Let your mouth speak archive

CLEVELAND, OH (WOIO) -

Cleveland Police say two friends shot each other over money after a night of gambling.

Cleveland Police were first called out to Clearview Avenue where they located Anthony Smith. Smith had been shot in the both of his arms and his stomach. Moments later, officers were called to Beachwood Avenue where the other friend, Charles Lenix, was found with a gunshot would the stomach.

Both males were transported to MetroHealth Medical Center for treatment.

Upon further investigation, Smith had borrowed some money from Lenix for gambling purposes. When they wrapped up their night, an argument ensued over the money escalating into a physical fight. Smith said he didn't have the cash but offered to pay Lenix with his food stamp card. Lenix said he wanted the cash, and the argument continued. During the fight a handgun was produced and both males ended up shot.

Both males were placed under arrest for Felonious Assault and are awaiting charges.

The Cleveland Division of Police is asking that anyone with information about this incident to contact the Fourth District Detective Bureau at 216-623-5418.

SACRAMENTO —

Illegal online gambling is an estimated $30-billion dollar business worldwide. Now, lawmakers in cash-strapped Calif. want to legalize games, such as online poker, to get a piece of that pie and they could do it this year.

"The issue isn't should people bet online. It's happening already," said Democratic Senator Lou Correa of Anaheim. He has a bill to make online poker legal in California.

Correa said nationwide, six out of every 10 online gamblers are from California and that legalizing online poker could net $250-million dollars in taxes immediately.

"To me, $250-million dollars can hire a lot of teachers for our kids," Correa said.

Nevada is far ahead of California. The state has fast tracked efforts to legalize online gambling after the U.S. Department of Justice ruled selling lottery tickets online was legal. Some states view this as opening the door to other types of online gambling.

"It's pretty foggy. It's clear as mud," said Louis Castle, Shuffle Master Chief Strategy Officer.

Castle is a computer gaming pioneer who recently worked for Zynga, a powerhouse social gaming company that is planning to join the online gambling field. He now works for Las Vegas based Shuffle Master, a maker of unique and patented poker games gearing up to provide those games and security for new online gambling sites.

"Yeah, it's coming. It's coming in a big way and it's going to come to the United States and the question is how," said Castle

It may seem like casinos would hate the idea of online gambling, and some do, but, major casinos such as the MGM Grand do support online gambling but they want it regulated at the federal level.

Now, states such as Nevada and Calif. are drawing up a patchwork of local rules to allow online gambling only within their borders.

"We don't want to see any of it," said pastor James Butler from the California Coalition Against Gambling Expansion. "Pretty soon they'll have an app that will allow you to connect instantly to a casino or a gambling site. Want to lose your home? We have an app for that," Butler said.

Butler also believes online gambling will cost more in social ills than revenue raised for California. He expresses the obvious concern about underage gambling as just one of many potential problems.

"Is there going to be a guarantee that anyone in California who receives social assistance will be banned from those sites? Or will basically the California citizens be subsidizing somebody else's gambling behavior?" said Butler.

Louis Castle believes the security technology, while not fool proof, is mature. "What it really comes down to is, are you doing a really good job of making sure you don't have underage gamblers," Castle said.

"You're out there first, you're able to receive those moneys first," explained Senator Correa.

After years of failed attempts, lawmakers in Sacramento seem ready to take up the question this year.

Playtech is one of the top online gambling specialists. It designs and licenses software for the gambling industry including online blackjack, poker, baccarat, and slot machine casinos.

Playtech Ltd. just announced its strong Q4, 2011 performance as it seeks multiple opportunities worldwide. As the ban on online gambling applies only to online sports betting in the United States, Playtech is looking to take an advantage and pursue business with multiple casinos based in the country. It is also currently in talks with potential partners in the United States.

In addition, Playtech announced recent joint ventures with German and South African partners. As company CEO, Mor Weizer stated, ”Playtech is preparing itself for each and every market to make the most of the changing regulatory landscape.”

The gambling software giant is also looking to expand its offering for Mobile sports betting with its acquisition of sportsbook developer, Geneity.

As mobile casinos as well as online gaming industry continue to grow at the astounding rate, Playtech just announced 89% increase on Q4 2011 earnings compared on a year before. Casino revenues were up 13%, bingo revenues up 9%, while poker revenues declined by 2%. Overall, the revenues for Q4 approached $90 million.

The battle of online gambling software giants

The recent acquisitions and strong performance will allow the company to place itself in a better position in relation to Microgaming, its major competitor. Microgaming directly competes with Playtech for business at real money online casinos with offers that include multiple versions of casino slot and table games.

Both companies prepare themselves for mobile casino games with constant innovations and an expanded marketplace offering. This will only make online casino gambling and sports betting a more exciting venture for punters.

WASHINGTON — The full D.C. Council will take its first vote on repealing the nation’s first government-sponsored online gambling program.

Online gambling was legalized in the nation’s capital last year, but the program was never implemented. Several councilmembers have raised concerns that language about online gambling was not included in the city’s contract with its lottery vendor. The program was then legalized as part of a budget bill that was approved without public comment.

At least eight of the 12 councilmembers have said they support repealing online gambling, although several of those say they are open to the concept if it’s introduced again as a standalone bill. The council will vote on the repeal during Tuesday’s legislative session. :thumbsup

Two bills - one of which could put a roulette table in the palm of a gambler's hand, the other offers multimillion-dollar tax breaks for nongaming development in Atlantic City - cleared the state Senate gaming committee Monday afternoon in Trenton.

Both bills now go to the full Senate for a vote.

Committee Chairman Sen. Jim Whelan, D-Atlantic, said wireless gaming is "an attempt to recognize we have a generation of young adults who are used to getting their recreation and communications from the palm of their hand."

Wireless gaming has been permitted since 2005 in Nevada, where casino patrons can take their games practically everywhere but their rooms.

Attorneys Joseph Tyrell and Joseph Dougherty, who represent the Casino Association of New Jersey, said the group supports the proposal - which would permit authorized games on approved devices within a casino property - because it wants the nation's second-largest gaming jurisdiction to keep current with trends.

They cited other recent examples of gaming halls taking gambling beyond the casino floor, such as Tropicana Casino and Resort's installation of slot machines and electronic table games in The Quarter and the introduction of blackjack tables to The Pool at Harrah's Resort.

"This is an exciting area we need to address, and New Jersey can be the forefront," Tyrell said.

David Rebuck, director of the state Division of Gaming Enforcement, has said he is confident New Jersey can develop regulations to ensure the integrity of the wireless gaming devices, as well as the ability to keep them out of the hands of children.

Senators later questioned the value of the tax credit program, which would provide nongaming development projects in the Tourism District with a $20 million credit against state taxes over 10 years if the project costs at least $20 million and creates at least 100 jobs.

"While we're working to keep Atlantic City's casinos competitive, we have to be mindful of keeping Atlantic City competitive, and by offering a tax credit for nongaming projects within the Tourism District, we can attract new shopping, dining and entertainment options for Atlantic City's visitors to enjoy," Whelan said in a statement.

However, Sen. Barbara Buono, D-Middlesex, asked during the hearing why lawmakers should lower the threshold from the older Urban Transit Hub program, which required at least a $50 million investment and 250 new jobs for eligibility.

"From a business standpoint, those are big projects in our eyes," Greater Atlantic City Chamber President Joseph Kelly said of the smaller Atlantic City projects. He added, "Business needs the incentives to attract them to our marketplace."

Sen. Sam Thompson, R-Burlington, Middlesex, Monmouth, Ocean, also wondered how the state Economic Development Authority, which would have final authority, would judge the merits of the projects.

Thompson asked whether the project developers would apply for other incentives on local taxes and questioned the net effect on local schools if the EDA approved significant numbers of projects.

Whelan said an additional provision that would allow casinos to lease slot machines for a portion of revenue would likely be changed. Most of the city's casinos, other than Resorts Casino Hotel, oppose the proposal out of fear they would be forced into sharing revenue or lose access to newer devices.

Lawmakers also approved several amendments to the original bills. One would give the Casino Reinvestment Development Authority the right to regulate noise in the Tourism District, over and above whatever city ordinances were in effect.

Whelan said that was something that should have been done in the original Tourism District legislation. Gov. Chris Christie signed a similar bill last month sponsored by Whelan and other shore lawmakers that largely exempted beach bars, amusement parks and carnival amusements from state noise laws between May 15 and Oct. 15.

How can we get money from online casinos websites ?

Hard work and a bit of luck pays off !!

States starved for revenue may hae a new source of money after a U.S. Department of Justice opinion that appears to open the market for state-sanctioned online gambling such as Internet poker.

A written opinion in late December by the DOJ may legalize online gambling throughout the country, according to I. Nelson Rose, a legal gambling expert, arguing in a paper he presented in January to the National Council of Legislators from Gaming States. The DOJ was responding to a request from Illinois and New York requesting an opinion on whether out-of-state vendors could sell lottery tickets to in-state adults without violating a federal statute known as the Wire Act. That law outlawed online gambling that crosses state borders.

The DOJ unexpectedly ruled the Wire Act applies only to gambling that involves sporting events.

Confusion Remains
The announcement has Rose asserting that states will jump at the opportunity to collect revenue from online gambling such as Internet poker sites.

“There is literally no federal law standing in the way of a state authorizing intra-state online games, and even entering into compacts with other states and nations to share players interstate and internationally,” wrote I. Nelson Rose in his paper. However, there is still a lot of confusion about how it can be done, whether it can work legally, and just what role the federal government should play. It’s also unclear how this would impact Indian casinos, as they would probably not agree to be regulated by states.

First, states would have to pass legislation allowing online gambling. Then, they might have trouble attracting enough online players if they stay strictly within their borders, and they might find it difficult to raise enough cash to handle online poker. Rose estimates each state would need up to $100 million to run an online poker operation. He says only a handful of states could bring that off.

“You have to have a lot of people, and you have to have liquidity,” agrees Frank Fahrenkopf, CEO of the American Gaming Association in Washington DC, which represents the casino entertainment industry.

Complicated Issues

It is already a competitive marketplace, with more than 2,000 offshore Web sites already in business, Fahrenkopf notes. Those sites have no boundary limitations, a worldwide pool of players, abundant money, and the ability to offer larger cash prizes.

States would have to pool their resources to get enough players, Fahrenkopf says, which he cites as a reason federal legislation is needed.

He suggests the federal government could give interstate licensing, regulatory, and taxing power to a state such as Nevada, which has a lot of experience regulating gambling.

Under such a scheme, Nevada could grant an online gambling license to Illinois, and Michigan could opt in on that license. Michigan and Illinois would then split the taxes, Fahrenkopf said. Federal legislation would also address consumer protection, he said.

Steven Titch, a policy analyst at the free-market Reason Foundation think tank, said he too thinks federal legislation may be necessary.

“I think ultimately there is going to be some type of federal legislation required to iron all this out,” Titch said. “I think states will move in quickly. Within a few years you will have Internet gambling back. That’s generally good for personal liberty. To me, it is a good thing.”

Rep. Stephen Sandstrom's effort to make sure Internet gambling is banned in the state has been put on hold.

The House Law Enforcement Committee chose to hold off any action on the bill to allow for its fiscal impact to be determined and to get a full understanding of how the bill could impact the Internet service providing industry.

Sandstrom, R-Orem, argued his bill, which would require Internet service providers in Utah to block online gambling websites, is worth any cost that might come to the state.

"There is a lot more at risk to the state than the potential cost," Sandstrom told the committee. "To me I think it really, quite frankly, doesn't matter, 'cause it will cost the state tens of millions of dollars if they do not go with this."

Sandstrom had support from many members of the committee for the intent of his bill, but the committee felt it was important to get the full information on the bill prior to passing it on to the House floor.

"We need to have this information prior to voting on this bill," Rep. Patrice Arent, D-Salt Lake City, said.

Arent noted she also would like to hear from Internet service providers in the state to know how this bill would impact them; no representatives from the providers were in the committee meeting.

Sandstrom stated that one of his main efforts in making sure the ban on Internet gaming is in place is to prevent Indian-owned casinos from popping up in Utah. He said if Congress approves nationwide online gambling and Utah does not have a ban in place that the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act could provide a window for casinos on Indian land to be opened in Utah.

"If we allow Internet gaming in Utah, we will have casinos," Sandstrom said.

Sandstrom's bill is aimed at preempting a bill being discussed in Congress that would allow Internet gambling throughout the nation unless there is a law on a state's books that already bans Internet gaming. The bill being considered in D.C., HR 1174, was assigned to a committee last June, but has not had a hearing since then.

Sandstrom hopes to have his bill reconsidered by the committee later this week.

House Bill 108

Sponsor: Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem

Internet Gambling -- This bill would ban Internet gambling in Utah

Unibet Group has signed an agreement to acquire 100 per cent of Australian independent online bookmaker Betchoice Corporation.

The initial acquisition price is £13.6m and the transaction is Unibet's second in a regulated market in recent months. It will provide the company with access to the fast growing Australian online market and position it well for the anticipated opening of live betting products in the country at some stage in the future.

Over the next two years, the company will invest significantly in improving the Australian product portfolio and in marketing to establish the Unibet brand in the fast-growing Australian market. Applying the wider sports product range and risk management techniques within Kambi, Unibet's B2B sportsbook division, to Betchoice will improve Betchoice's offering and financial performance. Kambi will also benefit from integrating Betchoice's racing product within its portfolio.

"We intend to rebrand the business quickly to Unibet," said Henrik Tjärnström, CEO of Unibet. "In addition to benefit from the already existing Australian product offering, the acquisition of Betchoice will provide Unibet with a platform to facilitate other gambling services and opportunities should market conditions continue to improve," he added.

Mark Morrissey, co-founder and chairman of Betchoice, commented: "There is a substantial market opportunity in Australia and with Unibet's expertise in marketing and risk management, together with its market-leading sports betting offering, I am confident that we can increase substantially our market share and establish Unibet as one of the leading brands in Australia."

Completion of the transaction is subject to approval by the Northern Territory Racing Commission and is expected to take place before the end of Q2 2012.

The seemingly endless process of bringing legal and regulated online poker to the U.S. encountered a significant setback today when the District of Columbia Council voted to repeal the city’s controversial Internet gambling law.

Last year, Internet gambling was added to the city’s existing 2009 lottery contract as a “non-traditional games” option. Internet gambling was subsequently legalized in the district through first-in-the-nation language added to a 2010 spending bill, making DC the first to have a law legalizing online poker on the books.

But, when the 2009 lottery contract became embroiled in debate over how the council and Mayor Vincent C. Gray (D) managed the city’s lottery contract, gambling opponents had the time to mount an objection to the law. Some in the council claimed that they were not aware of what they were voting on when they approved Internet gambling in 2010.

Supporters of Internet gambling attempted an eleventh-hour save to keep the law on the books. Council member Michael A. Brown (I-At large), who had spearheaded the 2010 bill, trying to salvage the language that allowed for internet gambling in the district while agreeing to cancel the i-Gaming contract. But council ended up voting 10-2 to end the city’s contract for I-Gaming and reverse the legislation that authorized the games.

“I want to make sure we get the best deal for the city,” said Council member Jack Evans (D-Ward 2), who opposed the original bill. “I believe it should be set up, so the city gets the best price and the best revenue.”

Brown, however, was doubtful that the new Republican-controlled Congress would support any new Internet-gambling legislation passed by the council. According to supporters on Internet gambling, the repeal will cost the city an estimated $13.1 million in revenue through September 2015.

A small glimmer of hope of passing similar Internet gambling legislation came from those who voted to repeal the existing law. “This was going to be our thing, our laws, governed by us,” Brown said. “We were going to reap the benefits from tourist, from residents.”

Not only is the district losing out on that revenue, but there is a chance that it could be sued by the lottery contractor, Intralot, for breach of contract. Intralot spent over $5 million in setting up an intrastate iGaming system and it could sue the district to recoup its costs.


A small glimmer of hope for supporters of Internet gambling came, ironically, from those who had voted to repeal the existing law. Council member Mary M. Cheh (D-Ward 3) echoed the sentiment of others in the council who are not completely opposed to continuing the dialogue and working towards some other legislation to legalize Internet gambling in the district.

“I believe there is a place we can try this,” Cheh said. “ I just think it can be controlled.”

Should gambling be legal in the state of Texas?

It's a debate that's been going on for years now.

Some say yes, while others say it just doesn't provide a steady revenue stream.

We sat down with two Amarillo lawmakers to find out how they feel about the gambling issue.

When we spoke with Representatives Four Price and John Smithee, they both informed me, they were not in support of gambling in Texas, but their opinions were not exactly the same.

"Personally, I don't think it makes financial sense to bring casinos into our backyard," said Price.

Price says he doesn't want casinos in Texas for three reasons.

He says, for one thing, other states have tried it, and it hasn't solved any of their budgeting struggles.

"The cost should outweigh the benefit. Studies have shown that, you've got increased cost associated with social service spending, law enforcement, legal expense, increased regulation and that it's actually been detrimental to the state's coffers instead of helpful."

He says it's just not a predictable and stable source of revenue.

John Smithee says he couldn't agree more, and he says over the years he has had to turn down multiple donations from Oklahoma casino owners.

"It's a true part of the political battle that's occurring in Texas, it's not always easy to tell who's on what side, there are certain groups that don't want casinos in Texas for their own reasons, other groups want to be able to come to Texas and make money here."

Many proposals touting the benefits of gambling have been brought to the table by different people, but Smithee says there just haven't been any that were good enough to convince him they were good for the state.

"The proposals I've seen, in my judgment weren't good for Texas, and I guess I am anti-gambling to the standpoint that from a common sense standpoint, it just doesn't appear that there's going to be a real benefit to Texas."

However, while John Smithee says there isn't any type of gambling he would like to see in Texas, Four Price says he would entertain the idea of expanding on what is already allowed.

"I'm not an advocate for expanding gambling's footprint in the state of Texas, but there are issues particular to where gambling is already going on that should be fully developed and looked at to see if it makes sense."

When we asked Smithee if he ever thought gambling would be legal in Texas, he said, politically you can never say never.

If you like to read stuff like The Onion News, you probably did a double-take when you read our headline or when you first heard about Roseanne Barr’s quest to become the next President of the United States. On Thursday, Roseanne tweeted the follwing: “I am running for Green Party nominee for POTUS. I am an official candidate. I am4 the Greening of America&the world. Green=peace/justice”.

Bet politics at Bovada Sportsbook right now and make your Presidential vote count even more.

First thing is first: she’s going to have to win the Green Party nomination.

Will Roseanne Barr become the official presidential nominee of the Green Party?
Yes 5/1

The question still remains: why is Roseanne all of the sudden making a run for the White House? In her words, she believes that the two main parties in America (The Democrats and The Republicans) are both owned by corporate America. She believes both parties are essentially bought – or sold to the highest bidder – and the people don’t actually get a voice in the matter. Her goal is to represent the people and not corporate greed.

The real question that the Green Party might want to ask is who does Roseanne appeal to right now? After all, she still has to get votes and even if this is a publicity stunt, how far can it really go? Voters might not take kindly to the fact that NBC picked up her sitcom pilot Downward Pilot last month, and her political posturing might be nothing more than drumming up some press for that show.

We’ll get the answers shortly. Roseanne has been added to the California primary ballot, which includes 23 other candidates. The primary itself will take place on June 5th.

Join Bovada Sportsbook and bet on political props throughout the entire 2012 race.

In recent months, there has been a lot of political upheaval over proposed changes to online gambling laws. Current laws are being viewed as outdated and preferential to internet casinos outside of the UK. Others are claiming that the proposed new regulations could well harm the online gaming market in the U.K. However, it appears that lawmakers in the U.K. may be looking to take proactive measures to protect citizens from falling victim of unscrupulous companies, such as Full Tilt Poker. The primary change proposed in the new regulations is a requirement that all online gaming providers be licensed by the UK Gambling Commission regardless of where the provider is located. Current laws currently allow companies licensed by "white list" regulators to provide online gambling services in the U.K. Among the regulators that are currently on the white list are the Alderney Gambling Control Commission and the Gibraltar Gambling Commission. This point of consumption form of licensing over the point of origin licensing of the present has been heralded by some and criticized by others. One of the main supporters is actually one of the organizations that would be negatively impacted. The Alderney Gambling Control Commission has sided with the proposed changed and has proposed that licenses issued be tightened and high risk companies be audited more frequently. The Gibraltar Gambling Commission believes that the current regulations are satisfactory and that the UK Gambling Commission actually lacks the necessary experience needed to regulate online poker companies. Part of the reasoning behind the push for licensing within the U.K. stems from the events surround Black Friday in the United States. On April 15th, 2011, three major online poker companies were indicted for violating US laws. Later, it was reported that one of those companies, Full Tilt Poker, had actually used funds from poker player accounts to not only pay business expenses, but also to provide payments to owners of the company. One interesting point to note is that the Alderney Gambling Control Commission was the licensing body for Full Tilt Poker and failed to detect any irregularities. It was not until months later that the AGCC finally suspended Full Tilt Poker's license, a move that was deemed a little "too little too late" by many in the United States. There is another point of contention in regards to the new regulations. Currently, companies that are setup remotely and provide services to the U.K. do not have to pay taxes within the U.K. If the new regulations are put into place, companies that receive a U.K. license would be forced to pay taxes on revenue received from U.K. players. Some companies such as William Hill have already moved their headquarters out of the U.K. in order to avoid paying those taxes. To give you an idea of how the current laws impact U.K. online players, in 2010 the UK online market was around £1.9 billion. However, only about 1/3 of that total went to U.K. casinos online. Allowing online gaming laws to continue as they are will keep a large chunk of potential tax revenue out of the U.K. Also, there are larger issues to consider. Online confidence with online poker has been shaken as a result of the Black Friday indictments. While the United States was the hardest hit, players from both Full Tilt Poker and Absolute Poker worldwide are currently unable to access their player funds. Blanca Games, the owner of Absolute Poker, is having to liquidate their assets to try and repay players. Full Tilt is working on a sale of the company with Groupe Bernard Tapie, a deal that be the only way that players receive any of their currently frozen funds. The new regulations would mean tighter controls and audits on online gaming companies. In addition, it would ensure that underaged gambling and problem gambling is curtailed. Lastly, it would provide a significant increase in tax revenue that many companies are currently avoiding via loopholes. In the short term, new online regulations will cost companies more in terms of taxes and fees associated with regulation. In the long term, it will be an investment that should pay off as it may well help to restore confidence in an industry struggling to recover from the greed of a select few.

SALT LAKE CITY -- Rep. Stephen Sandstrom's effort to make sure Internet gambling is banned in the state has been put on hold.

The House Law Enforcement Committee chose to hold off any action on the bill to allow for its fiscal impact to be determined and to get a full understanding of how the bill could impact the Internet service providing industry.

Sandstrom, R-Orem, argued his bill, which would require Internet service providers in Utah to block online gambling websites, is worth any cost that might come to the state.

"There is a lot more at risk to the state than the potential cost," Sandstrom told the committee. "To me I think it really, quite frankly, doesn't matter, 'cause it will cost the state tens of millions of dollars if they do not go with this."

Sandstrom had support from many members of the committee for the intent of his bill, but the committee felt it was important to get the full information on the bill prior to passing it on to the House floor.

"We need to have this information prior to voting on this bill," Rep. Patrice Arent, D-Salt Lake City, said.

Arent noted she also would like to hear from Internet service providers in the state to know how this bill would impact them; no representatives from the providers were in the committee meeting.

Sandstrom stated that one of his main efforts in making sure the ban on Internet gaming is in place is to prevent Indian-owned casinos from popping up in Utah. He said if Congress approves nationwide online gambling and Utah does not have a ban in place that the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act could provide a window for casinos on Indian land to be opened in Utah.

"If we allow Internet gaming in Utah, we will have casinos," Sandstrom said.

Sandstrom's bill is aimed at pre-empting a bill being discussed in Congress that would allow Internet gambling throughout the nation unless there is a law on a state's books that already bans Internet gaming. The bill being considered in D.C., HR 1174, was assigned to a committee last June, but has not had a hearing since then.

Sandstrom hopes to have his bill reconsidered by the committee later this week.

WASHINGTON (AP) The D.C. Council has voted 10-2 to repeal the nation's first government-sponsored online gambling program.

Online gambling was legalized in the nation's capital last year, but the program was never implemented.

Several councilmembers raised concerns that language about online gambling was not included in the city's contract with its lottery vendor. The program was then legalized as part of a budget bill that was approved without public comment.

The only two councilmembers to vote against repeal Tuesday were Michael A. Brown, who led the push for online gambling, and Marion Barry. Brown plans to introduce a new standalone bill that would allow the district government to offer online poker, blackjack and other games of skill and chance.

The Department Of Justice opinion clears sports betting inside state borders, but possibly not beyond them.

The U.S. Department of Justice may very well have cleared online betting according to each individual states law, but in a cruel twist of irony betting across state lines remains illegal, and the situation itself is very hazy, according to the mobile gambling news.

Delaware for instance, is permitted to offer wagering on American Football games, as it was a part of the four states who remained exempt from federal Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act that prohibited wagering on sports, when it came into force in 1992.

Whilst the Department Of Justice’s new opinion may have softened, there are still some older acts that turn the screws on online betting across state lines, that need to be revoked in order for players to gamble from state to state. Such as the Federal Wire Act of 1961.

The 1961 Federal Wire Act, according to American gambling laws, prevents gamblers from being able to place or pass on bets or information concerning sports bets, across the state lines. Although in 1978 an additional act, the Horse Racing Act, permitted simulcast gambling on horse races. The two confusing and unequal acts have been in the line of fire ever since.

The Department Of Justice, has relaxed many of their laws over online gambling in general, as it perceives poker and other online games similar to it, as games of skill rather than luck. But at the same time, DOJ strengthened its plans to prohibit sports betting across state lines, confirming the validity of the Wire Act of 1961.

The move leaves U.S. gamers having to physically go to a state where sports betting is legal in order to place bets. As California attorney and gambling law expert, I. Nelson Rose, adequately put it: “They could go take sports bets through the Internet from anyone who is physically present in Delaware.”

At present Nevada is experimenting with Mobile sports betting technology, that allows players at its casino to bet from their hotel rooms on mobile devices, and also allows people inside the state to wager on sports betting with their iPhones. Atlantic City is also joining in on the trend, read more in our Atlantic City Online Casinos Begin With Hotel in Room Gambling article.

The application approved and used on the iPhone for sports betting also tracks the gamblers location and if the GPS pin-pointer system finds the user is outside of Nevada, then the sports bet is ineligible to take place. iPhone gambling, nonetheless remains legal in the state in some form.

At present, the confusion surrounding these laws, and just why it is okay to wager on X and not on Y is becoming a talking point amongst sports betters and online gamers alike. It is conceivable that in the near future, the Department Of Justice will have to look over the Wire Act, and possibly backtrack. But for the moment, it’s really a case of not who you know, but where you live, that gets you on top.

With the Nevada caucus having taken place last weekend, Republican candidates were asked their thoughts on the legalization of online gaming.

Not surprisingly, GOP front-runner Mitt Romney expressed reservations, pointing to the “social costs and people’s addictive gambling habits.” Apparently, he wants the government to tell you who you can marry and what you do with your body — but wants it to step in before you sink that rent money into a PokerStars buy-in.

Ron Paul is all for online gaming, of course, because he’s for all things freedom. Maybe too much, but I digress.

With unemployment hovering above 8% and a “new normal” which means expensive gas prices and less bank loans, will gambling be the lucky answer to our stumbling economy? According to the American Gaming Association, the commercial casino industry supported $125 billion in spending and nearly 820,000 jobs in the US in 2010. Gambling accounted for 1% of the US economy. Gambling also translates into jobs – the average salary in the casino industry is higher than other recreation and retail segments.

Gaming is a growth segment. The industry is growing faster than any other recreation sector in the US economy. And then there are taxes. The industry paid $16 billion in taxes in 2010 – including an effective 32% tax rate (a lot higher than many of our politicians!).

With most US states cutting basic services – health, schools, police and even prisons, the growing gaming industry is filling holes in many states. Can anyone imagine Florida, Nevada or New Jersey without gambling? Besides gambling and gambling tourism, what other growth industry can help replenish state budgets?

When gambling comes to “your neighborhood”, the stakes are high. Online Casino Archives is aware of the complexity of the issue. We suggest that politicians from both sides get together with respected gaming business leaders to flesh out the issues state by state. Eventually, Miami and other tourist cities will have casinos.

The real question is, how do we implement responsible gambling? For that to happen, the adults need to sit down and work out adult policies.

New York joins the long list of American states interested in legalizing land-based and online casino gambling as well as online and mobile sportsbooks.

The Governor of New York, Mr. Andrew Cuomo has revealed he is fully on board when it comes to the issue of legalizing gambling throughout the state, recent casino gambling news confirms.

Friday the 3rd of February saw Mr. Cuomo submit a bill to the Senate and House of Representatives that would overturn the gambling ban, currently active in the state, and essentially legalize casinos, making them exempt from the current ban. Something a lot of other US states are considering lately, as many try to change the American gambling laws.

Whilst small tribal casinos, and a recently opened aqueduct casino are officially open in the state, neither are to be considered anything like a true casino, which New York will hope to receive significant tax revenue funds from.

With millions of tourists every year, there are hundreds of millions of dollars of clean tax revenue on offer by legalizing gambling and Blackjack casinos online. A point that Governor Andrew Cuomo will know only too well, as he attempts to win over lawmakers with the benefits of such a law change.

New York isn’t exactly short of places to go, or things to see. What it does lack however, is a casino. It is rumored that having a few casinos open would cater not only to the tourists, but also to the wealthy of the state, possibly becoming the number one casino destination in the North Eastern United States.

Mr. Andrew Cuomo’s bid to get gambling legalized throughout the state, may not have kicked off until the latter part of this past year, but judgment day is already upon him and his bill, as it goes to vote soon. Though Cuomo himself insists it could take two years to be cleared officially.

It has been reported that people are unhappy that Mr. Cuomo has not named any locations as to where these new casinos will be built. The Governor however, feels that since the process will be long and slow; such details could be finalized once gambling is free to expand.

In recent years, New York has fallen by the wayside as its neighboring states have all been quick to pounce on the gambling wagon, with Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, all allowed legalized internet and Mobile sportsbooks by altering their existing gambling bans, in one form or another. It is widely felt, that New York really doesn’t want to miss out on a potentially astronomical taxing revenue, any longer.