Divide and Conquer
Significantly Indebted
Adelson Funded iGaming Study Comes Out Swinging, To No-one’s Shock
Vegas Sands CEO Sheldon Adelson has funded a four-state study that, unsurprisingly, does not come up in favor of iGaming.
The benefit of studies is, you can generally encourage them to support nearly any standpoint on just about anything, according to who is included and exactly how you interpret the information. And when it is mega-billionaire Las Vegas Sands CEO Sheldon Adelson funding the findings, you will be sure the scholarly studies will go any which way you want ’em to.
Adelson No Fan that is iGaming Himself
It’s no news that Adelson for reasons that are perhaps not totally clear to your remaining portion of the mostly pro-iGaming casino industry is vehemently, adamantly in opposition to the whole concept of Internet gambling. He has been recognized to refer to the very concept as ‘a cancer waiting to happen’ and ‘a toxin which all good people need to resist,’ and also funded TV and print ads this past summer towards that end.
Now Adelson’s commissioned poll results with this topic have been released and obtained 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 journalist that is even seasoned whom hosts the nightly Las Vegas political news show ‘Face to Face’ has noted on his blog that the findings regarding the research were ‘quite startling’; mainly, the rather obviously self-serving leanings towards land gaming and away from the Internet form of the same. Namely, legal brick-and-mortar gambling enterprises were found to be ‘a means to generate income for hawaii,’ with approval ratings including high of 66 percent in Pennsylvania (which has already proved just as much with their recent development in that arena), 61 percent in Kentucky, 57 percent 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 have any legal land casinos at this juncture in time. For Pennsylvania and California, the support stemmed mostly from a need to help offset state budget deficits, even though land-based casino saturation nationwide is currently starting to rear its ugly head and there clearly was more flatlining to come, according to some industry experts. In fact, the land casino that is latest to go up in Pennsylvania Isle of Capri, located in southwestern area Farmington was already forced to layoff 15 percent of its workforce just two months after opening.
Virginia study participants reportedly showed a disdain for ‘Las Vegas-style gaming.’ We guess that’s diverse from say, ‘Indian casino-style gaming’ or ‘politicians-from-the-suburbs-style gaming.’ Exactly What?
Where this supposedly unbiased study gets interesting is with its reported findings on Internet gambling, but. Because, according to the research, in most four queried states, 3x as much of those who participated failed to have positive view of iGaming, by having an average that is overall off 66-22 on the ‘ we do not want it’ part of the fence. According to 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 clearly differentiate between general Internet gambling and online poker per se, however, and before anybody freaks out excessively in what any of this could potentially mean for the future of state-by-state iGaming being regulated and legalized, remember that, according to poker advocate Marco Valerio back in 2011, 67 percent of New Jerseyans were dead set against online gambling enterprises, and we see how that played away.
Supreme Court Judge Rejects Challenge to New York Casino Referendum
Tioga Downs lets its feelings be known in no uncertain terms New that is regarding York’s upcoming casino referendum by voters. (Image source: Ithacajournal.com)
A brand New York State judge has refused a challenge to the wording of New York’s upcoming casino referendum, paving the way for voters into the state to vote in the measure in November.
The lawsuit was dismissed by State Supreme Court Justice Richard M. Platkin, who found the challenge that is legal be ‘untimely and with a lack of legal merit.’
Delayed Vote Shot Down
That was a blow that is lucky nugget flash big opponents of the measure, who had hoped that they could delay a vote, or at least replace the wording that could appear on the ballot. The case ended up being brought up by Brooklyn bankruptcy attorney Eric J. Snyder, whom objected to your language used into the referendum question. The measure will be described as ‘promoting work growth, increasing aid to schools and permitting local governments to lower property taxes. on the ballot’
That was the language which had been approved 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 quantity of compromises and handles different interests in the state to create this kind of proposal possible.
However, Snyder and others said that the language being used was unjust. Since the language included suggested positive outcomes of the casino expansion, it could unfairly bias the outcomes of the referendum. These issues gained merit that is additional a poll by Siena College found that support for the ballot referendum increased by nine percentage points if the positive language was included, compared to when more neutral language have been used.
Justice Platkin dismissed these claims, though. He said that Snyder’s lawsuit ended up being 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 perhaps August 23, according to Snyder, though that could have made difference that is little the challenge had not been made until October 1.
Obviously, the state was happy that their legal arguments were accepted, and that the vote would continue as planned.
‘We’re pleased that Judge Platkin accepted the arguments that are legal we raised and that the election process can carry on moving forward,’ stated Board of Elections spokesman Thomas Connolly.
Opponents Voice Disappointment
Meanwhile, opponents of the measure had been predictably let down by your choice.
‘We’re disappointed that the judge decided 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 newest York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG).
But Snyder says that he’s not done yet. He plans to seek emergency relief from the courts that are appellate and points out that the Board of Elections had the chance to make use of an earlier version of the referendum suggested by the state attorney general’s workplace that did not include 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 help,’ Snyder told The nyc instances.
If the measure should pass, it would bring up to seven brand new casino resorts to selected parts of the Empire State. They would join a quantity of existing casinos that are owned and operated by native groups that are american the area.