OpenCDA

February 6, 2015

Slow Down – Get It Right

Filed under: Probable Cause — Tags: — Bill @ 8:18 am

gambling-games1On Monday, February 9  the Idaho Senate State Affairs Committee will receive testimony to consider repealing Idaho’s existing law which allowed pari-mutuel betting on historic horse races.  The existing law was passed and enacted in 2013.  It is clear from the votes by the Legislature that the 2013 law had substantial support.

So why is Idaho’s Legislature now considering repealing it barely two years later?

If you believe some legislators, in 2013 they were deceived.  If OpenCdA understands correctly, legislators and the tribes claim the gaming devices shown to them in 2013 are not the same gaming devices which are in use now.  It is their representation that the gaming devices in use now violate the Idaho Constitution, Article III, Section 20(2).

So here are OpenCdA’s questions for our legislators who now allege they were deceived in 2013:

  • What compelling testimony and evidence did you receive in 2013 which convinced you then the devices you saw did not violate Idaho’s Constitution and statutes?
  • Who presented the testimony and evidence you have come to believe was deceptive?
  • In 2013 what independent experts (not affiliated with either proponents or opponents) did the Legislature bring in to offer expert technical analysis of the devices you saw?
  • Since the law was enacted, what subsequent sworn testimonial or physical evidence has caused you to now believe the devices in use are illegal in Idaho?   From whom did you receive it?
  • From what independent experts (not affiliated with either proponents or opponents) have you received sworn expert technical analysis of the devices in use, the devices you now believe violate Idaho’s Constitution and statutes?
  • Based on objective independent analysis and evidence, exactly how are the devices in use now different from the ones accepted in 2013?  What consequential and relevant changes occurred in the devices to make them illegal now?

OpenCdA is skeptical that “deception in 2013” is the sole motivation for the Legislature’s rush to repeal Idaho’s historic horse racing law.  Our skepticism is reinforced by this letter sent to Governor Otter and Attorney General Wasden and this editorial in today’s local skewspaper, the Coeur d’Alene Press.  We seriously doubt that any of the signators to the letter or the editorial board at the Press have the requisite technical knowledge and skills to independently determine that the historic horse racing devices violate Idaho’s Constitution and statutes.

It seems to OpenCdA the legislative issue is whether the design and operation of the gaming devices currently in use causes the devices to be nonconforming with Idaho Constitution Article III, Section 20(2) and enabling statutes.   Some people say that because the machines are visually similar to slot machines and even other forms of casino gambling, that makes them illegal. However, it seems to us that the law was likely intended to prohibit devices operationally similar, not visually similar, to illegal gaming devices.

For example, we can make a box that fits around a tablet computer but has no operational connection to it. The box will look like a slot machine that lets the operator pull a lever and generate spinning wheels, flashing lights, and obnoxious sounds. But the operational tablet computer, the part that controls what’s really going on, will be playing a perfectly legal game. So is our box around a tablet computer an illegal gaming device? Of course not. Just because it looks like an illegal gaming device doesn’t mean it operates like one.

The issue for Idaho’s legislators is to determine if the historic horse racing devices now in use are operationally different, not just visually different, from the ones approved in 2013.  Moreover, they need to positively determine if the operational differences that may exist now cause the existing devices to violate Idaho’s Constitution and statutes.

Regardless of who the players are on both sides of the repeal issue, it still comes down to primarily a technical analysis of the operation of the gaming devices.

Rushing to repeal Idaho’s historic horse racing gaming law passed in 2013 puts an unfair burden on those businesses who invested in the facilities and equipment to apply the law.  Unless the Legislature can demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that the 2013 law proponents were engaging in a fraud by deception (testimonial and device manipulation), repealing the law is premature.

Unfortunately, the Idaho horse named “Legal Gambling” left the starting gate a long time ago, but it didn’t have a rider.  We suspect the three political appointees who are the Idaho Horse Racing Commission haven’t got the foggiest idea about electronic gaming and its vulnerability to manipulation. Other states have far better, more competent, and more experienced state gaming commissions. Idaho still thinks that cleaning up horse racing means shoveling the manure out of the stalls.

There are electronic gaming industry and state gaming commission representatives in other states who can and would help inform our Legislature about making the distinctions between legal and illegal gaming devices in Idaho.

OpenCdA urges the Idaho Legislature to slow down and take the time to address the much larger issue of legal gambling in Idaho.   It’s far bigger and more complex than the historic horse racing devices.  Deal with it now or suffer the consequences later.

27 Comments

  1. Nice, Bill – even tho,this not my forte or passion, I sent this one to my brother who loves the horses!

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 6, 2015 @ 8:54 pm

  2. Stebbijo,

    Thank you. I think our legislators owe their constituents a full and complete answer to each of the questions I posed. The answers inform us about how thoroughly and diligently (or not) our legislators are performing their duties. If the legislators are just taking walk-in-and-sign-up testimony and not seeking qualified independent professional technical guidance on highly technical legislation (mechanical and electronic gambling devices are in that category), they’re setting the state up for a fall.

    The public should also be very concerned about the professional and technical qualifications of persons selected for appointment by a governor to serve in regulatory positions. I very much want to know how much input, if any, the Idaho Horse Racing Commission commissioners had in the initial consideration of the devices which were approved in 2013 but which are now rather suddenly and mysteriously being declared to be illegal. I don’t see much in the way of technical qualifications for the Commissioners, so it’s certainly possible they may have received a gubernatorial appointment more to reward or acquire their political loyalty than for their professional knowledge about the gambling industry.

    It appears to me that the Idaho State Police may be borderline clueless when it comes to gambling regulation and enforcement, in spite of the fact that one of the proponents for pari-mutuel betting on historic horse races was employed by the Idaho State Police. Then just this week we learned that until 2014, the Idaho State Police had no policy governing outside employment by its employees.

    According to the Idaho State Police spokesflack Teresa Baker, the ISP considered Frank Lamb to be an “expert in that field [“instant horse racing”].” I believe that while expertise is important, it is also important for the head of Idaho’s agency that regulates horse racing to be objective. Given that he was a lobbyist for gaming in Wyoming, Lamb’s objectivity was, it seems to me, highly questionable. I would like to know how much our legislators relied on his “expertise” and to the extent they relied on it, how carefully and thoroughly they examined his credentials, expertise, and objectivity. Or did they just assume that because he was an employee of the Idaho State Police, he must know his stuff?

    According to reporter Cynthia Sewell in her February 5, 2015, online article headlined Idaho State Police says ex-racing director followed policy:

    Lamb was hired in November 2012 as a part-time director at $28 per hour with no benefits. Six months later he was made full time at the same pay rate but with benefits. One year later, in 2014, he received a bonus of $1,800 and a pay increase to $30.80 per hour, according to the State Controller’s Office. In 2014, the state paid Lamb about $46,000, which works out to an average of fewer than 40 hours per week.

    Regardless of what Idaho’s citizens think about the social and economic effects of gambling, it’s here. Failing to acknowledge that and address it appropriately will not have a good outcome.

    Comment by Bill — February 7, 2015 @ 7:13 am

  3. This is confusing … are they betting on “live” races or old races through these “devices” – like a glorified slot machine, my brother asks. Also, he asks, “Isn’t the old greyhound park still in operation for off track betting purposes?” He bets live racing in Japan, has been over there for so many years he speaks better Japanese than English, most likely.

    The old rumor years ago was that the Hagadone was wired to welcome gambling in when it gets in the door, maybe that is not so far off the mark. It just makes sense that the Indian tribes are not happy about this and want to stifle the competition.

    I am not a gambler, but it is interesting. May have to check it out. 🙂

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 7, 2015 @ 10:57 am

  4. That is quite the letter to the Governor. There has to be more to this than the concept of slots …will the reservations pull their millions out if it does not end? Probably …

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 7, 2015 @ 11:24 am

  5. Stebbijo,

    Your brother identified exactly the issue the Legislature needs to address.

    Apparently in 2013 the Tribe and other proponents of allowing pari-mutuel betting on historic horse races convinced the Legislature the devices were not illegal gaming machines (e.g., slot machines).

    Now in 2015 the Tribe and those who want tribal political and economic support want the Legislature to rule they are illegal gaming machines. The Legislature needs to make an evidence-based, evidence-supported determination before it makes a decision on repeal or not. The wrong decision could result in an allegation that the State interfered with businesses engaging in lawful interstate commerce.

    Distinguishing between the operation of the approved 2013 devices and the disputed 2015 devices comes down to a technical analysis of the gaming device itself. There are independent testing laboratories (a foreign concept in Idaho, apparently) that analyze mechanical and electronic gambling/gaming devices and provide the requestor (e.g., legislators) with a technical analysis which the requestor can then compare against applicable laws to determine if the devices are lawful or unlawful in the requestor’s jurisdiction.

    I believe the representation is that they are betting on the results of old races based on video and film clips of the races.

    Comment by Bill — February 7, 2015 @ 11:27 am

  6. Stebbijo,

    RE your comment 4: It appears to me the Indian tribes who have been allowed to offer legalized gambling in Idaho suddenly realized the historic horse racing gaming was significantly affecting their revenues, so they decided to twist their buddies in the Legislature and the Statehouse and simply order the 2013 enabling legislation repealed.

    Unfortunately, Idaho’s “citizen legislators” appear to have been unwilling or unprepared to do the work necessary to diligently regulate the gaming industry in Idaho in 2013 and sooner. As a result, the kind of conflict asserted in this issue (“We was deceived; it’s a different machine. Bait-and-Switch!”) can occur. A carefully written and competently enforced technical regulation consistent with Idaho law which defines what a legal historic horse racing device is and is not and which defines the regulatory process that must be followed if design and operational changes are made to the devices would have helped prevent what is happening now. It seems to me that too many of Idaho’s “citizen legislators” are averse to any kind of detailed regulations sometimes essential to fairly administer the laws the legislators and governor have enacted.

    According to this Associated Press skews article appearing online on January 19, 2015, the Post Falls Police Department is conducting a criminal investigation into the legality of the gaming machines used at Greyhound Park and Event Center in Post Falls. Shortly thereafter, the Coeur d’Alene Tribe canceled this year’s Julyamsh activity at Greyhound Park and Event Center, an event that brings in substantial revenue to Post Falls. That could cause the public to wonder if the Coeur d’Alene Tribe is trying to influence the outcome of the investigation or the charging decision by the Kootenai County Prosecuting Attorney or Idaho Attorney General. A prosecutorial charging decision would have to be based in part on an admissible evidence-based finding that the devices now in use at Greyhound, Les Bois, and Double Down are legal or illegal.

    My guess is that the Legislature will act quickly to repeal the 2013 law and our Governor will quickly sign it into law with an emergency provision to make implementation immediate. That gets the Idaho State Police and its component Idaho Horse Racing Commission, the Post Falls Police Department, the Kootenai County Prosecutor, and the Idaho Attorney General off the political hook. It would also let Idaho’s “citizen legislators” proclaim that they’ve done their job.

    But wouldn’t a finding that the current historic horse racing devices are illegal almost demand a criminal prosecution of those who allegedly snookered the tribes and the Legislature in 2013? If the devices were switched from ones declared legal in 2013 to one now found to be illegal, isn’t someone criminally liable? One would think so, but it may depend on whether the law passed by Idaho’s “citizen legislators” and implementing rules and regulations had provisions requiring design and operational changes to the devices to first be approved by … someone. I seriously doubt that too many people in the “sovereign nation” tribes or Idaho’s three branches of government want that issue to be raised in court. Too much public exposure, don’t ya know, and someone might start questioning too many officials’ competence and maybe honesty.

    Comment by Bill — February 8, 2015 @ 7:56 am

  7. It is bait and switch and I don’t like it. Yes, we need answers to the deception the legislature now claims they experienced, which is a really lame excuse. Sophisticated extortion at it’s best. And, what kind of standard does this give the people? If an entire Legistature can be deceived, then are they just plain naive or dumb like fox? For some reason, I do not feel like our politicians are acting in our best interests. While they take our hard earned working dollars to backtrack on their deceptions, it makes me want my money back. I have been deceived.

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 8, 2015 @ 3:36 pm

  8. Stebbijo,

    I don’t know if it is bait and switch. That is why an objective technical analysis of the devices (the bait shown in 2013 and the alleged switch used now) is needed. It would certainly be bait-and-switch if the analysis showed the 2013 device was completely legal but the 2015 devices were not.

    If you read the four Tribes’ letter dated January 6, 2015, they were supposedly deceived as well. Because they have their own gambling operations, I would expect them to be more aware of the need for close regulatory supervision and control. With their admission that they, too, were deceived, the gambling public has every right to wonder about the integrity of those Tribes’ gambling operations.

    In my original post I encourage the Legislature to proceed carefully. Assuming the horsemen and Les Bois, Greyhound, and Double Down were not knowingly violating the law, they have a considerable investment in facilities and equipment. That would seem to indicate the Legislature should try and fix the existing 2013 law, not simply repeal it. Of course, if the proponents were knowingly violating the law, then maybe criminal prosecutions are in order. Exposing in a very public trial(s) how the sausage was made might remind a lot of voters that elections do have consequences.

    Comment by Bill — February 8, 2015 @ 4:04 pm

  9. That is another great letter, this is such a mess. Then who swapped out the machines if they are not legal or are they even legal? Are they relying on the definition of “device” as my brother was inquiring as in legal definition of exactly what they can bait and switch? Legal my omission? There is not hint of a device in that law. Is it a TV. That law was really pretty stupid, I don’t get it. What’s a race pool? Any Senator or Representative out there who can explain that term?

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 8, 2015 @ 5:09 pm

  10. I am going to ask my brother. 😉

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 8, 2015 @ 5:10 pm

  11. I am going to try and copy and paste this facebook conversation about horse betting. I really consider my brother an expert on gambling even if he may not win, once getting his start at the Elks at age 14 in Sandpoint, Idaho in football, then getting kicked out because he was taking their money. 🙂

    I have a question. This law does not have anything about devices but it refers to “race pool” — what is that, what does it mean?
    41 mins · Like

    Keith Hagstrom Maybe it means Par Mutual Pools the amount of money the track collects from betters and then returns to the winning players abiet at a 22% track tax take.. maybe Idaho is prohibited from having on line betting on races…Hawaii and Utah I know can’t.
    31 mins · Unlike · 1

    Keith Hagstrom TVG allows Idaho residences to bet.
    29 mins · Like

    Joanne Stebbins I am really dumb on this, like most of our Idaho politicians.What does TVG mean?
    20 mins · Like

    Keith Hagstrom http://www.tvg.com

    Horse Racing Wagering, Resources, Online Betting | TVG.com
    Horse racing and online horse betting – TVG is the #1…
    TVG.COM
    15 mins · Like · Remove Preview

    Keith Hagstrom The u.s gov allows internet betting on horse racing but not sports. Hypocritical as usual.
    13 mins · Like

    Joanne Stebbins Thank you Keith, so interesting. You are the expert, you would know!
    12 mins · Like

    Keith Hagstrom It’s the death of the industry though…more and more people staying home to bet. Tracks closing all the time because attendence is significantly down everywhere
    5 mins · Unlike · 1

    Joanne Stebbins Thank you, I am going to share your information on OpenCdA, much appreciated.

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 8, 2015 @ 5:55 pm

  12. Stebbijo,

    RE your comment 9: You’re asking exactly the right questions. Many of the answers you seek should be in the administrative rules that the State uses to implement the law. I doubt they are, but they should be.

    Keith raised a very significant point: As online gambling (or video gambling) increases, the attendance at in-person gambling places is likely to drop. Will it reach a point that the brick-and-mortar casinos go away?

    Comment by Bill — February 8, 2015 @ 7:14 pm

  13. Gambling is a profession. It is about the people and the love that one has in the relationship to the competition, like horses. You invest your money in a different manner. Then the fun and work begins. When people contact ceases to exist, there is no fun in the sport or job. Seriously, who wants to bet pool online or cards? Gambling is not really an addiction, but a statistical game of numbers. It is much like the stock market, but at least you get to watch it in real time. But, like Keith said, sports gambling is not legal, here. Yeah, right. 😉 So sick of government dictating their protection of citizens in the name of fake diseases, while they rake up lottery profits from their alleged victims and yet, cannot support our own schools to validate it’s (lottery) inception. Hypocrites.

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 8, 2015 @ 8:55 pm

  14. So, I see on the skewspaper, CdAPress that our north Idaho senators are claiming that now the CdA Indian tribe slot machines are illegal. Do you know what law if any actually says slot machines are illegal? I don’t see anywhere in the Idaho statutes where this stuff is actually broken down? Other than the lottery commission – this pari-mutuel betting is buried in Title 54 under PROFESSIONS, VOCATIONS, AND BUSINESSES of all things.

    This is the definition of (8) “Pari-mutuel” means any system whereby wagers with respect to the outcome of a race are placed with, or in, a wagering pool conducted by a person licensed or otherwise permitted to do so under state law, and in which the participants are wagering with each other and not against the operator

    and

    13) “Simulcast” means the telecast or other transmission of live audio and visual signals of a race, transmitted from a sending track to a receiving location, for the purpose of wagering conducted on the race at the receiving location.

    then they define: (11) “Race meet” means and includes any exhibition of thoroughbred, purebred, and/or registered horse racing, mule racing or dog racing, where the pari-mutuel system of wagering is used. Singular includes the plural and plural includes the singular; and words importing one gender shall be regarded as including all other genders.

    So, if I were to break this all down, it tells me that any gender but not limited to horses, dogs, or mules is composed of a competition that can be conducted through other transmission of live audio and visual signals from where ever for the purpose of a wager or gamble, which could mean a slot machines of rainbow brite ponies trying to take control of the strawberries, oranges, or apples. “Live” can also mean imparting or driven by power.

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 12, 2015 @ 12:59 pm

  15. Stebbijo,

    Assuming you’ve already read Idaho Constitution, Article III, Section 20 (2), you might also check Idaho Code Title 18, Chapter 38. But here’s a challenge for you: Please find “slot machine” defined in Idaho statutes. What is a slot machine? The rules governing historic horse racing are more or less administered through IDAPA 11.04.02. (More less than more.)

    Sen. Nonini et al are getting closer to asking the right question. In watching the Senate State Affairs Committee archived videos of the two days of hearing this week, the only two Committeemembers who seemed to understand just how deficient the State has been in regulating gaming/gambling were Sens. Winder and Werk. DAG Brian Kane tried to steer the Committee in the right direction when he told them that the Legislature could hire an independent testing company or expert to evaluate the historic horse racing equipment in use at Les Bois, Double Down, and Greyhound, but it sure looked as if most of the senators were taking the position “I’ve already made up my mind — don’t confuse me with facts.” Their approach has been very disappointing, and I think all parties to the issue deserved better than they got from Senate State Affairs.

    Comment by Bill — February 12, 2015 @ 2:01 pm

  16. Thank you, I could not find any thing referring to slot machine.

    So, slot machines are definitely illegal according to 18-3810…it shall be a misdemeanor for any person to use, possess, operate, keep, sell, or maintain for use or operation or otherwise, anywhere within the state of Idaho, any slot machine of any sort or kind whatsoever. So, if I go to Post Falls or Worley, have I committed a crime?? LOL.

    This issue appears to be – what exactly is a slot machine vs a pari-mutuel betting device?

    And, it is sad that the Legislature is not going to get this right, because it will open up some pretty ugly doors if they do not. Evidently, an independent testing company is just too much for them to digest and I can only surmise why.

    At his rate, all they really have to do is tweak the slot machine law or they will have to remove ALL of them. Too much money too lose, will never happen. This whole thing is a stand off. The Indians may have to back off or everyone loses – money.

    I have a much clearer picture of this now, everyone is at fault and everyone is getting caught.

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 12, 2015 @ 3:19 pm

  17. … and they will also have to change/fix the Idaho Constitution or at least enforce it. Waiting for Wendy Olson …. 😉

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 12, 2015 @ 3:29 pm

  18. Which brings up the question – how is internet gambling legal in Idaho? Where are those laws? I checked out that TVG site and it is a horse racing site but Idaho is not allowed to participate and Keith said Idaho residents were betting.

    To open a TVG wagering account, you must be at least 21 years old and reside in a state where wagering services are available. According to their FAQ.

    Wagering services are currently offered in Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 12, 2015 @ 3:40 pm

  19. error: Idaho residents are allowed to bet on TVG . . and online horse betting site.

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 12, 2015 @ 4:19 pm

  20. Bill, this is driving me bonkers (kind of 😉 … just trying to make sense of it all and it is so complicated. When Senator Nonini wrote his letter claiming that the reservations are not in compliance with slot machines, was that an attempt to stop something that is actually legal? Meaning, are the Indians on the Idaho reservations and in accordance with prior (federal) lawsuits in compliance because they are a sovereign nation?

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 13, 2015 @ 9:46 pm

  21. Stebbijo,

    Senator Nonini and Representatives Mendive, Dixon, and Barbieri have sent a letter to the Director of the Idaho State Lottery, Jeff Anderson, asserting, “… that the Tribal casinos in Idaho may be operating a large number of gaming devices that may not comply with their Idaho gaming compacts.” Their letter goes on to describe their reasoning for making that assertion. The letter also cites the section of Idaho Code which they believe gives the Director of the Idaho State Lottery to monitor and ensure compliance with the compact [Coeur d’Alene Compact]. That is what their letter requests.

    It appears to me the legislators are trying to get the State of Idaho to make a determination about whether or not some Tribal gaming devices comply with the federal-state compact. That is likely why they cc’d the US Attorney for the District of Idaho in their letter.

    I’ve spent over ten hours this week watching the videos of the two days of Senate State Affairs Committee hearings on Senate Bill 1011. (The hearings lasted a little over five hours, however I watched them twice — once for general impression and then again to make notes.) I believe every Idaho legislator who is going to vote on Senate Bill 1011 and every citizen who wants to get some factual, authoritative information about gambling in Idaho ought to watch them. The subject matter can at times be technically complex, but people who are willing to listen and make a sincere effort to understand the application of the facts to the law will be better informed.

    This morning’s Coeur d’Alene Press skewspaper article included a quote from Representative John Rusche. Rusche was quote saying, “Legislation to repeal the slot machine-like ‘instant racing’ passed the Senate State Affairs Committee on Wednesday. After hearing from members of the horse racing community, the committee decided that the gambling machines are not the same machines being placed around Idaho today. These ‘instant-racing’ machines look and sound a lot like slot machines, with spinning lights, music and flashing buttons. I expect we’ll see the legislation over in the House soon.” Rusche is apparently one of those who need to watch and listen to the expert testimony in the hearings rather than being persuaded by “spinning lights, music, and flashing buttons.” When people wonder why Idaho is earning its well-deserved reputation as “Appalachia West”, they need only look at some of their legislators including Senator Bart Davis and Representative John Rusche.

    The major issue for the legislature in deciding SB 1011 is whether the historic horse racing/instant racing machines in use now violate the Idaho Constitution and statutes. It is a technical, complex issue that was in my opinion answered by testimony during the hearings. That is why I believe the legislators who will be voting on SB 1011 in both the House and Senate need to watch the hearings rather than accept as factual and authoritative the representations of some of their fellow legislators.

    As I hinted in my OpenCdA post on February 6, Idaho should have created a “real” gaming commission before it ever allowed Tribal gaming in the 1990’s. Many of the issues being raised by SB 1011 could and likely would have been resolved long before the 2013 legislation was even proposed.

    Comment by Bill — February 14, 2015 @ 6:35 am

  22. Yes, I was surprised to read that the Lottery Commission has oversight over these alleged slot machines. I am going to try to fit some time in to watch some testimony.

    Everyone has an opinion even this guy who is trying to save older women.

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 14, 2015 @ 5:59 pm

  23. Stebbijo,

    I have one question for Krutz: What is the statutory citation in Idaho Code or IDAPA that defines “slot machine?” Since so many people are screaming at the top of their lungs that the historic horse racing machines are slot machines, I’d like to see the definition that the Idaho Legislature wrote (not cut-and-paste from some other state) that conclusively proves Idaho’s historic horse racing machines are “slot machines.”

    When Deputy Attorney General Brian Kane testified on Wednesday, I expected the Committee members to ask him for Idaho’s definition of a slot machine. It didn’t happen, and citizens ought to wonder why the legislators didn’t ask. I presume he could have provided it since he did the analysis for the AG’s opinion dated January 15, 2004, concerning Initiative to Amend Idaho State Video Lottery Terminal Law. Kane’s analysis cited the Idaho Supreme Court’s definition of “slot machine” in MDS Investments, 138 Idaho at 462, 65 P.3d at 203. In that opinion, the Supreme Court’s definition was:

    A slot machine is a gambling device which, upon payment by a player of any required consideration in any form, may be played or operated, and which, upon being played or operated, may, solely by chance, deliver or entitle the player to receive something of value, with the outcome being shown by spinning reels or by a video or other representation of reels.

    By the way, the skewsmedia conveniently omitted reporting some of Kane’s relevant testimony about why the AG’s office didn’t test the new machines to determine statutory and constitutional compliance after issuing its legal analysis in 2012 on the first machines. The skewsmedia would like the public to believe there was bait-and-switch with the machines. If there was, it was because our erstwhile legislators were snoozing. Watch Kane’s testimony, too. It won’t restore your faith in the diligence of our Legislature to research the consequences of legislation before they pass or reject it or before repealing existing laws.

    One of the witnesses on Monday, Louis Cella, did explain the difference between slot machines and historic horse racing/instant racing machines. Assuming he was being truthful, I presume he would know the difference since it was his family that invented the HHR/IR machines. His testimony is worth watching. The distinction is technical and relates to the operation, not the appearance of the machines, but given that many of the Senators on the State Affairs Committee appeared to have the attention span of a fruitfly, it was easier for them to arrive at their preconceived decision by saying, “But it looks like a slot machine.” (Cella explained that, too.)

    From a non-technical standpoint, the most compelling testimony was on Wednesday by Sharon Mueller. Like Cella, she very nicely took the Senate State Affairs Committee to the woodshed.

    Comment by Bill — February 14, 2015 @ 7:23 pm

  24. Bill,

    Finally have the videos working, I am watching Brian Kane’s testimony. It is good. The one thing that really sticks out now, is we actually have a Deputy Attorney General who represents the Horse Racing Commission. That commission drafts their own rules regarding this pari-mutuel betting. One of the questions asked, is why hasn’t the AG’s office investigated the current machines? This, I understand is because the legislation was crafted after the AG’s office just merely offered or provided an opinion of the machines that showed an actual race and it was essentially a horse racing machine back in 2012. What is in there now, is determined by the Horse Racing Commission, they craft the rules. So the Ag’s office is essentially out of the loop …

    The AG’s office has no police powers or oversight regarding these machines and there is no real gaming commission. Then, I ask, who is the AG’s Deputy for the Horse Racing Commission, where is his/her testimony? I also did not know that we looked at this pari-mutuel stuff in 2008 and determined that it was unconstitutional, but in 2012 it was decided that the horse racing was okay and it has been making it’s way here since 1963. But, there are glitches such as”instant horse racing” vs “historical racing”. I gathered that the statute is so “broad” and it really needs “tightened” up, because nobody really knows what is what.

    If the Legislature listened at all to Brian Kane, then they should hire an independent analysis. This stuff can get fixed, I don’t know why Sen. Stennet has to threaten with prosecuting attorneys ect. It is the Legislature’s fault for not taking a good look at this in the first place and understanding how and if the nuts and bolts were actually in place to keep the statute they okayed in place … but they evidently leaned on an AG opinion which they could take or leave, just as they can with the recommendation to hire an independent analysis regarding the machines.

    The AG’s offered, Brian Kane, the opinion letter that was written in 2012 to the Legislature. I would like to see that.

    I guess at this point, if the horse racing commission says the machines are legal than they must be, because of such a broad statute.

    Bill Roden was also interesting to listen to, explaining his experience at Les Bois Park and how he put his 20 dollar bill in, to find no horse racing and listened to a staff member boast about new “slot machines” that will be coming in. I guess the horse racing is on the machine but you really have to look for it, so technically, I guess it might be construed as a pari-mutuel betting machine by some, however it may be imitating casino style gambling which is prohibited under the Idaho State Constitution.

    If the Legislature really wants to repeal this law, they will have to spend some of our money, for sure. Thanks for pointing me to these videos, they really are worth watching. Later, I will try to find Cella and Mueller.

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 15, 2015 @ 12:26 pm

  25. Stebbijo,

    Here is a link to the AG’s analysis letter dated February 2, 2012. It is not an opinion; only an analysis. I believe this is the letter DAG Kane referred to.

    I’ve prepared an index of the witnesses offering testimony. You can find a specific witness’s testimony quickly by pulling the image scroll lever (not fast forward) until the time stamp on the video is the same as the index time stamp.

    My opinion is that the Legislature should put this “repeal” action on hold. Put a moratorium on any further HHR/IR expansion in Idaho (no additional machines at existing facilities and no new facilities) until after a State Gaming Commission is in operation. The new State Gaming Commission, if there is to be one, has to be a part of any legislation from that day forward. Even if the state gaming commission function is to vest in an existing entity (Horse Racing Commission or Lottery Commission), the HHR/IR expansion has to be put on hold until the gaming commission’s duties and responsibilities have been defined and statutorily authorized.. Also, the Post Falls Police investigation should conclude this week or next. Wait and see what its findings are and what, if any, prosecution ensues. My hope is that if a State Gaming Commission is formed, it won’t just be another example of Idaho cronies being appointed ’cause they’re friends and donors of the “right” people.

    Deliberation of the present legislation should have conclusively shown government officials that a scrupulously honest, diligent, technically competent, and impartial gaming commission is essential to monitor all gaming (including Tribal gaming) in Idaho. Whether Idaho is capable of assembling a gaming commission with those traits is another story entirely, though.

    Comment by Bill — February 15, 2015 @ 12:45 pm

  26. Thank you Bill … I get it, I was thinking as an opinion as just a plain joe position, not a legal opinion of an actual court case. Thank you for the index of witnesses. Makes it a lot easier.

    That definitely must be the letter Brian Kane is referring to.

    And, that letter is an eye opener, and based on that letter I would think everything was just hunky-dory – I probably would have voted the statute in, too.

    This whole mess is most likely going to Court.

    I understand from the analysis that there is no Idaho Supreme Court case that has any clear definition or outlines concerning “forms of casino gambling” even in Tribal gaming.

    Here is Wayne Hoffman’s take on this stuff.

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 15, 2015 @ 1:15 pm

  27. Exactly, I agree with you. It should go into a moratorium … this is way too much to digest in one session.

    Comment by Stebbijo — February 15, 2015 @ 1:17 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress
Copyright © 2024 by OpenCDA LLC, All Rights Reserved