yahboohoo
04-06-2007, 12:46 PM
USA Today article (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-03-30-gambling_N.htm?csp=34)
Gambling interests spend millions in lobbying
By Todd Plitt, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Casinos, Indian tribes and other groups spent millions lobbying Congress last year as lawmakers considered bills to ban wagering online and off Indian reservations.
The industry is expected to spend millions more this year as those issues heat up again in Washington.
The $25 million the gaming industry spent on lobbying in 2006 was a slight increase over the previous year's total, but down from the $28.5 million spent four years ago. Overall, companies, associations and other groups spent $2.5 billion on lobbying in Washington last year, with the pharmaceutical industry topping the charts at $166.5 million.
The spending came amid controversy over public corruption scandals involving convicted former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who admitted to bilking wealthy American Indian gaming tribes.
"Even though we didn't have anything to do with it, we all tend to get labeled," said Frank Fahrenkopf Jr., president of the American Gaming Association, which spent $900,000 last year lobbying on behalf of commercial casinos.
Still, the gambling industry fared pretty well in Washington, he said. And he expects casinos will do even better this year because of a new cast of leaders in Congress who understand the industry.
They include Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat who has been a strong casino advocate; Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee; and Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., the House Judiciary Committee chairman.
The industry also has Republican allies in powerful posts, including Sen. John Ensign, a Nevada Republican, who now heads the National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee.
Much of the gambling industry's 2006 lobbying centered on legislation to ban online betting. The measure became law after former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., inserted it into an unrelated bill passed late last year.
Internet gaming supporters want lawmakers to reverse the ban before some of the regulations go into effect this summer.
The Poker Players Alliance, which lobbied heavily against the ban recently hired former New York senator and poker enthusiast Alfonse D'Amato to lead the group's effort this year. D'Amato's message to former colleagues: the U.S. government could generate $3 billion in taxes a year if it regulated the industry.
"There are millions of Americans who love poker and who feel strongly their rights were taken away in the last session," said Michael Bolcerek, president of the Poker Players Alliance, which paid another lobbying firm $540,000 last year to work against the bill. "It's an overreach of the federal government that needs to be rectified."
The alliance already has some support in Congress for repealing the ban. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, told The Financial Times last week that the Internet gambling ban was one of the "stupidest" bills ever passed.
Meanwhile, two Nevada lawmakers, Reps. Shelley Berkley, a Democrat, and Jon Porter, a Republican, are drafting a proposal to study ways to regulate online gambling.
Gaming experts question whether the issue will gain any traction.
"It's a subject the public cares somewhat about," said Robin Hanson, an economics professor at George Mason University who studies the gambling industry. "But they're not overwhelmingly passionate about it."
Hanson says it's usually more difficult for Congress to repeal anti-gambling measures than to pass them because it's the kind of issue most politicians don't want to promote.
"Usually, the way gambling grows is by neglect," he said.
Although efforts to ban off-reservation gaming died in Congress, the Interior Department is considering regulations that could restrict development of new Indian casinos on off-reservation sites.
Dozens of tribes who want to build casinos — in some cases hundreds of miles from their reservations — are lobbying against the rules. But many wealthy gaming tribes support new regulations, saying the practice has led to "reservation shopping."
Tribal governments are also monitoring the actions of the National Indian Gaming Commission, which wants to make bingo machines used in certain Indian casinos work slower so they won't resemble Las Vegas-style slot machines.
Despite the high-stakes measures affecting Indian casinos that Congress considered last year, the $16 million tribes spent on lobbying was about 25% less than they spent in 2003, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Experts attribute the drop-off to the Abramoff scandal.
"Since the Abramoff scandal, they have taken more care in selecting lobbyists to represent them," said Roger Gros, editor of the magazine Global Gaming Business. "They're much more selective on where they spend their money."
Gambling interests spend millions in lobbying
By Todd Plitt, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Casinos, Indian tribes and other groups spent millions lobbying Congress last year as lawmakers considered bills to ban wagering online and off Indian reservations.
The industry is expected to spend millions more this year as those issues heat up again in Washington.
The $25 million the gaming industry spent on lobbying in 2006 was a slight increase over the previous year's total, but down from the $28.5 million spent four years ago. Overall, companies, associations and other groups spent $2.5 billion on lobbying in Washington last year, with the pharmaceutical industry topping the charts at $166.5 million.
The spending came amid controversy over public corruption scandals involving convicted former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who admitted to bilking wealthy American Indian gaming tribes.
"Even though we didn't have anything to do with it, we all tend to get labeled," said Frank Fahrenkopf Jr., president of the American Gaming Association, which spent $900,000 last year lobbying on behalf of commercial casinos.
Still, the gambling industry fared pretty well in Washington, he said. And he expects casinos will do even better this year because of a new cast of leaders in Congress who understand the industry.
They include Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat who has been a strong casino advocate; Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee; and Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., the House Judiciary Committee chairman.
The industry also has Republican allies in powerful posts, including Sen. John Ensign, a Nevada Republican, who now heads the National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee.
Much of the gambling industry's 2006 lobbying centered on legislation to ban online betting. The measure became law after former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., inserted it into an unrelated bill passed late last year.
Internet gaming supporters want lawmakers to reverse the ban before some of the regulations go into effect this summer.
The Poker Players Alliance, which lobbied heavily against the ban recently hired former New York senator and poker enthusiast Alfonse D'Amato to lead the group's effort this year. D'Amato's message to former colleagues: the U.S. government could generate $3 billion in taxes a year if it regulated the industry.
"There are millions of Americans who love poker and who feel strongly their rights were taken away in the last session," said Michael Bolcerek, president of the Poker Players Alliance, which paid another lobbying firm $540,000 last year to work against the bill. "It's an overreach of the federal government that needs to be rectified."
The alliance already has some support in Congress for repealing the ban. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, told The Financial Times last week that the Internet gambling ban was one of the "stupidest" bills ever passed.
Meanwhile, two Nevada lawmakers, Reps. Shelley Berkley, a Democrat, and Jon Porter, a Republican, are drafting a proposal to study ways to regulate online gambling.
Gaming experts question whether the issue will gain any traction.
"It's a subject the public cares somewhat about," said Robin Hanson, an economics professor at George Mason University who studies the gambling industry. "But they're not overwhelmingly passionate about it."
Hanson says it's usually more difficult for Congress to repeal anti-gambling measures than to pass them because it's the kind of issue most politicians don't want to promote.
"Usually, the way gambling grows is by neglect," he said.
Although efforts to ban off-reservation gaming died in Congress, the Interior Department is considering regulations that could restrict development of new Indian casinos on off-reservation sites.
Dozens of tribes who want to build casinos — in some cases hundreds of miles from their reservations — are lobbying against the rules. But many wealthy gaming tribes support new regulations, saying the practice has led to "reservation shopping."
Tribal governments are also monitoring the actions of the National Indian Gaming Commission, which wants to make bingo machines used in certain Indian casinos work slower so they won't resemble Las Vegas-style slot machines.
Despite the high-stakes measures affecting Indian casinos that Congress considered last year, the $16 million tribes spent on lobbying was about 25% less than they spent in 2003, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Experts attribute the drop-off to the Abramoff scandal.
"Since the Abramoff scandal, they have taken more care in selecting lobbyists to represent them," said Roger Gros, editor of the magazine Global Gaming Business. "They're much more selective on where they spend their money."