Tuesday, September 19, 2006

Indiana House Minority Leader B. Patrick Bauer, D-South Bend, has a curious
take on the current video-gambling controversy. It's all the fault of
Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels' administration, which has "pushed the issue"
to the point where the legislature may have to decide soon whether to make
the machines legal or not. By cracking down on the American Legion and VFW
posts that have had the machines, Daniels "has created a crisis," so the
governor has some "answering" to do. Were you able to follow that reasoning?
If Daniels had just left things alone - with Cherry Masters and other video
gambling devices illegal, but everybody in the state simply ignoring the
law - things would have been perfectly OK. But, because Daniels insists that
the law be changed or followed - State Excise Police confiscated 517
machines from 117 locations statewide from December 2005 to April -
legislators might now actually have to take the law seriously, too. Any
rational examination of the situation has to credit Daniels for doing
exactly the right thing. It is intolerable to have a law that is routinely
ignored, and it is unconscionable for the legal community to look the other
way and pretend nothing is happening. Such a situation breeds disrespect not
just for a law but for the whole concept of law, and that's something no
civilized society can tolerate. The law against video gambling must be
repealed or enforced. It's not an easy call to make, but the General
Assembly should at least consider whether it's finally time to legalize the
machines. That's the request of the Indiana Licensed Beverage Association,
which is holding a series of meetings around the state to put pressure on
legislators for legalization. They make a good point. Considering all the
other ways in Indiana to gamble, from the lottery to pari-mutuel tracks to
bingo to casinos, "It's silly to say those are all OK but not video
gambling," is the way Brad Klopfenstein, executive director of the
association, puts it.

The gambling culture is strong in Indiana, in other words. That might be
deplorable, but it is a fact. That is why so many people are willing to
ignore the law. If the law is too far ahead of people's sensibilities, it
creates a climate of cynicism. What is the point, people reasonably ask, of
letting casinos rake in millions in profits that go out of state and, at the
same time, telling an American Legion or Moose Lodge it can't use gambling
revenues to stay in operation?

The state has the additional problem that it long ago gave up the high
ground on gambling, losing any moral authority to make pronouncements on the
evils of that particular vice. It's called the state lottery, which had
sales of $739 million last year and has collected $2.7 billion since it
began in 1989. The state's efforts to curb other forms of gambling make it
look little better than a bunch of gangsters trying to muscle other mobs out
of its territory. In addition to making the state a predator that preys on
human weakness, the lottery turns the budgeting process upside-down. Instead
of carefully making plans and seeking voter approval through tax rates, the
state now has a big pot of money it merely has to decide how to spend. How
can government thus funded not stay too big and intrusive?

So, the additional money the state will receive from legalization - as much
as $300 million a year, according to one estimate - does not constitute an
especially good argument for video gambling. But it is a good argument to
note that legalization will also bring regulation, the ability to make sure
that winners get a fair take and that the machines stay in those clubs full
of consenting adults instead of ending up in convenience stores and other
places where teenagers would have easy access. (That's assuming, of course,
that the regulations are taken more seriously than the anti-gambling law
itself was before Daniels came along.)

The best argument made against legalization is this: The fact that an evil
already exists does not make it wise to add to that evil. It's akin to
arguing that you might as well drive without a seat belt because a heart
attack might get you anyway. "Just because you've sunk yourself to your
waist," says Rep. James R. Buck, R-Kokomo, "doesn't mean you need to sink to
your nose."

But the state long ago got in more than waist-deep, and legalizing the video
games would be barely a drop more in that vast ocean of gambling. The state
should consider the option of treating this vice like other vices, such as
smoking and drinking. The state doesn't have to promote or encourage them,
but it does recognize that they exist and taxes and regulates them
accordingly.