Divide and Conquer
Adelson Funded study that is iGaming Out Swinging, To No One’s Shock
Las Vegas Sands CEO Sheldon Adelson has funded a study that is four-state, not surprisingly, doesn’t come up in favor of iGaming.
The benefit of studies is, you can generally cause them to support just about any standpoint on just about any such thing, dependent on who is included and how you interpret the information. And if it is mega-billionaire Las Vegas Sands CEO Sheldon Adelson funding the findings, you can be sure the studies will get any which way you want ’em to.
Adelson No iGaming Fan Himself
It’s no news that Adelson for reasons that are maybe not entirely clear to your rest of the mostly pro-iGaming casino industry is vehemently, adamantly opposed to queenofthenileslots.org the whole concept of Internet gambling. He has been known to refer to the concept that is very ‘a cancer waiting to occur’ and ‘a toxin which all good people need to resist,’ and also funded TV and print advertisements the 2009 summer towards that end.
Now Adelson’s commissioned poll results with this subject were obtained and released by Nevada public affairs reporter Jon Ralston. The findings focus on four potentially key states in this matter: California, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Kentucky. Kentucky? Who knew. And journalist that is even seasoned who hosts the nightly Las Vegas political news show ‘Face to Face’ has noted on his blog that the findings of the study had been ‘quite startling’; mainly, the rather obviously self-serving leanings towards land gaming and away on the internet version of the same. Namely, legal brick-and-mortar casinos were found to be ‘a method to generate income for the state,’ with approval ratings ranging from most of 66 percent in Pennsylvania (which includes already proved just as much making use of their current growth in that arena), 61 % in Kentucky, 57 % in California and 54 % in Virginia.
But the opinions on iGaming were not quite therefore friendly.
State Budget Crises Affect Outlooks
Particularly interesting there is that neither Kentucky nor Virginia have any land that is legal at this juncture in time. For Pennsylvania and California, the support stemmed mostly from the aspire to help offset state budget deficits, despite the fact that land-based casino saturation nationwide is already starting to rear its ugly head and there is more flatlining to come, according to some industry experts. In reality, the latest land casino to go up in Pennsylvania Isle of Capri, based in southwestern area Farmington was already forced to layoff 15 percent of its workforce just two months after opening.
Virginia study participants reportedly showed a disdain for ‘Las Vegas-style gaming.’ We guess that’s diverse from say, ‘Indian casino-style gaming’ or ‘politicians-from-the-suburbs-style gaming.’ Exactly What?
Where this supposedly unbiased study gets interesting is with its reported findings on Internet gambling, but. Because, according to this study, in every four queried states, 3x as numerous of those who participated didn’t have a positive view of iGaming, by having an general average margin off 66-22 on the ‘ we do not want it’ side of the fence. Dependent on wording (surprise, surprise), the views shifted slightly, and Kentucky and Virginia participants stated many vehemently that they were in support of online casino bans, by 63-27 and 55-33 margins respectively.
The poll did not plainly differentiate between general Internet gambling and on-line poker per se, however, and before anyone freaks out a lot of about what some of this could potentially mean for the future of state-by-state iGaming being regulated and legalized, keep in mind that, according to poker advocate Marco Valerio back in 2011, 67 percent of New Jerseyans had been dead set against online gambling enterprises, and now we see how that played out.
Supreme Court Judge Rejects Challenge to New York Casino Referendum
Tioga Downs lets its feelings be understood in no uncertain terms regarding brand new York State’s upcoming casino referendum by voters. (Image source: Ithacajournal.com)
A brand New York State judge has rejected a challenge to the wording of the latest York’s upcoming casino referendum, paving the means for voters in the state to vote in the measure in November.
The lawsuit was dismissed by State Supreme Court Justice Richard M. Platkin, who found the challenge that is legal be ‘untimely and with a lack of legal merit.’
Delayed Vote Shot Down
That had been a blow that is big opponents associated with measure, whom had hoped that they are able to delay a vote, or at least change the wording that would appear on the ballot. The case was brought up by Brooklyn bankruptcy attorney Eric J. Snyder, who objected towards the language used into the referendum question. On the ballot, the measure is described as ‘promoting job growth, increasing aid to schools and permitting neighborhood governments to lessen property taxes.’
That ended up being the language that had been authorized by the State Board of Elections in which consulted with Governor Andrew Cuomo to craft the measure july. The governor is a strong supporter of the measure, and crafted an amount of compromises and addresses different interests in hawaii to make this kind of proposition possible.
However, Snyder and others said that the language being used was unfair. Since the language included suggested good outcomes of the casino expansion, it could unfairly bias the total results of the referendum. These concerns gained merit that is additional a poll by Siena College found that support for the ballot referendum increased by nine percentage points once the positive language was included, compared to when more neutral language have been used.
Justice Platkin dismissed these claims, though. He said that Snyder’s lawsuit had been filed far after the 14-day screen in which challenges to ballot-language are permitted had passed away. That screen began on August 19 or perhaps August 23, according to Snyder, though that would have made little difference and the challenge wasn’t made until October 1.
Naturally, the state was pleased that their appropriate arguments were accepted, and that the vote would go on as prepared.
‘We’re pleased that Judge Platkin accepted the appropriate arguments which we raised and that the election process can continue moving forward,’ stated Board of Elections spokesman Thomas Connolly.
Opponents Voice Disappointment
Meanwhile, opponents of the measure had been predictably disappointed by your choice.
‘We’re disappointed that the judge decided on to block a discussion that is legitimate the merits of whether the state gamed the language of the casino amendment to tilt New Yorkers to a yes vote,’ stated a statement by the latest York Public Interest analysis Group (NYPIRG).
But Snyder says that he is not done yet. He plans to find emergency relief from the appellate courts, and points out that the Board of Elections had the opportunity to use an earlier version of the referendum suggested by the state attorney general’s workplace that did not are the ‘advocacy language.’
‘Ignoring the attorney general’s recommendation, the Board of Elections changed the neutrally worded casino amendment by adding language to gain voter help,’ Snyder told The nyc instances.
If the measure should pass, it would mention to seven casino that is new to selected regions of the Empire State. They would join a quantity of existing casinos that are owned and operated by indigenous US groups throughout the area.