This past spring, I wrote a blog series about gaming issues in Washington , and the presidential candidates stated opinions on those issues.  On election day, I thought it would be a useful exercise to recap what little we know about the two major presidential candidates positions on gaming related issues.

Both Barack Obama and John McCain are unabashed gambling aficionados.  McCain has been a regular visitor to the casinos here in Vegas, as well as in Arizona , Connecticut and New Jersey , with an avowed love for games of chance, particularly playing craps.  Obama was a regular member of the Illinois State Legislature weekly poker game and reportedly has continued his affection for poker since his arrival in Washington .  Unlike George W Bush, Bill Clinton or George Bush Sr., both of these candidates have actively and consistently gambled as adults.

John McCain took a strong stance against sports betting earlier this decade, but that stance has softened over the last four years.  What follows is an abridged version of an ESPN article from 2004...

“McCain wants to eliminate what he sees as the most troubling aspects of legalized gambling in the . He has led the fight to ban gambling on college sports, a battle the Nevada casinos have won (so far), in part by suggesting that he would make Super Bowl and NCAA pools illegal. And McCain would ban Internet gambling -- not because it's addictive, but because players typically have no way of knowing whether they are in fair games.

“And just as important, McCain has come to see his role as skirmishing as long as it takes for public opinion to come around his way. About banning gambling on college sports, he says: "When the most respected coaches in college athletics come to me and say, 'We want this banned because we think it can have a terrible effect on young people, then I'm going to react.”

“For McCain, though, that's not the bottom line. "I'll give you a little straight talk," he says. "There's going to have to be another scandal, and there probably will be." That's McCain: waiting for the next, inevitable burst of bad news to come along, to present an opportunity not only to excoriate wrongdoers but to corral the powerful into doing the right thing. To take another step toward saving sports.”

McCain has quietly disavowed his former position – apparently sports bettors are a bigger and more powerful constituency than he originally thought.  However, the Republicans have been at the forefront of anti-gaming legislation for the last eight years.  McCain, if elected, is unlikely to chance the infrastructure of the federal agencies that have been enforcing the anti-gaming agenda, most notably the Justice Department.

Barack Obama has supported a proposed study that would pave the way for legal online gaming at some point in the not-to-distant future.  The bad news is that legalized online gaming is not a high priority issue among the electorate or the presidential candidates; Obama has not been willing to go on the record supporting the cause.

The legislation proposing a study of online gambling is co-sponsored by Nevada Representative Shelley Berkley, who has been among the most outspoken opponents of recently passed prohibition.   Berkeley : “This legislation has a loophole big enough to drive a truck through that was designed solely to protect betting on horse racing and lotteries over the Internet.  Internet gaming is becoming more popular every day and we need a comprehensive federal study that looks at the question of whether or not it can be effectively regulated and what role technology can play in accomplishing that goal.

Obama “cautiously supports a study of Internet gambling and supports regulation to address the worst abuses”, which is somewhat reassuring to online gamblers.

Gambling expert, Professor I Nelson Rose: “When the Democrats took control of the Senate, Harry Reid, senator from Nevada , became majority leader. So, land-based casinos, which want a study and law allowing them to operate internet casinos, can get those, if the President is a Democrat. If John McCain wins nothing will change.

"Assuming Barack Obama …wins, the Democrats will keep control of Congress and there will be a change in the federal law. It might come as early as 2009. More likely, it won't be until 2010, or even later. For political cover, there could be an objective, scientific study done first, that proves that internet gambling can be kept safe from hackers, protecting the "vulnerables" (children and compulsive gamblers), and that states that don't want to allow can be blocked.”

Writing about politics is a dangerous subject on a sports betting website.  Whatever I write, and whatever conclusions I come up with are bound to elicit hostile reactions from those opposed to my personal viewpoint.  Sports bettors, as a demographic group, are not inherently political.  Based on anecdotal evidence among the many sports bettors that I’ve known over the years, there is a fairly even mix of Democrats and Republicans. 

That being said, there is probably a higher percentage of true independents, and third party affiliations among sports bettors than among the general public as a whole.  That’s no surprise really – sports bettors are generally better educated than the general public, and the nature of successful sports betting requires the ability to think independently, as opposed to following party mantras by rote.

When you look at the track record of the two parties that run Washington , they both have dismal results when it comes to personal freedoms, like the freedom to bet on sports.  During the Bush years, we’ve seen ambitious Republican prosecutors target offshore sports books and their advertising dollars.  We’ve seen numerous indictments handed out to the owners and directors of legal, licensed sports books from around the globe. 

We’ve seen the repressive UIGEA (Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act) slipped in as a rider to a ‘must pass’ Port Securities bill at the last minute, and pass virtually unopposed, leading to the pullout of major betting websites like Party Poker and Pinnacle from the US market. 

We’ve also seen Senator John McCain sponsor a bill in congress to outlaw legal sports betting within the on ‘amateur’ athletics, a bill that would have ended any betting on college football and basketball in Nevada casinos.  The other Arizona Senator, John Kyl, has repeatedly sponsored bills that target offshore sports books, casinos and poker sites for prosecution. 

Many conservative Republicans oppose gaming on moral and religious grounds, making it difficult to construct a rational argument against them that will have any affect on their opinions.  And the traditional laissez faire attitude of the Republican party when it comes to personal freedoms has gone out the window over the last decade.  Republicans have been absolutely horrible for sports bettors and poker players in the.

Clearly, the Democrats must be better, right?  Unfortunately, the big picture answer is ‘No’, at least not in the past.  Former Democratic governor Eliot Spitzer of New York effectively ended the easy flow of money to offshore sites with his ambitious attacks and shakedowns of the banks, credit card companies and internet payment sites like Paypal and Neteller.  Current Kentucky Democratic governor Steve Beshear has attempted to seize 141 gambling domain names from offshore operators, seeking to force the sites to block access to Kentucky users, or relinquish control of their domains.

Bill Clinton’s Attorney General, Janet Reno, was responsible for similar shakedowns, and was responsible for sending Jay Cohen to prison, still the only offshore sportsbook operator to be successfully convicted in federal court.  Cohen’s crime?  Running a legal, licensed sportsbook in another country, then having the guts to come back to the to fight the charges.  Every other sportsbook operator indicted by Reno (19 in all, if memory serves correctly) either settled with the government (forced to pay a bribe to avoid prosecution, in our ‘free and fair’ system) or simply gave up their right to return to US soil, fugitives from justice.

The Democrats have had every opportunity to negate the flow of anti-gaming legislation and regulations from the Bush White House, but they’ve sat on their hands and watched these draconian measures become law.  Don’t think for a minute that the Democrats are much better than Republicans as a whole on this issue, because their track record is almost as bad.

I’m a one issue voter.  My issue is slightly broader than just gambling – I look for candidates that support the concept of ‘personal freedom’ in the classic libertarian sense.  I don’t want the federal government to act like my mother, telling me which socially acceptable activities (like gambling) are allowable for me to engage in.  I don’t want the Feds prying into my personal affairs.  I am a tax paying adult, not a child, and I don’t favor any sort of government intrusion into my private life.

The single issue that concerns me the most is not the biggest issue on any politician’s current agenda.  There are legitimate reasons to be concerned about a complete Democratic takeover of the House, Senate and White House, despite recent broad indications of Democratic support for legalizing and regulating online gaming.  But John McCain’s track record for sports bettors and the horrors of the last eight years of the Republican Justice Department, leaves a sports bettor like me simply unable vote for McCain.

There are two prominent Democrats who are with us on the issue of sports betting.  Massachusetts Rep Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, has sponsored legislation to repeal the UIGEA.  Frank called the UIGEA the "stupidest (bill) ever passed".  Frank's own bill, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, seeks to legalize, license and regulate online gambling, but it’s a long, long way from passing. 

Michigan Rep John Conyers, Chairman of the House Judiciary committee too, is on our side on this issue. Conyers has repeatedly called for a study to investigate online gaming, probably the first step in the process.  Conyers has been a strong advocate of the revenue streams that taxation and regulation could bring to the government during this time of deficit spending. 

In a perfect world, guys like Conyers (a tax and spender if ever there was one) and Frank (the banking committee chairman who must be at least partially responsible for the $700 billion dollar bailout of the industry last month) would both be run out of office along with every single other incumbent politician in Washington.

In the real world, we must hold our nose and choose.  As a sports bettor, another four years of Republican rule would be worse than the potential promise of a new Democratic administration.  I personally ALWAYS vote for a third party candidate, but for those of you choosing between McCain and Obama, I’d have to endorse the Democrat, not the Republican.

For more sports betting analysis by Teddy Covers, go to www.sportsmemo.com.