By JANE ROH
Courier-Post - August 25, 2009
Legislators challenge federal ban on wagers
New Jersey officials were pleased with Monday's ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, citing unwanted competition for an already-ailing Atlantic City. But some looked ahead to a larger battle over sports gambling across the country.
"I absolutely support sports betting in New Jersey," said Democratic state Sen. Jim Whelan, who chairs a committee with oversight of the gambling industry. "Sports betting is not a huge moneymaker in and of itself, but it's a tremendous marketing tool. It brings people to town."
The 1992 federal statute banned sports gambling except in Delaware and three other states because they had already permitted some form of game wagers. At the time, Delaware had allowed only parlay betting on football games.
In another suit, New Jersey state Sen. Raymond Lesniak is challenging the federal law because it does not apply to all states equally. Colleagues backing him argue that sports gambling is already rampant, and that states should be able to participate both as regulators and revenue seekers.
"The money we spend to investigate and prosecute this behavior is not just revenue [opportunities] lost, it's tens of billions of dollars lost," said Assemblyman Lou Greenwald, budget committee chairman. That Delaware lost in Monday's ruling "is good for New Jersey today, but bad for New Jersey in the long term."
Whelan agreed, adding that outlawing sports gambling has done little to stop game-fixing and other shoddy practices.
"There's a much greater threat to the integrity of sports through illegal betting than legal betting. The scandals in college basketball haven't come out of Las Vegas," Whelan said. "Casinos have a vested interest in running a straight game. ... [Pete] Rose wasn't betting in casinos in Vegas."
http://www.courierpostonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009908250347
Courier-Post - August 25, 2009
Legislators challenge federal ban on wagers
New Jersey officials were pleased with Monday's ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, citing unwanted competition for an already-ailing Atlantic City. But some looked ahead to a larger battle over sports gambling across the country.
"I absolutely support sports betting in New Jersey," said Democratic state Sen. Jim Whelan, who chairs a committee with oversight of the gambling industry. "Sports betting is not a huge moneymaker in and of itself, but it's a tremendous marketing tool. It brings people to town."
The 1992 federal statute banned sports gambling except in Delaware and three other states because they had already permitted some form of game wagers. At the time, Delaware had allowed only parlay betting on football games.
In another suit, New Jersey state Sen. Raymond Lesniak is challenging the federal law because it does not apply to all states equally. Colleagues backing him argue that sports gambling is already rampant, and that states should be able to participate both as regulators and revenue seekers.
"The money we spend to investigate and prosecute this behavior is not just revenue [opportunities] lost, it's tens of billions of dollars lost," said Assemblyman Lou Greenwald, budget committee chairman. That Delaware lost in Monday's ruling "is good for New Jersey today, but bad for New Jersey in the long term."
Whelan agreed, adding that outlawing sports gambling has done little to stop game-fixing and other shoddy practices.
"There's a much greater threat to the integrity of sports through illegal betting than legal betting. The scandals in college basketball haven't come out of Las Vegas," Whelan said. "Casinos have a vested interest in running a straight game. ... [Pete] Rose wasn't betting in casinos in Vegas."
http://www.courierpostonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009908250347
