casinos to obtain licenses from and be regulated by the federal government:

Frank, who will be testifying during Wednesday's hearing, says that because nearly all states already permit some form of traditional gambling--including lotteries, betting on horse and greyhound racing, and sports wagering -- the federal government should legalize and regulate the online equivalents. Instead of a blanket legalization, his legislation would require the Treasury Department to police the industry and ensure that it takes adequate steps to identify minors and compulsive gamblers.

My TLF colleague Tom Bell has done seminal work in this field and you will definitely want to check out his recent essay, "The UnInGEn-ious Act's Non-Impact on Internet Gambling" and his classic 1999 Cato white paper, "Internet Gambling: Popular, Inexorable, and (Eventually) Legal." What Tom has done better than anyone else is to show that, as is the case with almost every "market activity devoted to the pursuit of happiness," eventually the law will adjust to accommodate these activities. It may take some time for the law to adjust, but it will.

Incidentally, I loved this little gem of a quote that Declan included in his story from the activist group Focus on the Family, which argues of this effort to legalize online gambling:

"This is all about Big Government decriminalizing an addictive, predatory vice in order to exploit more citizens for more money...When federal government tries to cannibalize its own citizens for more revenues, something is wrong."
Wait, what? How can the decriminalization of something about "Big Government." The exact opposite is the case. Look, you can find other excuses to try to regulate "vice" -- although I've always subscribed to the theory that not every sin should be a crime -- but don't ask us to believe that this is about fighting Big Government when Big Government is the one fining people or throwing them in jail for exercising their freedom to enjoy themselves and spend their money as they wish. That's true freedom.

Of course, I would find more sympathy for Focus on the Family's argument if it really was all about fighting the imposition of taxes on Net gambling proceeds. But that's not what Focus on the Family really cares about here. They just want to keep Net gambling banned. And that's true "Big Government" at its worst.

posted by Adam Thierer @ 10:30 AM |

Share |

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly


Post a Comment:

Blog Main
RSS Feed  
Recent Posts
  EFF-PFF Amicus Brief in Schwarzenegger v. EMA Supreme Court Videogame Violence Case
New OECD Study Finds That Improved IPR Protections Benefit Developing Countries
Hubris, Cowardice, File-sharing, and TechDirt
iPhones, DRM, and Doom-Mongers
"Rogue Archivist" Carl Malamud On How to Fix Gov2.0
Coping with Information Overload: Thoughts on Hamlet's BlackBerry by William Powers
How Many Times Has Michael "Dr. Doom" Copps Forecast an Internet Apocalypse?
Google / Verizon Proposal May Be Important Compromise, But Regulatory Trajectory Concerns Many
Two Schools of Internet Pessimism
GAO: Wireless Prices Plummeting; Public Knowledge: We Must Regulate!
Archives by Month
  September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
  - (see all)
Archives by Topic
  - A La Carte
- Add category
- Advertising & Marketing
- Antitrust & Competition Policy
- Appleplectics
- Books & Book Reviews
- Broadband
- Cable
- Campaign Finance Law
- Capitalism
- Capitol Hill
- China
- Commons
- Communications
- Copyright
- Cutting the Video Cord
- Cyber-Security
- Digital Americas
- Digital Europe
- Digital Europe 2006
- Digital TV
- E-commerce
- e-Government & Transparency
- Economics
- Education
- Electricity
- Energy
- Events
- Exaflood
- Free Speech
- Gambling
- General
- Generic Rant
- Global Innovation
- Googlephobia
- Googlephobia
- Human Capital
- Innovation
- Intermediary Deputization & Section 230
- Internet
- Internet Governance
- Internet TV
- Interoperability
- IP
- Local Franchising
- Mass Media
- Media Regulation
- Monetary Policy
- Municipal Ownership
- Net Neutrality
- Neutrality
- Non-PFF Podcasts
- Ongoing Series
- Online Safety & Parental Controls
- Open Source
- PFF Podcasts
- Philosophy / Cyber-Libertarianism
- Privacy
- Privacy Solutions
- Regulation
- Search
- Security
- Software
- Space
- Spectrum
- Sports
- State Policy
- Supreme Court
- Taxes
- The FCC
- The FTC
- The News Frontier
- Think Tanks
- Trade
- Trademark
- Universal Service
- Video Games & Virtual Worlds
- VoIP
- What We're Reading
- Wireless
- Wireline
Archives by Author
PFF Blogosphere Archives
We welcome comments by email - look for a link to the author's email address in the byline of each post. Please let us know if we may publish your remarks.

The Progress & Freedom Foundation