The on again off again gambling/games of skill issue in Ohio
Earlier it was reported that Dann ready to legalize ‘game of skill’, meaning that games that were similar to previous games that were considered illegal in Ohio would now be legal:
Dann says games that are at least 51 percent skill-based will be allowed to operate. The announcement came as Dann settled a case with Castle King contesting the legality of another gambling device. Because Match Um Up is similar to the other game but less complex, it’s a legal game of skill under terms of the settlement, said Peter M. Thomas, chief of Dann’s executive agencies section.
Then five days later, Dann may pull plug on wagering game deal. Where it was reported why the deal might not go through, the gaming companies don’t want you to know what the percentage of skill rating is. While I see the reason why the gaming companies might want to keep that secret, I can also see the reason why people would want to be able to verify that the game does indeed fall within the 51% skill category.
It’s also worth taking a look at what the Ohio Revised Code currently says, courtesy of a link from the Attorney General’s page the pdf page 7 and on games of skill:
(AAA)(1) “Skill-based amusement machine” means a skill-based amusement device, such as a mechanical, electronic, video, or digital device, or machine, whether or not the skill-based amusement machine requires payment for use through a coin or bill validator or other payment of consideration or value to participate in the machine’s offering or to activate the machine, provided that all of the following apply….
There is also an interesting Fact Sheet on skill-based amusement machines that is also linked on the Attorney General’s site that was written when Jim Petro was in office. What’s most interesting is the last paragraph in the two page pdf:
The Ohio Attorney General does not have independent law enforcement authority to issue citations and confiscate machines — local law enforcement officials do. Also, the Attorney General’s Office does not have authority to make a formal determination on whether a particular game is a skill-based amusement machine.
So then we come to today, now, it appears that has all changed in reading this article in the Columbus Dispatch blog, entitled, The bets are off, Strickland and Dann say. Now, the earlier games that Dann was going to allow are not going to be allowed, Governor Strickland is promising to veto a bill by Sen. Steve Stivers, R-Columbus, that would allow patrons of horse tracks to wager on thousands of archived horse races via a machine that displays clips of the last 10 seconds of the race and it was stated that Strickland and Dann felt that any “game of skill” that awarded a prize over $10.00 should be illegal. Which I guess a voucher or cash payout of $9.99 would still be legal.
All of this on the heals of the failed Learn and Earn attempt where Ohioans technically did not come out against gambling, they just came out against gambling being used as a ploy to fund college educations. What I do wonder about though is who is supposed to make the determination on if these games are games of skill or not, and something else I’ve always wondered…Is the Ohio Lottery considered a game of skill rather than one of chance? Or is it only legal in Ohio because it’s being done by the State? If it is truly a game of skill, maybe one of you can help us figure out that pattern of icons and a way to win.
The lottery is only legal because it’s being done by the state. I’m happy about this turn of events. I’m one of those voters who vote down EVERY gambling expansion ballot issue. Perhaps Dann and Strickland had a talk, and Dann found religion. Strickland earns kudos from me on this one.
June 12th, 2007 at 10:24 pmFor me that’s part of the problem, if we are truly going to be against gambling then to have the State advertise the lottery seems a tad…hypocritical. I did not support Learn and Earn and I can’t really say I’m a fan of gambling either, especially since it is over touted as some type of a financial windfall when some of our neighbors are discovering that the more gambling locations created, the less profit.
I do agree that it’s obvious trying to promote some of these games as “games of skill” would have been pretty difficult for the average person to buy. Yet I still wonder with the way the document from Petro was worded exactly who is responsible for determining if a game is a game of skill or one of chance.
June 12th, 2007 at 10:38 pmSooner or later, the gambling interests will get their way, or they will never stop trying to do so. It’s their job.
And when they do, I hope that we label any monetary incentives coming from this as a stupidity tax or a tax on the mathematically challenged. . .
June 13th, 2007 at 6:03 pmWhere was my post from yesterday?
June 14th, 2007 at 12:42 pm