Spencer Bachus, Bob Riley Called Out on Alabama Problem Gambling
Two of Alabama's foremost politicians, US Representative Spencer Bachus and Governor Bob Riley, are among the most ardent foes of legalized gambling in the country. Bachus is the Congressional leader in the fight to retain the UIGEA and make online casinos illegal, while Riley has assembled a special task force to raid bingo halls a la the Untouchables, and has sworn the state will accept no legal gambling. Yet, curiously, the state of Alabama devotes no funding whatsoever to treat the victims of problem gambling, the very citizens both men purport to protect.
According to the National Council on Problem Gambling, Alabama is "void of problem gambling resources." There is no state program to educate the public about the signs of compulsive gaming, nor are there programs to treat members of the community suffering from the disorder.
While both men may say they defeat the issue by illegalizing gambling, statistics show that to be totally false. Keith Whyte of the NCPG says states without casinos or legal gaming still have roughly the same incidence of problem gambling as those that do, much as dry counties still have alcoholism.
Further, Whyte says he "never met a problem gambler who said he had a hard time finding a place to bet," regardless of the law under which the gambler lived.
If Bachus and Riley are sincerely concerned, and not just acting as demagogues inciting mobs for their own political purposes, why do they not act to address the needs of the victims of compulsive gambling? Riley has been accused of accepting campaign funds from tribes in neighboring states in exchange for keeping Alabama free of gaming competition, something he has harshly denied.
Bachus, meanwhile, has not even signed up as a sponsor of the new Comprehensive Problem Gambling Act, the first bill to address the subject on a federal level. Rumors persist in the gaming industry that Bachus cynically recites fabrications of the Christian conservative coalition so as to retain their support.
If either man wanted to take positive steps to solve problem gambling issues, and lessen their effect on families, counseling experts say a funding mechanism in Alabama is essential. And perhaps Bachus, says one legislative observer, might take a second from his shrill defense of the UIGEA to support the CPGA as it attempts to advance this year... if he cares.
Recent Comments
| Posted by: pfowler | When: 07/08/2009 01:08:30 PM EST |
| I have worked with gamblers for over 20 years and do not agree with Mr. Whyte's comments contained herein. It has not been my experience that casino gambling does not increase problem and compulsive gambling nor is it my experience that availability and location dont create "new" compulsive gamblers. | |
| Posted by: Tom Weston | When: 07/08/2009 04:43:30 PM EST |
| Not only is it Mr. Whyte's opinion, it is backed up by statistical information gathered and studied in peer-reviewed, objective analysis, as opposed to the anecdotal observations you note, which are unscientific and subjective. It is important to note Mr. Whyte's remarks here and on the other articles on this site, in which he states that impulse-control disorders do not cease to exist because gambling is withdrawn. As he says, gamblers can still find ways to bet, and further, the impulses can simply switch to other stimuli, such as drugs or alcohol. The important distinction is that casinos do not create problem gamblers; these people have a disorder that needs treatment, even if gambling is totally illegal. | |
| Posted by: John | When: 07/10/2009 03:48:35 AM EST |
| I'd suggest that before you begin claiming that someone who has worked with problem gamblers is offering nothing but "unscientific and subjective" information, you should actually consider publishing Whyte's peer-reviewed objective analysis. Or at least provide a link to the other articles containing this information located on your site. | |
| Posted by: Tom Weston | When: 07/10/2009 10:14:59 AM EST |
| No problem, John. And note that pfowler admitted his opinion is not based on research, but his personal observation, which is the definition of anecdotal, subjective evidence. http://www.onlinecasinoadvisory.com/casino-news/online/harvard-professor-denies-online-gambling-increases-disorders-42713.htm http://www.onlinecasinoadvisory.com/casino-news/online/problem-gambling-may-be-genetic-1811.htm http://www.onlinecasinoadvisory.com/casino-news/online/problem-gambling-not-increased-at-online-casinos-42711.htm http://www.onlinecasinoadvisory.com/casino-news/land/canadian-problem-gambling-rate-drops-42455.htm http://www.onlinecasinoadvisory.com/casino-news/land/problem-gambling-unaffected-by-casino-decor-42446.htm http://www.onlinecasinoadvisory.com/casino-news/online/problem-gambling-related-to-mental-disorder-42384.htm http://www.onlinecasinoadvisory.com/casino-news/online/gambling-addiction-caused-by-bipolar-disorders-1993.htm http://www.onlinecasinoadvisory.com/casino-news/online/problem-gambling-symptom-of-larger-illness-1760.htm http://www.onlinecasinoadvisory.com/casino-news/land/addictive-gamblers-brains-1583.htm Those are articles detailing scientific, peer-reviewed research into the both the nature of problem gambling, and the significance, or lack thereof, of gambling proximity. There are also more articles in our "Problem Gambling" news section which deal with anecdotal evidence and the unfortunate use of it in incorrectly generalizing without proper testing. | |




