The presidential contest is intensifying, and the betting sector is making significant wagers. Although there were some raised eyebrows when the initial Democratic primary debate occurred at Wynn Las Vegas, the premier property of casino magnate Steve Wynn – an individual who has publicly clashed with President Obama on matters such as healthcare and economic policy – the choice to hold such a pivotal gathering at a glamorous Vegas establishment is logical. Indeed, the connections between wagering and the 2016 election are irrefutable, with numerous points of intersection between the two.
The American Gaming Association (AGA) is increasing its investment in this relationship, initiating a substantial endeavor linked to the presidential race. Known as “Gaming Votes,” the effort seeks to emphasize the industry’s influence, especially concerning employment and financial matters, while also informing casino personnel about the candidates’ positions on gambling-related topics.
To underscore this message, AGA President and CEO Geoff Freeman dispatched a letter to all the contenders, encouraging them to demonstrate their backing for the gaming sector. The message is unambiguous: in this high-stakes competition, the house invariably holds a position at the table.
He deemed Nevada a “pivotal swing state” and stressed that contenders “must grasp the contemporary gambling sector, a $53 billion industry sustaining approximately 425,000 positions in Nevada and yielding almost $8 billion in tax receipts.” The correspondence recommended recipients engage with Nevada’s chosen representatives, visit a casino or vendor, and converse with individuals directly profiting from the sector.
This concentration isn’t confined to Nevada. Previous October, the American Gaming Association escorted Senator Cory Gardner, Congressman Scott Tipton, business and civic leaders from the Denver vicinity, and test engineers to explore Gaming Laboratories International’s central office in Wheat Ridge, Colorado, for a dialogue session. “We’re not your ancestor’s gaming sector, but a nationwide financial driver that generates well-compensated employment opportunities in every part of Colorado,” Freeman stated. “While most Coloradans don’t frequent a casino daily, the industry makes substantial contributions to the state and its inhabitants, from schooling to travel.”
**The GOP Emphasis**
As we examine the particular gaming topics, dialogues, and allusions that have surfaced in the presidential contest thus far, we discover a considerable emphasis on the conservative side. During the second Republican debate in Simi Valley, California, hopefuls Jeb Bush and Donald Trump clashed regarding the latter’s purported aim to introduce casino wagering to Florida.
Their dispute concerning United States media garnered significant attention, as evidenced by the following passage:
**Bush:** “He desired gaming establishments in Florida…”
**Trump:** “That is inaccurate–”
**Bush:** “On the contrary, you did, you expressed a desire for it.”
**Trump:** “Entirely untrue.”
**Bush:** “You sought it, but your efforts were thwarted due to my opposition–”
**Trump:** “I would have succeeded in obtaining it.”
**Bush:** “–I am not susceptible to influence, neither in the past, present, nor future.”
**Trump:** “I assure you, had I truly desired it, it would have been mine.”
**Bush:** “–Gaming establishments–”
**Trump:** “I reiterate, if it had been my objective, I would have attained it.”
In terms of veracity, the fact-checking platform Politifact.com determined: “Our investigation yielded no documentation of Trump directly petitioning the state for gambling privileges; however, substantial evidence suggests that Trump was engaged in negotiations for a deal to manage casinos on Seminole Tribe territory in Florida. Furthermore, Trump made contributions to Bush and the state GOP during Bush’s 1998 gubernatorial campaign.”
This candid dialogue illustrated the willingness of both individuals to articulate their positions and remain resolute. Conversely, another contender, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, exhibited considerably less restraint in the subsequent debate held at the University of Colorado when the facilitator broached the subject of the regulatory framework governing daily fantasy sports. Christie, who had been endeavoring to overturn a federal statute prohibiting land-based sports wagering in New Jersey, offered the following perspective on the characterization of DFS: “Are we truly contemplating governmental intervention in fantasy football? Let us pause for a moment.”
Submerged in financial obligations, citizens lack employment, extremists aim to harm us, and our focus is on imaginary gridiron contests? Can we shift our attention? Sufficient discussion about fictional football, allow individuals to partake. What is the significance?”
**The Financier**
Although the prospective Republican candidates understandably command attention in any dialogue concerning the GOP contest, there exists another pivotal, interconnected, and presently unresolved inquiry: Who will emerge victorious in the Sheldon Adelson contest?
Sheldon Adelson, the head of the Las Vegas Sands Corporation, purportedly expended nearly $150 million during the 2012 election cycle, encompassing $30 million and $15 million on endeavors to secure the elections of Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, correspondingly. Conjecture has circulated regarding where Adelson might allocate his resources this time, with recent accounts implying Marco Rubio is the leading contender for the mega-contributor’s backing.
Republican hopefuls have allegedly been undertaking frequent visits and telephone conversations with Adelson, eager to obtain both the party’s nomination and the casino tycoon’s substantial wealth. These aspirants include Rubio, who has purportedly even sought Adelson’s guidance on specific policy stances. This wooing, coupled with his endorsement of matters crucial to Adelson’s interests, such as prohibiting internet wagering – Rubio co-sponsored the anti-online gaming legislation RAWA – has given rise to reports that he is positioned to be the primary recipient of Adelson’s contributions.
The American gaming sector lacked the power to unilaterally determine the outcome of the 2016 Presidential race. Although casino magnate Sheldon Adelson possesses considerable sway, even his wealth couldn’t dictate the GOP’s selection. Nevertheless, the gaming industry’s impact on the election transcended Adelson’s financial contributions. From the economic weight of gambling establishments to their occasional emergence as contentious topics, their presence resonated. This influence even reached the concluding presidential debate, hosted at UNLV’s Thomas & Mack Center, a mere stone’s throw from the Las Vegas Strip.
Therefore, what were the candidates’ positions on gaming?
**Hillary Clinton (Democrat)**
Clinton’s perspective on gambling appeared to shift over time. In 1984, as Arkansas’ First Lady, she opposed the establishment of casinos within the state. Yet, by 2000, she endorsed casino ventures in the Catskills and Niagara Falls, contending that if it stimulated tourism, she was in favor. During her time in Congress, she voted for the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 but subsequently supported investigating the viability of regulating internet gambling.
**Bernie Sanders (Democrat)**
[The supplied text omits details regarding Bernie Sanders’ position on gambling.]
In 2006, Senator Bernie Sanders demonstrated his endorsement of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) not only verbally but also through his ballot. He supported a modification intended to effectively cease practically all aspects of internet gaming, even attempting to eliminate certain safeguards that were established for skill-dependent games. Although it ultimately proved unsuccessful, it provides insight into his position.
Senator Marco Rubio, a member of the Republican Party, has emerged as a prominent figure in endeavors to halt online gambling, notably as a co-sponsor of the Restoration of America’s Wire Act (RAWA). He has articulated his perspective unequivocally, expressing his longstanding opposition to the expansion of gambling and perceiving online gambling as an activity that primarily exploits individuals facing financial difficulties. He characterizes it as a levy on the impoverished that yields no economic growth. Nevertheless, he has acknowledged that online poker might warrant separate consideration due to the element of skill involved. Interestingly, in 2009, he denounced attempts to broaden gambling in Florida as an unethical and foolish pursuit.
Furthermore, there is Donald Trump, a Republican who established his business empire on casinos through Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts. Despite relinquishing direct control in 2009 (the company is now recognized as Trump Entertainment Resorts), he reportedly continues to derive financial benefits from it, allegedly receiving a portion of the profits in exchange for the ongoing utilization of his name. The company previously operated three casinos in Atlantic City. Trump Plaza ceased operations in 2014, while Trump Taj Mahal remains operational. However, Trump Marina has been rebranded as the Golden Nugget Atlantic City, under the ownership of Landry’s. Trump’s venture in Las Vegas was short-lived; he acquired a 10% stake in the Las Vegas Riviera Hotel and Casino in 2004 but divested it a mere nine months later.
This article was initially featured in the January/February edition of Gambling Insider magazine.
