California.On the one hand much of it is illegal, but on the other hand some of it is legal (Indian Gaming, Horse Racing, Lotto etc).Potentially upcoming at the next state election (February 5, 2008) will be an initiative to expand gambling under the state constitution.The name of the initiative is Internet Poker.
United States, 24 states and the District of Columbia use an initiative process statewide or locally.It is an opportunity for citizens to write their own legislation, gather signatures of support, and put it on the ballot for all registered voters to decide its fate.This process bypasses the elected representatives and once passed by citizens can only be overturned if unconstitutional or if another citizen passes an initiative changing it.Currently, only two initiatives have been approved by the California Secretary of State to be placed on the February 5, 2008 ballot.Internet Poker supporters are still collecting signatures. Internet Poker: What may be the new law?
(1) Creates a state-owned internet poker site
(2) 90% of the net revenues from the site will be distributed to cities and counties for STREET REPAIR
(3) 10% of the net revenues will be distributed to the CA Gambling Addiction Fund
(4) 21 years of age or older can play
(5) Full Text of the Legislation
How would you vote on this initiative? Why?What are pros and cons to this initiative?
2 Responses to “Internet Poker: Should the State Government Participate?”
Isn’t it rather ironic that we tempt/encourage an addiction for the sake of the state’s funding (what exactly is the connection between internet gambling and road repair) and then place a token amount of money as a payback for addictions intervention? As a counselor I have seen the other side of addictions–uncontrollable debt, deceit, loss of material and emotional stability. “They are going to do it anyway” is a sad response to the problem. Its like the old joke about the smoker who saved coupons from the back of his cigarette packs to purchase an iron lung…….not funny. And certainly not a responsible community response to growing addiction behavior or easy, public access to the temptation.
I believe it doesn’t seem right for them to be using their money on assumption. Also there should be a limit to how much people should spend there time on poker. That is why I believe it is good that the U.S. has to make it illegal to play poker. But then again it is sad because the U.S. has more important stuff to worry about and better places to spend the goverments money. The people that play poker all the time to try there luck is rediculace. So with that I believe poker is not a big part of our culture so I approve what the government is trying to do.
Isn’t it rather ironic that we tempt/encourage an addiction for the sake of the state’s funding (what exactly is the connection between internet gambling and road repair) and then place a token amount of money as a payback for addictions intervention? As a counselor I have seen the other side of addictions–uncontrollable debt, deceit, loss of material and emotional stability. “They are going to do it anyway” is a sad response to the problem. Its like the old joke about the smoker who saved coupons from the back of his cigarette packs to purchase an iron lung…….not funny. And certainly not a responsible community response to growing addiction behavior or easy, public access to the temptation.
I believe it doesn’t seem right for them to be using their money on assumption. Also there should be a limit to how much people should spend there time on poker. That is why I believe it is good that the U.S. has to make it illegal to play poker. But then again it is sad because the U.S. has more important stuff to worry about and better places to spend the goverments money. The people that play poker all the time to try there luck is rediculace. So with that I believe poker is not a big part of our culture so I approve what the government is trying to do.