Barack Obama Probably Is Not Bluffing About Online Gambling

It's unlikely we'll learn more about Barack Obama's position about online gaming during the presidential debates or stump speeches down the home stretch of the campaign. As unemployment climbs, the economy slows, and banks collapse, there are admittedly bigger fish to fry. But if the candidate's online gambling position is paramount to you as a voter, consider that you have a special lens with which to view Obama's stance; he is, after all, a poker player.

As a state senator, Obama was a regular in the Illinois legislature's weekly low stakes poker game, held at the headquarters of the Illinois Manufacturers' Association. According to his opponents, Obama studied the game and knew the odds. His play was focused and analytical, and his friends claim he seldom bluffed.

Obama supports an unbiased study of internet gaming, like Congresswoman Shelley Berkley's (D-NV) Internet Gambling Study Act calls for. He has also been quoted saying he sees the advantages of getting online gaming "under regulatory control," and hence legalizing it. The Republican presidential platform includes language that seeks to ban online gaming, while the Democratic platform is silent on this issue.

But so far, there has been no clear statement that repealing the UIGEA or regulating online gaming is either a priority or an agenda item for the Democratic hopeful. Does Obama really support the legalization and regulation of online gaming? Could his endorsement of a study just be an election bluff to mollify factions within his base? They say you can tell a lot about a person by the way they play poker, and by all accounts, Obama is an "A-B-C" player. If his playing style is any indication, Obama's support of an unbiased study of internet gaming is what it appears to be: an attempt to better understand the issue.

Does all this make Obama the unbridled progambling candidate of your dreams? Probably not. During the Democratic primary, the Clinton campaign portrayed Obama as antigambling, citing a 2003 article where he was quoted saying the "moral and social cost of gambling, particularly in low-income communities, could be devastating." Also publicized was his 1999 vote against the expansion of riverboat gambling in Illinois. But remember, Clinton was working overtime to sway the caucus of gamblingcentric Nevada at the time. And during his own swing through the "Silver State," Obama went on record to say that he viewed gambling as a "successful economic model" as long as it was "properly regulated."

Like McCain, Obama's political bedfellows are diverse on the issue of gambling. Former Representative Jim Leach, one of the architects of the UIGEA, has publicly endorsed Obama. Should we be worried that Obama may somehow feel beholden to Leach for his endorsement? Could this weigh on Obama's ultimate position relative to internet gaming? Here again Obama's poker game may hold the key.

Lobbyists were frequent players in the legislature's "home game." According to a story by Christopher Wills of the Associated Press, over the years Obama apparently won a tidy five-figure sum off the lobbyist for SBC Communications (the forerunner of today's AT&T). But winning the guy's money over a few beers and cigars didn't appear to legislatively sway Obama. In May 2003, SBC made a full-court press to line up Democratic support for legislation that would increase consumer phone bills. Obama was one of only six Democratic senators to vote against it.

Obama's most visible political ally in this presidential bid, his running mate Joe Biden, was just one of ten senators who voted against the 1998 amendment, sponsored by Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), which would have made wagering on the internet a criminal offense. While allowing states to use the internet for lotteries and betting on horse and dog racing, Kyl's proposal would have imprisoned internet casinos operators and fined individual bettors. And pro-internet gaming appears to run in the family. Biden's son Hunter, until recently, was planning to lobby for the "legality of internet gaming."

And a formal position not withstanding, logistically it would be far easier for Obama to support a repeal of the UIGEA or put online gaming under regulatory control than it would for McCain. After all, most of those legislative initiatives are coming from the Dems. If McCain were to reach across the aisle to embrace online gambling, he'd knowingly alienate his base. And with the challenges facing the next president, burning political capital over online gaming is probably as likely as a two-outer.

[Editor's Note: With the impending November election, Poker Player Newspaper asked journalist Amy Calistri to look at Barack Obama's and John McCain's candidacies from the perspective of their positions on gambling and poker. Amy's piece on Senator McCain appeared last issue; her piece on Senator Obama appears below]