Some pending gambling legislation info

[RoadKillCafe]

This week, while your family is looking at higher gas prices and the dissolution of marriage on the West Coast, the Democratic Congress is spending their time catering to the gambling industry. Representative Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and John Dingell (D-Mich.) have introduced legislation (H.R. 2176 and H.R. 4115) that would override the wishes of Michigan voters in a 2004 gambling referendum. These two bills would use a questionable Indian Tribal land claim to legalize two new casinos in Michigan--350 miles from any current Tribal land!

Don't we have enough casinos in Michigan .. sheesh. Good ol' Bart, gonna vote him out.

In the House Financial Services Committee this week, Congressmen Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Ron Paul (R-Texas), with a possible assist from Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), will be pushing their legislation, H.R. 5767, to overturn the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA). While the congressmen insist that their cause is one of libertarianism, their true motivation likely lies with United Kingdom citizen Kobus Paulsen, CEO of the England-based UC Group, which will profit billions if the UIGEA is overturned. Mr. Paulsen helped Reps. Frank and Paul write their bill and is believed to be bankrolling much of the multi-million dollar effort to overturn the UGIEA.

That goofy UIGEA blocks US citizens playing online poker for $$, unless you want to use electronic checks that take $$ directly from your checking account (like I'm gonna let some unknown foreign company have direct access to my account). Why should we let offshore companies make all the $$?

[thousandcasts]

I don't gamble, but what does it matter how many casino's we have in Michigan? If they want to put one in every county, so be it--one doesn't ever have to gamble if one chooses not to.

Seems to me these people who are constantly opposing casino's and what not should find something better to do with their energy.

[RoadKillCafe]

Originally Posted by thousandcasts

I don't gamble, but what does it matter how many casino's we have in Michigan? If they want to put one in every county, so be it--one doesn't ever have to gamble if one chooses not to.

Seems to me these people who are constantly opposing casino's and what not should find something better to do with their energy.

I don't really either, but changing the laws that already work everywhere else seems wrong. Also, I would think that there is X total casino revenue for the state, and adding casinos just cuts the pie up into smaller pieces. Could be wrong (and frequently am just ask the wife).

[Sala]

Originally Posted by RoadKillCafe

I don't really either, but changing the laws that already work everywhere else seems wrong. Also, I would think that there is X total casino revenue for the state, and adding casinos just cuts the pie up into smaller pieces. Could be wrong (and frequently am just ask the wife).

I think you are right to a point, but I BET as casinos get closer to more people the revenue will go up. But it will lower the revenue of other casinos--but an overall gain in revenue

I say we let them build all the casinos they want--IN EXCHANGE for getting rid of the nets

[RoadKillCafe]

Originally Posted by Sala

I think you are right to a point, but I BET as casinos get closer to more people the revenue will go up. But it will lower the revenue of other casinos--but an overall gain in revenue

I say we let them build all the casinos they want--IN EXCHANGE for getting rid of the nets

I'd prefer them to diversify, try and find businesses that bring in $$ from outside the state. Diversification could help out, especially in the more rural areas.

How much revenue do they generate from the nets? I was really surprised to hear they were netting perch in Long Lake (Alpena).