By Michelle Minton Competitive Enterprise Institute Blog. Excerpt:
"Seitz’s decision did not open a “Pandora’s box”—the box had been open
for two decades. There is and never has been a federal prohibition on
online gambling, which took off as soon as the Internet and personal
computing became a staple in American life. In 1999 Scott Olson writing for the Journal of Technology and Law Policy
noted that by 1997 consumers spent an estimated $1 billion worldwide on
net gambling, with around 60 percent coming from the U.S. (even Kenny Rogers
had an online casino in 1998). And during the years when the DOJ was
arguably strictest against online gambling, Americans continued to spend
billions—$30 billion between 2003 and 2010—gambling
on foreign-operated sites. The OLC’s opinion simply dispelled some of
the ambiguity in federal law and allowed state authorities to begin
regulating the activity within their borders.
Experts “warn that online gambling is dangerously addictive for some, especially children.”
Goodman never names these experts. Later in the article she quotes
“experts” (it’s unclear if they’re the same experts) who claim that the
demographic most at risk for problem gambling are people between the
ages of 18 and 25. While 18-25 isn’t exactly a tot, I’ll give her the
point: Pathological gambling, like other addictive behaviors can ruin
lives. The question Ms. Goodman fails to ask is: What impact will the DOJ’s 2011 memo have for these at-risk gamblers?
It seems intuitive that as gambling becomes more available the rate
of problem gambling will increase. But research has shown this is not
the case. While greater opportunity for gambling does correlate with a
temporary increase in disordered behavior, it is just that: temporary.
Worldwide rates of problem gambling have been declining since the late 1990s. And according to Harvard addiction expert Howard J. Shaffer,
the U.S. rate of pathological gambling remained relatively stable over
several decades, and has actually decreased since the 1970s, despite a
significant increase in gambling availability.
And while there always will be a small portion of the population who
show signs of pathological behavior, it is not a reason to ban an
activity for everyone, especially in light of the fact that
online casinos are better equipped to address such problems than their
brick-and-mortar counterparts.
Many studies, including from Harvard Medical School’s Division on Addiction Studies, have found that online gambling is no more addictive than on-site gaming (see also page 403).
In fact, some found that addiction rates were lower for online gambling
than some off-line games. One reason could be that online games have
substantially more avenues through which they can identify and address
compulsive gambling behavior."
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.