South Dakota Governor says no online gambling in our state

[Jeffiner99]

Another governor has weighed in on the Barney Frank bill. It seems South Dakotans would not be allowed to play online if this bill passes. Here is the email I received by the governor. (The intent of his message is clear although he seems to be confused about what opting out or opting in means). I am sure not going to correct him.

Dear xxxxx:

Thank you for your e-mail regarding H.R. 2046, proposed federal legislation that would regulate online gaming activities, and its potential impact on states.



It may surprise you to know the 2000 South Dakota State Legislature passed legislation, which was ultimately signed into law, prohibiting Internet gambling in our state. That bill, House Bill 1110, passed the state House of Representatives with only nine dissenting votes and was supported unanimously by the South Dakota Senate. At that time, I was a state legislator representing District 24, and voted favorably on this piece of legislation in both the Senate State Affairs Committee and on the Senate floor.



Regarding the state opt-out provision contained in H.R. 2046, because South Dakota already prohibits online gaming activities conducted by anyone other than the South Dakota Lottery or those entities governed by the South Dakota Gaming Commission, such an opt-out in our state would require the repeal of an entire chapter of state law as well.



I hope this information has helped to answer your questions. Thank you again for the e-mail.



Sincerely,

Mike Rounds



Lori Shangreaux
Executive Assistant to the Governor
Office of the Governor
500 East Capitol Avenue
Pierre, SD 57501-5070
605-773-3214
lori.shangreaux@state.sd.us

[autobet]

[ QUOTE ]
South Dakota already prohibits online gaming activities conducted by anyone other than the South Dakota Lottery or those entities governed by the South Dakota Gaming Commission

[/ QUOTE ]

Another reminder its not online gambling that they are opposed to, but the evil OFFSHORE (no political contribution and no state tax kind ) of gambling.

[oldbookguy]

Yep, your state is one of only 14 that have a law banning Internet Gaming of any kind even skill. In theory the UIGEA should only cover these states in relation to poker considering solitaire / solitaire poker is allowed as a skill / cash contest game at AOL, MSN and Yahoo Games.

The 14 are: Alaska, Iowa, Arizona, Louisiana, Arkansas, Maryland, Connecticut Missouri, Montana, South Carolina, Delaware, South Dakota, Florida, Tennessee, Illinois and Vermont.

There may be hope though that would be a long post if the NJ Law Suit is successful concerning Off Shore v Domestic.

obg

[Bilgefisher]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
South Dakota already prohibits online gaming activities conducted by anyone other than the South Dakota Lottery or those entities governed by the South Dakota Gaming Commission

[/ QUOTE ]

Another reminder its not online gambling that they are opposed to, but the evil OFFSHORE (no political contribution and no state tax kind ) of gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]

That and over 50% of South Dakota casinos reported operating at a loss last year. I don't think they want any more competition.

[KEW]

[ QUOTE ]
Yep, your state is one of only 14 that have a law banning Internet Gaming of any kind even skill. In theory the UIGEA should only cover these states in relation to poker considering solitaire / solitaire poker is allowed as a skill / cash contest game at AOL, MSN and Yahoo Games.

The 14 are: Alaska, Iowa, Arizona, Louisiana, Arkansas, Maryland, Connecticut Missouri, Montana, South Carolina, Delaware, South Dakota, Florida, Tennessee, Illinois and Vermont.

There may be hope though that would be a long post if the NJ Law Suit is successful concerning Off Shore v Domestic.

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you sure about Maryland????? I live in MD and have NEVER seen MD listed before or banned by any site I am aware of..Also if I counted right you listed 16 states..

[TheEngineer]

OMG....let's all opppose IGREA!!!!

Actually, according to the letter, it's already illegal in South Dakota, so IGREA changes nothing. Never mind.

[Jeffiner99]

[ QUOTE ]
OMG....let's all opppose IGREA!!!!

Actually, according to the letter, it's already illegal in South Dakota, so IGREA changes nothing. Never mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought the point of supporting IGREA was that it WAS going to change things. Ah well, sorry South Dakotans.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OMG....let's all opppose IGREA!!!!

Actually, according to the letter, it's already illegal in South Dakota, so IGREA changes nothing. Never mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought the point of supporting IGREA was that it WAS going to change things. Ah well, sorry South Dakotans.

[/ QUOTE ]

You wanted the federal government to override their laws?

No need to apologize to SD. It's their law.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought the point of supporting IGREA was that it WAS going to change things. Ah well, sorry South Dakotans.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, the main purpose of IGREA for us is to give us the opportunity to send lots of letters and to make lots of noise in support of our rights, so Congress realizes we exist.

If you don't like IGREA, how do you expect to get a better bill without us having a good showing here?

[jonyy6788]

[ QUOTE ]
Yep, your state is one of only 14 that have a law banning Internet Gaming of any kind even skill. In theory the UIGEA should only cover these states in relation to poker considering solitaire / solitaire poker is allowed as a skill / cash contest game at AOL, MSN and Yahoo Games.

The 14 are: Alaska, Iowa, Arizona, Louisiana, Arkansas, Maryland, Connecticut Missouri, Montana, South Carolina, Delaware, South Dakota, Florida, Tennessee, Illinois and Vermont.

There may be hope though that would be a long post if the NJ Law Suit is successful concerning Off Shore v Domestic.

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

a) you listed 16
b) where's state of Washington?
me= /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[oldbookguy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yep, your state is one of only 14 that have a law banning Internet Gaming of any kind even skill. In theory the UIGEA should only cover these states in relation to poker considering solitaire / solitaire poker is allowed as a skill / cash contest game at AOL, MSN and Yahoo Games.

The 14 are: Alaska, Iowa, Arizona, Louisiana, Arkansas, Maryland, Connecticut Missouri, Montana, South Carolina, Delaware, South Dakota, Florida, Tennessee, Illinois and Vermont.

There may be hope though that would be a long post if the NJ Law Suit is successful concerning Off Shore v Domestic.

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you sure about Maryland????? I live in MD and have NEVER seen MD listed before or banned by any site I am aware of..Also if I counted right you listed 16 states..

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, mis-counted.

The info come from King Games, the affiliate of Yahoo Games.

go to Yahoo Games, click SKILL, SELECT any listed SKILL game, then read the Terms of Use (King Games), the states are listed towards the bottom.

Others such as MSN games only list 14.

For these go to MSN.com. click GAMES and in the menu look for play for cash or click:
http://zone.msn.com/en/root/gamebrowser.htm?playmode=4&genre=0

SELECT ANY GAME then read the Terms and Conditions:
Arkansas, Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Iowa, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Montana, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee and Vermont. (14 here)

obg

[oldbookguy]

Washington changed the law to an affirmative defense for home players and it is a very low misdemeanor now so I think they removed Washington State from the Terms and Conditions:

http://msn.worldwinner.com/cgi/legal/terms_pop.html?ref=deposit

obg

[KEW]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yep, your state is one of only 14 that have a law banning Internet Gaming of any kind even skill. In theory the UIGEA should only cover these states in relation to poker considering solitaire / solitaire poker is allowed as a skill / cash contest game at AOL, MSN and Yahoo Games.

The 14 are: Alaska, Iowa, Arizona, Louisiana, Arkansas, Maryland, Connecticut Missouri, Montana, South Carolina, Delaware, South Dakota, Florida, Tennessee, Illinois and Vermont.

There may be hope though that would be a long post if the NJ Law Suit is successful concerning Off Shore v Domestic.

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you sure about Maryland????? I live in MD and have NEVER seen MD listed before or banned by any site I am aware of..Also if I counted right you listed 16 states..

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, mis-counted.

The info come from King Games, the affiliate of Yahoo Games.

go to Yahoo Games, click SKILL, SELECT any listed SKILL game, then read the Terms of Use (King Games), the states are listed towards the bottom.

Others such as MSN games only list 14.

For these go to MSN.com. click GAMES and in the menu look for play for cash or click:
http://zone.msn.com/en/root/gamebrowser.htm?playmode=4&genre=0

SELECT ANY GAME then read the Terms and Conditions:
Arkansas, Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Iowa, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Montana, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee and Vermont. (14 here)

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe this list is for SKILL games and not a Law banning online gaming...Washington clearly passed a Law banning online gaming..MD I am near positive "we" do not have a Law specific to online gaming...

[oldbookguy]

You are missing the point with 'SKILL' gaming and poker.
Actually LOOK at the games, there are card games; I.E. Solitaire, Solitaire Poker, Free Cell........
Is Poker Solitaire any less chance than regular poker, the RNG deals the cards the same as in poker.......Is Poker any less 'SKILL' than Solitaire?

It is the UIGEA rules where we shold REALLY be fighting this fight. Rules by the way we have not even seen yet and the above is likely part of the problem as to why there are problems fashioning them. Poker; Solitaire; is there a difference and how to decide.....

obg

[Piece of Cake]

[ QUOTE ]
That and over 50% of South Dakota casinos reported operating at a loss last year. I don't think they want any more competition.

[/ QUOTE ]

Has it been proven that online poker cannabalizes live poker. I thought online play clearly promotes increased live play.

[autobet]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That and over 50% of South Dakota casinos reported operating at a loss last year. I don't think they want any more competition.

[/ QUOTE ]

Has it been proven that online poker cannabalizes live poker. I thought online play clearly promotes increased live play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think these numbers have much to do with poker. They probably have to do with a casino mostly full of slots sitting 97% empty.

Live poker has exploded across our country over the last five years. The combination of TV and the Internet where new players can gain confidence and experience for free or a few dollars has lead to millions of new players who want to venture into a cardroom to try their luck and test their skills...In the past cardrooms where taken out and replaced with slots. This trend has been reversed in the last five years.

[permafrost]

Good work Jeffiner99.

Can you say if you have also asked the Attorneys General the same questions?

[Jeffiner99]

[ QUOTE ]
Good work Jeffiner99.

Can you say if you have also asked the Attorneys General the same questions?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I hadn't thought of it. Why AGs? The legislation says that Governors or other chief executive officer that informs the Governor that gaming is illegal. Do you think AGs fall into that latter category?

Let me know a reason and I will be happy to. It took me about 5 hours to send all the other emails. So thank you for recognizing the work. It is greatly appreciated.

[Dunkman]

Wow, they have internet in South Dakota?

[ZPinhead]

[ QUOTE ]
Washington changed the law to an affirmative defense for home players and it is a very low misdemeanor now so I think they removed Washington State from the Terms and Conditions:

http://msn.worldwinner.com/cgi/legal/terms_pop.html?ref=deposit

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually this bill in Washington state did not pass the legislature during the last session. It was mis-reported as passed for several days though. Sure glad I live in the 'Nanny State' that knows what's best for me!

[permafrost]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Good work Jeffiner99.

Can you say if you have also asked the Attorneys General the same questions?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I hadn't thought of it. Why AGs? The legislation says that Governors or other chief executive officer that informs the Governor that gaming is illegal. Do you think AGs fall into that latter category?

Let me know a reason and I will be happy to. It took me about 5 hours to send all the other emails. So thank you for recognizing the work. It is greatly appreciated.

[/ QUOTE ]

The more I think about it, I don't see a way to phrase the question so that they could legally reply, until the law passed.