It is STILL only about money

On Friday, as a rider to a port-security bill, the President of the United States signed into law, an act that would prevent the payment of debts with credit card, cheque or electronic funds transfer to any on-line gaming site. Essentially making it "illegal" to bet on-line. The reason? Officially, the bill's sponsor, one Robert W. Goodlatte (R-Va.) said he opposed all gambling, citing its "ill effects on society," but particularly Internet gambling, for reasons that are not cited in the article (Washington Post Saturday October 14, 2006 - A Section).

While Rep. Goodlatte sounds like a throwback to the time of Prohibition (which is what Annie Duke says they have essentially imposed), and for all his "moral and ethical" high ground, which I think he does not hold, the issue is not related to the ill effects gambling has on society, for if it was, then why did Rep. Goodlatte not take a run at abolishing all gambling? No, the issue, as I have said before, is the inability of the United States Government to glean any form of revenue from the industry. This is probably made most clear by the lack of argument or even opinion of the major casinos and their association. Their opinion is that the guy who bets on-line is not one of their customers anyway. What they would like, however, is for Congress to study whether legalized, nationwide, taxed and regulated like what they have in Britain. Tell me again that it has something to do with protecting society?