Divide and Conquer
Adelson Funded study that is iGaming Out Moving, To No One’s Surprise
Las Vegas Sands CEO Sheldon Adelson has funded a four-state study that, needless to say, doesn’t come up in favor of iGaming.
The benefit of studies is, you can generally speaking cause them to support almost any viewpoint on just about anything, depending on who is included and exactly how you interpret the information. And if it is mega-billionaire Las Vegas Sands CEO Sheldon Adelson funding the findings, you may be sure the scholarly studies will go any which way you want ’em to.
Adelson No Fan that is iGaming Himself
It is no news that Adelson for reasons that are maybe not totally clear to your rest of the mostly pro-iGaming casino industry is vehemently, adamantly in opposition to the entire concept of Internet gambling. He has been proven to refer to the very concept as ‘a cancer tumors waiting to happen’ and ‘a toxin which all good people need to resist,’ and also funded TV and print advertisements earlier this summer towards that end.
Now Adelson’s commissioned poll results with this topic are obtained and released by Nevada public affairs reporter Jon Ralston. The findings focus on four potentially key states in this matter: California, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Kentucky. Kentucky? Who knew. And even seasoned journalist Ralston who hosts the nightly Las Vegas political news show ‘Face to Face’ has noted on his weblog that the findings of this research had been ‘quite startling’; mainly, the rather demonstrably self-serving leanings towards land gaming and away from the web form of the same. Namely, legal brick-and-mortar casinos were found to be ‘a means to build revenue for the state,’ with approval ratings ranging from a lot of 66 percent in Pennsylvania (which includes already proved the maximum amount of using their present development in that arena), 61 percent in Kentucky, 57 per cent in California and 54 percent in Virginia.
But the opinions on iGaming were not quite therefore friendly.
State Budget Crises Affect Outlooks
Particularly interesting there is that neither Kentucky nor Virginia actually have any land that is legal at this juncture in time. For Pennsylvania and California, the support stemmed mostly from a desire to help offset state budget deficits, despite the fact that land-based casino saturation nationwide is already starting to rear its ugly head and there is certainly more flatlining to come, according to some industry experts. In fact, the latest land casino to get up in Pennsylvania Isle of Capri, positioned in southwestern area Farmington has already been forced to layoff 15 % of its workforce only two months after opening.
Virginia study participants reportedly showed a disdain for ‘Las Vegas-style gaming.’ We guess that’s diverse from state, ‘Indian casino-style gaming’ or ‘politicians-from-the-suburbs-style gaming.’ Exactly What?
Where this study that is supposedly unbiased interesting is with its reported findings on Internet gambling, however. Because, according to this study, in most four queried states, 3x as much of those who participated would not have positive view of iGaming, with an general average margin off 66-22 on the ‘ we do not want it’ side of the fence. Dependent on wording (surprise, shock), the views shifted slightly, and Kentucky and Virginia individuals stated many vehemently that they were in favor of online casino bans, by 63-27 and 55-33 margins respectively.
The poll did not plainly differentiate between general Internet gambling and poker that is online se, however, and before anybody freaks out an excessive amount of about what any one of this might potentially mean for the future of state-by-state iGaming being regulated and legalized, keep in mind that, according to poker advocate Marco Valerio back 2011, 67 percent of New Jerseyans were dead set against online gambling enterprises, so we see how that played out.
Supreme Court Judge Rejects Challenge to New York Casino Referendum
Tioga Downs lets its feelings be understood in no free play lobstermania slot uncertain terms regarding New York State’s upcoming casino referendum by voters. (Image source: Ithacajournal.com)
A New York State judge has refused a challenge to the wording of the latest York’s upcoming casino referendum, paving the way for voters in the state to vote on the measure in November.
The lawsuit had been dismissed by State Supreme Court Justice Richard M. Platkin, who found the challenge that is legal be ‘untimely and lacking in legal merit.’
Delayed Vote Shot Down
That had been a big blow to opponents for the measure, who had hoped that they are able to delay a vote, or at least change the wording that could appear on the ballot. The case was brought up by Brooklyn bankruptcy lawyer Eric J. Snyder, who objected towards the language used in the referendum question. On the ballot, the measure will be described as ‘promoting work development, increasing aid to schools and permitting regional governments to lessen property taxes.’
That had been the language which had been authorized by the State Board of Elections in which consulted with Governor Andrew Cuomo to craft the measure july. The governor is a strong supporter of the measure, and crafted a wide range of compromises and addresses different passions in hawaii to make this kind of proposal feasible.
However, Snyder and others said that the language used was unjust. Since the language included suggested good outcomes of the casino expansion, it could unfairly bias the total outcomes of the referendum. These issues gained additional merit when a poll by Siena College found that help for the ballot referendum increased by nine percentage points as soon as the positive language was included, compared to when more neutral language was used.
Justice Platkin dismissed these claims, though. He said that Snyder’s lawsuit had been filed far after the window that is 14-day which challenges to ballot-language are permitted had passed. That screen began on August 19 or even August 23, according to Snyder, though that could have made little difference and the challenge wasn’t made until October 1.
Naturally, the state was delighted that their arguments that are legal accepted, and that the vote would go on as planned.
‘We’re happy that Judge Platkin accepted the legal arguments which we raised and that the election process can continue moving forward,’ said Board of Elections spokesman Thomas Connolly.
Opponents Voice Disappointment
Meanwhile, opponents of the measure were predictably let down by the decision.
‘We’re disappointed that the judge opted for to block a legitimate discussion on the merits of whether hawaii gamed the language of the casino amendment to tilt New Yorkers to a yes vote,’ said a statement by the latest York Public Interest analysis Group (NYPIRG).
But Snyder says that he’s not done yet. He plans to find emergency relief from the courts that are appellate and points out that the Board of Elections had the opportunity to use an earlier form of the referendum suggested by the state attorney general’s office that did not range from the ‘advocacy language.’
‘Ignoring the attorney general’s recommendation, the Board of Elections changed the neutrally worded casino amendment by adding language to gain voter support,’ Snyder told The nyc occasions.
If the measure should pass, it would mention to seven brand new casino resorts to selected regions of the Empire State. They would join a quantity of existing casinos that are owned and operated by indigenous US groups throughout the area.