- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Breaking news: After weeks, heck, months of build-up, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s office has announced that he’s vetoed the state’s groundbreaking online gambling bill: New Jersey Gov Vetoes Online Gambling Bill
I am absolutely amazed and appalled that Christie vetoed this. His state is in the perverbial ****ter financially, and I cannot understand why he would veto something like this. I hope, as the article states, that they can “tweak” the bill (whatever that means), and get this thing done. We need to get rid of Bush-like thinking, and start being more progressive and realistic in the U.S.
Although no one really knows the ramifications that legalization will have on affiliates, I just want anything that be a thorn in the side of UIGEA, to get passed.
I was pretty surprised, too. But I think it’s starting to make sense … according to an iMEGA press release, he’s saying he wants to put it up to a vote, “similar to the referendum vote that established gambling in Atlantic City in 1976.”
“If the Legislature believes that expanding gambling outside of Atlantic City is in the best interests of the State of New Jersey, it should place the question on the ballot for the voters to decide,” he said: Governor Christie Wants Voters to Decide Fate of Internet Gambling in New Jersey
Sounds like it was a tough decision for him … or maybe Caesars is more powerful than suspected … !
The bill’s big supporter, Senator Raymon Lesniak, is also saying that Christie is still committed to online gambling, and that he’s vowed to “work with Senator Lesniak to make sure Internet wagering comes to the Garden State:” Lesniak Gets Christie’s Support to Revisit Internet Gambling in New Jersey
Lesniak is fully aware that this could be New Jersey’s opportunity to become America’s “Silicon Valley” of Internet gambling, so he’s not likely to give up just yet.
I’m in the same thought as Nathan.
At first I couldn’t understand why, but it starts to make a lot of sense.
I hadn’t considered the implications of online gambling through kiosks at bars and clubs. It just opens a whole new kettle of fish.
@Nathan 226537 wrote:
I was pretty surprised, too. But I think it’s starting to make sense … according to an iMEGA press release, he’s saying he wants to put it up to a vote, “similar to the referendum vote that established gambling in Atlantic City in 1976.”
“If the Legislature believes that expanding gambling outside of Atlantic City is in the best interests of the State of New Jersey, it should place the question on the ballot for the voters to decide,” he said: Governor Christie Wants Voters to Decide Fate of Internet Gambling in New Jersey
Sounds like it was a tough decision for him … or maybe Caesars is more powerful than suspected … !
The bill’s big supporter, Senator Raymon Lesniak, is also saying that Christie is still committed to online gambling, and that he’s vowed to “work with Senator Lesniak to make sure Internet wagering comes to the Garden State:” Lesniak Gets Christie’s Support to Revisit Internet Gambling in New Jersey
Lesniak is fully aware that this could be New Jersey’s opportunity to become America’s “Silicon Valley” of Internet gambling, so he’s not likely to give up just yet.
So, you are saying that he’s playing up to the Big Casinos. If this is this case, then he is nothing more than the same old, same old politician. He has an opportunity to grab some of the online gambling traffic that is currently leaving his state, and giving him no tax revenue. He should work with the brick-and-mortar casinos in coming up with an online solution that benefits everybody. But, outright rejection of this bill, means that he will be losing out on a big slice of tax revenue. Bad, bad economic decision on his part, I say.
Well, I’m just suggesting that it’s *possible* that he’s ponying up to the Big Casino element. I couldn’t go beyond speculation — I don’t know much about the guy or about New Jersey. Hell, I haven’t set foot in an Atlantic City casino since 2002!
And of course he’s the same old, same old politician — I can’t think of any major politician in the U.S. who isn’t. Rebels don’t usually get to be governor — died-in-the-wool politicians who know that appealing to corporate power is more important than catering to individual voters get to be governor. (And no, I don’t consider George Bush, Sarah Palin, Barack Obama or John McCain to be “rebels”, even though that’s how some of them have successfully marketed themselves.)
Again, I don’t know much about Christie personally, but I’d guess that he also felt that endorsing Internet gambling would turn off too many of his conservative Republican supporters. Instead, he gets to cop out and say “let the voters decide” — which is a fine thought, but isn’t it his job to make these decisions, instead of dodging them?
Hi Nathan,
Christie has come off as a “I’m not going to take any crap” governor, who has vehemently talked about his horrible state deficit, and has talked very openly about “busting unions”, who are a major contributor to the state’s debt (in many ways). That’s why I thought the Internet gambling bill would be a slam dunk for him, since it would be new-found revenue.
I guess not. Maybe he’s afraid of pissing off the established B&M casino industry in his state, as you suggest. But, that really makes him, same old, same old.
BTW, they are talking about him as a possible Presidential candidate in 2012. He lost my vote with this decision, unless there is some sort of justifiable explanation, or a dramatic turnaround in this initial outcome.
PD
