Steve Russell discusses how debates over morality influence gambling policy:
It’s state lotteries that most often opened up states to lawful casino gaming by Indian tribes, an application of the rule that states can apply criminal laws but not civil regulations on Indian land. Once any gambling was legal, the cow was out of the barn. Congress quickly passed the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act in 1988 in an effort to corral that cow and cut states in on the milk production.
To this day, most non-Indians and even some Indians believe the IGRA granted tribes the right to run casinos. That is nonsense. IGRA substantially limited a preexisting right. Biblically speaking, IGRA taketh away, not giveth.
For some reason, casinos in particular and gambling generally stir up Biblical speaking. Gambling promises something for nothing, and we are told that is immoral. Some people start gambling and can’t stop, and so destroy their lives. Sort of like yours truly and food. I thought my gluttony made me immoral, not restaurants, but I suppose I’m splitting hairs.
Split me the hairs that explain the difference between the numbers and the state lottery? Would it be that, for example, Texas lottery money was sold as earmarked for public education? If so, what’s the moral take on the legislature cutting public education to the bone and using lottery cash to stanch the bleeding?
Get the Story:
Steve Russell: The Government's Selective Morality About Gambling
(Indian Country Today 9/7)