The House of Representatives has passed a bill that its supporters would like you to think bans wagering over the World Wide Web. "This is the strongest bill that works to end this scourge of Internet gambling, protects our young people and our families," the Washington Times quoted Virginia Republican Robert W. Goodlatte, a cosponsor of the Internet Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act.
Rep. Goodlatte's morally inspiring words, however, weren't entirely true.
The bill does close a loophole in current law that has allowed offshore casinos and casinos in states where gambling is legal to accept online bets from residents of all 50 states. But it falls far short of prohibiting Internet gambling.
The House, for instance, carved out an exception for online interstate betting on horse racing. It also creates intrastate exceptions for Indian casinos and for lotteries.
So online gambling is a scourge if it's done with a non-Indian casino, but not if it's done with a state lottery. And young people and families need to be protected from betting on dogs, but betting on horses is a wholesome activity.
Far from being a strong measure against gambling, the Internet Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act is a demonstration of politics as usual in Washington. Interest groups with lobbying muscle on Capitol Hill got their exemptions, while legal brick and mortar casinos in the United States created a financial obstacle for their foreign, online competition.
Whether you support or oppose gambling is a matter of principle. A House measure that feigns gambling prohibition is about as unprincipled as playing poker with a marked deck of cards.