Since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2018, States can allow sports bettinglegal gambling has exploded across America, leaving several predictable problems as a result.
Many of the 30+ states that allow sports betting — including Michigan, Virginia When connecticut — There is a surge in demand for services that help gambling addicts. no resource Respond appropriately.online gambling Popular among high school studentsAlthough, the legal betting age ranges from 18 to 21, depending on the state. Also, the amount of money some Americans currently spend on sports betting should raise concerns for their financial health: in just one month last year, sports gamblers lost his $7 billion I bet. 20x increase From 3 years ago. That’s money they’re not spending on other parts of the economy. borrowed This means that you may not be able to repay.
California will be the next state to embrace this ludicrous plan if the corporations that own the betting platforms and the tribes that run the casinos give way. You should prevent that from happening by denying the . These two competing measures allow sports betting in California, but in different ways, and both lead to a nasty expansion of gambling.
Proposition 26Backed by Native American tribes that operate casinos such as Pechanga and Agua Caliente, four privately owned racetracks and state-agreed tribal casinos will allow direct sports betting. It will also expand the types of games allowed in Indian casinos to include roulette and craps.
Proposition 27Backed by several betting platforms such as DraftKings and FanDuel.It also allows betting on award shows and other non-sporting competitions.
This essentially turns any mobile phone, tablet or computer into a legal casino where you can place bets with just a few taps of the app.
The spread of technology and the fact that many people are familiar with sports Addictive online sports betting More than any other type of gambling, experts have found. First, it’s easier to take your gambling device out of your pocket than it is to go to a casino. Additionally, there is the fact that people who follow the team tend to believe that they have a better knowledge of the cards than the table or the slots that forces him to place more bets than the machines. A study published in the Journal of Gambling Studies found that studies comparing people who bet on sports with people who bet on other types of bets “found that sports bettors were at higher risk of problem gambling.” .
Proposition 26 avoids the problem of Internet-based gambling, but presents other problems. The provision making it easier for card rooms to be sued is the latest salvo in a long-running feud between Indian tribes and card room operators over which venues have the right to offer certain types of games. Equivalent to Advocates for the humane treatment of animals worry that by allowing sports betting on racetracks, Prop. 26 will fuel a cruel industry that is losing public support.
Prop. 26 aligns with California voters’ past support for allowing gambling on tribal land, but the action not only enriches funders but also drives competitors away. Equivalent to a toxic brew of industry profits designed for If California decides to adopt sports betting, it should use a framework that is as fair as possible, rather than blatantly picking winners and losers.
One argument from proponents of both measures is that sports betting takes place everywhere, legal or not, so California would be better off regulating and taxing the practice than pushing it into the shadows. Legalization, they said, would curb the black market and generate massive amounts of taxes for the state.
While this sounds good, California’s experience with legalizing cannabis shows that there are reasons for skepticism. The same argument was made in 2016, when voters approved recreational marijuana, but six years later, the black market has continued to thrive. About three-quarters of the weed sold in California is illegal, and legal sellers say all the taxes they face make it difficult to compete with illegal drug dealers. says there is.
Prop. 27 aims to reduce illegal betting by penalizing people who use illegal websites and creating new enforcement units in state departments of justice, but the UCLA Gambling Research Program’s expert House said it was not confident it would lead to meaningful black market suppression. Other states that allow online sports betting still compete with many unregulated online bets. Professor of Psychiatry Timothy Fongand he doesn’t think it will go away in California.
Continued activity on the black market could mean that the taxes generated by sports betting trickle down rather than explode. I recall that taxing weed promised to provide a ton of new funding for programs to help youth and prevent substance abuse. lower than expected and the state is just reduced tax rate Because the legal market is so confusing.
The amount of new taxes generated under Proposition 26 is uncertain, with bipartisan legislative analysts saying “but could reach tens of millions of dollars annually.” It will be spent on schools, gambling addiction programs, sports betting enforcement, and the state general fund. A racetrack that offers sports betting pays his 10% of bets to the state, while the tribe negotiates tax payments in agreements with the state.
Proposition 27 will likely generate more tax revenue, up to $500 million a year, according to legislative analysts, but that number is also uncertain. Tribes and companies that offer sports betting pay a 10% tax on bets. They will also pay the tribe his $10 million license fee and the corporation his $100 million license fee. The taxes generated are first used to regulate the sports betting industry.Remaining funds are mainly used deal with the homeless, for example, by subsidizing affordable housing, emergency shelters and navigation centers. A portion of the funds (15%) goes to tribes not involved in online sports betting.
No wonder voters are upset about the vast numbers of Californians without a roof over their heads. But don’t think Proposition 27 will solve the homeless problem. Over the past two years, the California legislature pledged her $13.5 billion to provide shelter and services to the homeless as the state budget flooded with surplus funds. Taxes from sports betting provide an ongoing source of funding, but the amount may not be a game changer.
Worse, legalizing addictive gambling could push more people into extreme poverty and require government services, thereby undermining the amount of money the state is actually making. there is. “Online sports betting can make it more difficult for gambling addicts to avoid betting.” Written by a Legislative Analyst“This could increase the number of people in need of government assistance.”
Some might view Propositions 26 and 27 as indicators of cultural evolution, as sports betting has become more socially acceptable in recent years. perhaps. But it is an evolution driven by greed.
The normalization of sports betting has been fueled by betting platforms. athletic league And media companies profit from persuading people to place bets.so if you like gambling pour in hundreds of millions of dollars MOVING TO PROPOSITIONS 26 AND 27, CLEANING OUR LAST SPENDING RECORD ON STATE BALLOTA MEASURES.
If both measures are passed, both could be in effect, with Prop. 26 governing the in-person sports betting industry and Prop. 27 governing the online industry. However, there could be a protracted legal battle over whether California can operate her two different sports betting systems.
California needs no more gambling or litigation. Propositions 26 and 27 are both bad bets because the risks outweigh the benefits. Please don’t vote.
Comments
Post a Comment