The District’s Council deserves thanks for repealing the Internet gambling law.
This law should have never been adopted without public hearings, committee reviews and careful consideration by the community. Clearly, for a law as important as this one, the process didn’t work the way it should have.
Councilman Jack Evans and the Finance Committee, in particular, deserve credit for taking steps to correct this. The committee held a roundtable last year to begin discussion on this matter. It asked D.C. Lottery to hold ward-by-ward community meetings and it followed this with the recent public hearing on the measure.
This law was expansive. It would have brought casino-type gambling into homes and bars, restaurants and hotels. It would have created new risks for families and neighborhoods. It would have hurt people
The District would have been hurt as well. There were many unanswered questions about how the law would work.
There was no discussion, for instance, on whether the gambling age should be raised from 19 to 21. It’s 21 in Nevada.
There was nothing in the law limiting the number of neighborhood sites that could be created for gambling.
There were no limits on the types of the games. Some argue, for instance, that Internet gambling should be limited to so-called games of skill, such as poker.
There was no contingency made for addressing problem gambling, other than to limit losses to $250 a week.
There was no oversight body, no gaming commission or lottery board, created by this law to monitor and regulate the operation. There were no regulations.
By repealing, the Council, in the end, showed that the process can work.