By Frank Catania
Seemingly every attempt to regulate activity on the Internet raises questions about the proverbial slippery slope. But if regulation of the Internet is a slippery slope, then surely an outright ban of an Internet activity constitutes falling off the cliff.
Today, the House Judiciary Committee is expected to mark up an over-the-cliff approach, the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act. This bill would cut off the ability of Americans to use the Internet for almost all forms of gambling. (The big exception is for horse racing, underscoring the golden rule in politics: Special interests can win an exemption.)
This prohibition attempt has little to do with the technology; it's really about some members of Congress trying to impose their own sense of morality on the Internet. The Christian conservatives pushing these bills are attempting to force their religious beliefs - that gambling is immoral - on all Americans (all but those who bet on the horses).
What the bill's supporters fail to understand is that short of banning the Internet or heavily censoring it, as China does, Internet gambling will always be available to U.S. players. The Internet sails far beyond our boundaries or the long arm of U.S. law. More than 70 countries regulate Internet gambling, and sites based in these countries are accessible to U.S. players.
Most important, a ban on Internet gambling would not address the public-policy issues at hand, the very issues that gaming opponents warn about. A ban would not prevent underage gambling or offer assistance to problem gamblers. What would? Regulation.
State-of-the-art technology, including age-verification software and existing government databases, combined with proper operating procedures and strict regulation, can prevent minors from gambling online and offer greater assistance to problem gamblers.
If Internet gambling were regulated, sites could cross-reference driver's-license databases or voting registration lists to verify the age of players. For problem gamblers, a regulated environment provides operators the tools to monitor online activity and be instrumental in minimizing harm. And regulation of Internet operations, like the regulation of "bricks-and-mortar" gambling, allows all transactions to be tracked, audited and taxed, relieving concerns over financial impropriety.
As the former director of the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement, I understand that regulation is not simple. But I believe that strict regulation is the only effective means for controlling players and the environment in which they play.
The growth of the industry alone shows the need for regulation. In 2005, Internet gambling was a $12 billion industry worldwide, up from $3 billion in 2000. U.S. players account for more than half of this revenue. With regulation, U.S. companies would be able to get involved in this industry, reaping financial benefits such as tax revenues and job creation.
It's time Congress developed a consistent and sensible policy for Internet gambling. Whether the entertainment is online or offline, consumers deserve diligent regulators who make sure operators are honest, games are fair, winning players are paid promptly, problem gamblers are offered assistance or ultimately barred, and minors are prohibited from playing.
History has taught us that prohibition does not work. Instead, we need lawmakers to develop policies that offer consumer protections without restricting Internet access, freedom or innovation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frank Catania (Frank@cataniaconsulting.com) is president of Catania Consulting Group Inc. in New Jersey, a gaming consultancy, and former deputy speaker of the New Jersey General Assembly.
Seemingly every attempt to regulate activity on the Internet raises questions about the proverbial slippery slope. But if regulation of the Internet is a slippery slope, then surely an outright ban of an Internet activity constitutes falling off the cliff.
Today, the House Judiciary Committee is expected to mark up an over-the-cliff approach, the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act. This bill would cut off the ability of Americans to use the Internet for almost all forms of gambling. (The big exception is for horse racing, underscoring the golden rule in politics: Special interests can win an exemption.)
This prohibition attempt has little to do with the technology; it's really about some members of Congress trying to impose their own sense of morality on the Internet. The Christian conservatives pushing these bills are attempting to force their religious beliefs - that gambling is immoral - on all Americans (all but those who bet on the horses).
What the bill's supporters fail to understand is that short of banning the Internet or heavily censoring it, as China does, Internet gambling will always be available to U.S. players. The Internet sails far beyond our boundaries or the long arm of U.S. law. More than 70 countries regulate Internet gambling, and sites based in these countries are accessible to U.S. players.
Most important, a ban on Internet gambling would not address the public-policy issues at hand, the very issues that gaming opponents warn about. A ban would not prevent underage gambling or offer assistance to problem gamblers. What would? Regulation.
State-of-the-art technology, including age-verification software and existing government databases, combined with proper operating procedures and strict regulation, can prevent minors from gambling online and offer greater assistance to problem gamblers.
If Internet gambling were regulated, sites could cross-reference driver's-license databases or voting registration lists to verify the age of players. For problem gamblers, a regulated environment provides operators the tools to monitor online activity and be instrumental in minimizing harm. And regulation of Internet operations, like the regulation of "bricks-and-mortar" gambling, allows all transactions to be tracked, audited and taxed, relieving concerns over financial impropriety.
As the former director of the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement, I understand that regulation is not simple. But I believe that strict regulation is the only effective means for controlling players and the environment in which they play.
The growth of the industry alone shows the need for regulation. In 2005, Internet gambling was a $12 billion industry worldwide, up from $3 billion in 2000. U.S. players account for more than half of this revenue. With regulation, U.S. companies would be able to get involved in this industry, reaping financial benefits such as tax revenues and job creation.
It's time Congress developed a consistent and sensible policy for Internet gambling. Whether the entertainment is online or offline, consumers deserve diligent regulators who make sure operators are honest, games are fair, winning players are paid promptly, problem gamblers are offered assistance or ultimately barred, and minors are prohibited from playing.
History has taught us that prohibition does not work. Instead, we need lawmakers to develop policies that offer consumer protections without restricting Internet access, freedom or innovation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frank Catania (Frank@cataniaconsulting.com) is president of Catania Consulting Group Inc. in New Jersey, a gaming consultancy, and former deputy speaker of the New Jersey General Assembly.