Divide and Conquer
Adelson Funded iGaming Study Comes Out Swinging, To No One’s Shock
Vegas Sands CEO Sheldon Adelson has funded a study that is four-state, unsurprisingly, will not come up in favor of iGaming.
The benefit of studies is, you can generally get them to support almost any standpoint on just about anything, based on who is involved and exactly how you interpret the information. And when it’s mega-billionaire Las Vegas Sands CEO Sheldon Adelson funding the findings, you may be sure the studies will go any which way you want ‘em to.
Adelson No iGaming Fan Himself
It is no news that Adelson for reasons which can be perhaps not totally clear towards the remaining portion of the mostly pro-iGaming casino industry is vehemently, adamantly opposed to the whole concept of Internet gambling. He has been recognized to refer to the concept that is very ‘a cancer waiting to happen’ and ‘a toxin which all good people ought to resist,’ and also funded TV and print adverts this past summer towards that end.
Now Adelson’s commissioned poll results on this topic have now been obtained and released by Nevada public affairs reporter Jon Ralston. The findings focus on four states that are potentially key this matter: California, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Kentucky. Kentucky? Who knew. And even seasoned journalist Ralston who hosts the nightly Las Vegas political news show ‘Face to Face’ has noted on his weblog that the findings of the research had been ‘quite startling’; mainly, the rather demonstrably self-serving leanings towards land gaming and away from the web version of the same. Namely, legal brick-and-mortar gambling enterprises were found to be ‘a way to build revenue for the state,’ with approval ratings ranging from high of 66 percent in Pennsylvania (which includes already proved just as much using their current growth in that arena), 61 % in Kentucky, 57 percent in California and 54 per cent in Virginia.
But the opinions on iGaming were perhaps not quite therefore friendly.
State Budget Crises Affect Outlooks
Particularly interesting there is that neither Kentucky nor Virginia have any legal land casinos at this juncture in time. For Pennsylvania and Ca, the support stemmed mainly from the want 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 clearly was more flatlining to come, according to some industry experts. In fact, the latest land casino to get up in Pennsylvania Isle of Capri, located in southwestern area Farmington has already been forced to layoff 15 per cent of its workforce only two months after opening.
Virginia study participants reportedly showed a disdain for ‘Las Vegas-style gaming.’ We guess that’s different than state, ‘Indian casino-style gaming’ or ‘politicians-from-the-suburbs-style video gaming.’ What?
Where this study that is supposedly unbiased interesting is with its reported findings on Internet gambling, however. Because, according to the research, in most four queried states, 3x as much of those who participated did not have a positive view of iGaming, with an average that is overall off 66-22 on the ‘ we don’t like it’ side of the fence. Dependent on wording (surprise, surprise), the views shifted slightly, and Kentucky and Virginia participants stated many vehemently that they had been in support of online casino bans, by 63-27 and 55-33 margins respectively.
The poll did not demonstrably differentiate between general Internet gambling and poker that is online se, however, and before anybody freaks out too much in what any one of this may potentially mean for the future of state-by-state iGaming being regulated and legalized, understand that, according to poker advocate Marco Valerio back in 2011, 67 percent of New Jerseyans were dead set against online casinos, so we see just 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 New that is regarding York’s upcoming casino referendum by voters. (Image source: Ithacajournal.com)
A New York State judge has rejected a challenge to the wording of the latest York’s upcoming casino referendum, paving the way for voters into the state to vote in the measure in November.
The lawsuit had been 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 big blow to opponents regarding the measure, who had hoped that they could delay a vote, or at least change the wording that will appear on the ballot. The case ended up being brought up by Brooklyn bankruptcy attorney Eric J. Snyder, who objected to your language used within the referendum question. The measure will be described as ‘promoting task growth, increasing help to schools and allowing local governments to reduce home taxes. on the ballot’
That was the language which had been authorized by the State Board of Elections in July, which consulted with Governor Andrew Cuomo to craft the measure. The governor is a supporter that is strong of measure, and crafted an amount of compromises and handles different interests in hawaii to make this kind of proposal feasible.
However, Snyder and others said that the language getting used was unfair. Since the language included suggested positive outcomes of the casino expansion, it could unfairly bias real-money-casino.club the total results of the referendum. These issues gained additional merit when a poll by Siena College found that help for the ballot referendum increased by nine portion points when the positive language was included, in comparison to when more neutral language was indeed used.
Justice Platkin dismissed these claims, though. He said that Snyder’s lawsuit ended up being filed far after the window that is 14-day which challenges to ballot-language are permitted had passed. That window began on August 19 or maybe August 23, according to Snyder, though that could have made small difference and the challenge had not been made until October 1.
Obviously, the state was happy that their legal arguments were accepted, and that the vote would carry on as planned.
‘We’re pleased that Judge Platkin accepted the appropriate arguments which we raised and that the election process can carry on moving forward,’ said Board of Elections spokesman Thomas Connolly.
Opponents Voice Disappointment
Meanwhile, opponents of the measure were predictably disappointed by the decision.
‘We’re disappointed that the judge selected to block a genuine discussion on the merits of whether the state gamed the language of the casino amendment to tilt New Yorkers to a yes vote,’ said a statement by the New York Public Interest analysis Group (NYPIRG).
But Snyder says that he is not done yet. He plans to seek emergency relief from the courts that are appellate and points out that the Board of Elections had the opportunity to use an previous form of the referendum suggested by the state attorney general’s office 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 New York days.
If the measure should pass, it would mention to seven brand new casino resorts to selected regions of the Empire State. They would join a number of existing casinos that are owned and operated by native groups that are american the area.