Sanity From the Federal Bench
When I discussed legalizing sports betting with Governor Markell a few months ago I asked what the chances were that we would be legally allowed to do it. He told me that they had submitted the question to the State Supreme Court for review. That report came back with some positive results for the administration, suggesting that it would be legal by the state constitution.
This did not surprise me in the least. This is the same court that found that calling a slot machine a “video lottery machine” made it legal. Never mind the fact that the constitution specifically forbids them:
§17. Lotteries and other gambling.
Section 17. All forms of gambling are prohibited in this State except the following:
(a) Lotteries under State control for the purpose of raising funds,
(b) Lotteries (other than slot machines, roulette, craps, and baccarat games) provided that each is sponsored and conducted under the limitations of Section 17B by companies, organizations, or societies which have been in existence for at least two years; provided, however, that no person who shall not have attained the age of 18 years shall participate in any lottery (where money is the prize) otherwise authorized by the Article. (6-2-83)
Wisely, the NFL et al., took their case to a place where the salaries of the judiciary were unaffected by the coffers of the state of Delaware, the Feds. The federal law exempted Delaware from their 1992 ban on sports betting, but only in a very limited way. Clearly, the feds take their laws and Constitution much more seriously.
Can we now move on here and find real sources of revenue? Also, I wonder who has “standing” to challenge the slots at the racetracks…
Tags: Delaware Budget, Gambling, sports betting
Also, I wonder who has “standing” to challenge the slots at the racetracks
Geek, should I take it you’re no supporter of the
slotvideo lottery machines, then? I enjoy them, er…enjoyED them when I could afford blow money, but now that I don’t have that to spend, I stay away.The last time I went, the Mrs Smitty and I went to Dover Downs. We ate up north, but went down there for a little slots and then DJ+dancing. All said and done, it was a good time. We wished we ate down there at (I don’t know if I have this name right) Doc McGrogan’s(?). Anyway, we got there, each had a beer, played the nickels for about 40 minutes, padded our wallet by $30 or so, and extended our ability to imbibe and snack on an appetizer. All said and done, we had a great time. Take away those slots and none of that would stick around. The slots have become so ingrained, that there would be a painful shot in revenue and employment if they were yanked.
FWIW – I would like to see an attempt to amend the consitution so they can call it what it is and not the ‘video lottery’ nod-and-wink.
I am not a supporter. But of course that is immaterial. The question is why we look the other way to violations of the state constitution? I am not a gambler, although I have donated small amounts of money to a few casinos.
If the constitution said that the Governor can only serve 2 terms, and I like the Governor (both of which are actually true), would it be OK to allow the Governor to run for a third term if the court said that it was OK, if we change the spelling of Governor to “Guv’ner”?
If we want to allow slot, change the constitution. Otherwise, I want to find someone with standing to clear them out.
I think they should change it, too, because of what you say; however, I am not for reversing its existence at this point, either. Yes, I know, it’s a double-standard, but it’s here and there is a lot that now hinges on its sticking around. There are a lot of jobs tied into it as well as ancillary businesses, such as restaurants, shops, the hotel (in Dover’s example), etc. Therein lies the quandry. If this comes up for amendment and loses, then what? Does it continue as “video lottery” or is it all wiped out and shut down?
Sorry, I’m just catching up today. But if this is what the constitution says, how do they get table games started without changing this?
While I’m agnostic on gambling, I am not a fan of counting on its revenues for funding government. There is way too much volatility in this revenue stream and as other venues come online around us the competition gets keener. Then at some point the venues already here step up to ask for help in becoming more competitive with more promises of easy state money. Gambling funds ought to go to a scholarship program or to a taxpayer rebate program or something that clearly treats it as the found money it is.