Conspiracy Theory: Put on Your Tin Foil Hats

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Why else would Harrah's donate, simple good will from a Senator from Tennessee(sp)? Does Harrah operate anything in Tennessee?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe Harrah's has any interests in Tenneesee.

But as Frist as demonstrated (along with the natural influence that comes with being the Majority Leader in the Senate), he's a powerful ally on issues of national scope that Harrah's may have a keen interest in -- labor relations, health care costs, policies pertaining to the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs to recognize tribes for casino projects they sponsor or co-partner in, federal laws regarding wagering on college athletics, etc. are all issues where Harrah's may be trying to buy influence or at least access via campaign contributions.

Harrah's has given away more than $300k in political contributions in 2006 to date -- $20k six years ago to one of the most powerful politicians in the country hardly seems indicative of some kind of conspiracy.

This article in In Business Las Vegas gives a relatively informative description of how and why B&M casinos contribute.

[LucidDream]

OK, I am done arguing here since everyone is going to believe what they want anyway. I will say this though in departing, pay attention to what these big casino companies do in the future in terms of online gaming. I guarantee you they make a run at it.

Ask yourself this. As hard as it is going to be to stop all of these online gambling sites right now, why would the US Govt go after them knowing what it is going to cost them to stop it? Things are always done for a reason and the main reason is usually money. If you think they are trying to keep the average american from losing his yearly salary playing poker that definately isn't the reason.

Don't get confused and think this is an online poker issue because it isn't. This is an online gambling issue and the issue is that big US casinos want to get into the online gambling business. Poker will be a small part of that big picture.

You would be naive not to see that this is what things are leading to.

[woodguy]

Here are Harrah's top 5 political contributions for the record you linked to. They are also the only amounts above $10K. (edited typing error, "about" s/b "above")

[ QUOTE ]
Amount Date Description
Ensign Majority Committee, Las Vegas, NV $19,500 2/17/2006
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Washingt $15,000 12/9/2005
National Republican Congressional Committee, Washi $15,000 6/26/2006
Senate Majority Committee, Washington, DC $12,000 6/24/2005 4K Allen VA, 4K Burns MT, 4K Battle Born

[/ QUOTE ]


It seems that their largest donation is to the Ensign Majority Commitee. That's the same dollar nubmer that appears in Frist list as coming from Harrah's.

So $20K for the guy who gets it done and $15K for the sheep to remain sheep on both sides of the aisle.

In the article you linked to, it states that:

[ QUOTE ]
Gaming is still regulated primarily by states rather than the federal government. It's also subject to nonpartisan debate, unlike other large corporate interests that typically lean Republican. Many liberal Democrats oppose casinos or don't support gaming expansion alongside conservative Republicans.

[/ QUOTE ]

So why would an industry that is almost wholly governed by state law save their biggest donations for federal poltics?

They also state that:

[ QUOTE ]
"We support people who support our industry," said Frank Fahrenkopf, chief executive of the American Gaming Association.

[/ QUOTE ]

So why would Harrah's single biggest donation be to the precise person who helped stem the flop of $$$ to current online gaming sites, but who sees gambling as evil. That doesn't sound like someone who supports the gambling industry.

I suppose they could be trying to buy Frist's vote, but when would Harrah's needs Frists vote?

The Native Casino link would be the most obvious answer to the question, "Why would Harrah's try to buy a powerful federal politicians?" (aside from online $$$ tinfoilhattheory) What is Frists voting record and public stance on those issues?

I understand this all may well be a coincidence, but when large $$$ are involved, coincidence can be tough to swallow on the surface.


Regards,
Woodguy

[Azizal]

[ QUOTE ]


Think about this: people have been trying to legalize marijuana for decades, and even though it is a relatively harmless substance with several demonstated health benefits, it remains prohibited.



[/ QUOTE ]

There are no deep pockets in the "legalize marijuana crowds". Online gambling in the US would be infinitely more profitable than legal marijuana. That is a huge difference between the two issues. Gambling is already legal in certain restricted ways, though much less than the few legal ways to use/grow pot. I would guess that more people in this country are for internet gambling than for the legalization of pot, though that makes little difference. It's all about the money, and the gambling interests have it, and the incentive to make more, while the marijuana "interests" are politically and financial midgets by comparison.

PS. This same whole conspiracy theory occurred to me and some friends as well. I think on some levels it is true, though the challenge to get gambling legalized is not a small one. However, given the amount of money involved I am sure some people are working towards it. Whether or not they succeed is up in the air.

[cmattos]

This was posted in the main Legislation forum, but it has particular relevance to this thread:

Party Gaming looking to purchase smaller gaming sites. MGM & Harrah's may follow.

[spatne]

[ QUOTE ]

There are no deep pockets in the "legalize marijuana crowds".

[/ QUOTE ]

Patchwork pants have very deep pockets. Unfortunately, they're filled with polished beads and brownie crumbs.

[mattnxtc]

I actually am expecting this...u get rid of the foreign competition and then allow US casinos to take over...i kinda expect to see this in a year or 2

[mason55]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what everyone here seems to miss is this:

the sites that would benefit the most from online poker legalization in the US would NOT be Harrahs, MGM, Bellagio, et al.

the best positioned companies would be google, myspace and AOL - sites that already get billions of traffic hits that they could easily translate into their new rooms.

Traffic leads to downloads, which leads to players, which leads to critical mass.

Harrahs et al could spend untold millions and still not get the traffic that the other sites already get - and these sites would not have to pay ANYTHING for this traffic.

money is not the problem in creating a room (see Mansion) - it is website traffic.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont buy it. The tie ins to their B&M casinos would be huge. FPP for rooms/suites. "HarrahsPoker.com, the exclusvie site to win WSOP seats" etc.

And the B&Ms have a big head start..programmings done, execs who know the game etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

any site could partner with Expedia to offer the same benefits as the casinos, or even more so. free flights, hotel rooms, etc.

re: the software/knowing the game: this stuff is easy (how much did Party know about poker?), and I would argue that a sits like Google (b/c of their massive bandwidth infrastucture) is actually the one with the headstart

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not arguing one way or another but all the casinos need to do is get a licensing clause written in and they won't have to worry about google et al.

this was mentioned earlier in the thread.

[tmfs]

[ QUOTE ]
Why else would Harrah's donate, simple good will from a Senator from Tennessee(sp)? Does Harrah operate anything in Tennessee? That may make sense if they do, and this conjecture is incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ]

Harrah's Casino
1100 Casino Strip Boulevard , (Off Hwy 61: 35 miles south of Memphis) , Robinsonville, TN

[Instyle007]

I'm so happy that my thread has lead to this wonderful discussion.

I don't know why Party & 888 threw in the towel so quickly. I do know however that something is up.

There is no reason for them to quit so easily. The law has not taken effect yet. Banking groups have said it will be very tough if not impossible to police. Some say the law doesn't apply to poker.

We'll find out soon enough I'm sure.