Ray, a self-confessed compulsive gambler, came close to losing his marriage last year when he told a Wynn Las Vegas casino host that he was done after 20 years of feeding on the resort’s insatiable slot machines. It is said that it was.
“We returned to California to thank him for taking such good care of us,” says Ray. According to Ray, the host called him a week later and offered him free play equal to 25% of what he had lost on the previous trip, three of the standard offers Ray was used to receiving. It is said that the amount was much higher than that.
“It was free money. I couldn’t turn it down. I had to make up for the loss,” he said, adding that he promised his wife that he would stop playing once he used up his free credits.
But like many people before him, Ray threw good money after bad, losing about $10,000 in free play and another $75,000 on top of that.
Experts say this scenario is legal and is repeated regularly in Nevada. While Nevada has the most experience dealing with casinos and sports bettors, it has done the least to protect them.
Unlike most of the more than 40 states that have some form of legal gambling (including riverboat and Native American casinos), Nevada has a law that excludes gamblers from gambling in casinos within the state. There is no law that allows it.
Instead, Nevada has lax self-regulation, allowing gamblers to opt out of direct marketing solicitations and receiving comps and credits from individual casinos, but not from gambling.
In the world of problem gambling, it’s no surprise that the states that have been in the legal business the longest are far behind modern regulations.
“Nevada has a traditional approach of ‘leave your money here and bring your problems home,'” said Keith White, executive director of the National Council on Problem Gambling. He said other states that have experienced the effects of Nevada’s policy “have decided to do a little better in bringing casinos into their jurisdictions.”
Responsible gaming initiatives vary by state, but typically include some or all of the same components.
- Thirty-four jurisdictions require casino and sports betting operators to implement self-exclusion programs that allow gamblers to be removed from casinos and online sites. Blackout periods vary and can be selected by the user. The procedures for revoking a designation also vary by jurisdiction. Nevada has self-exclusion regulations for web gamblers, but not for casino patrons.
- The majority of legal gaming jurisdictions have a central self-exclusion registry. Caesars Entertainment has a self-exclusion registry shared by casinos in the United States.
- Thirty-one jurisdictions, including Nevada, require casinos to display signage and disclosures related to responsible gaming, such as counseling and toll-free resources.
- Twenty-one jurisdictions require land-based and online operators to submit responsible game plans that address issues such as employee training and public awareness. Nevada has no such requirement.
“When a gaming licensee is informed of a customer’s desire to stop gambling, they should respect it immediately, even in the spirit of customer service,” said Dr. Alan Feldman, formerly of MGM Resorts International, said: Public relations officer.
Ray, who plays slots compulsively, said he was not given the opportunity to self-limit his play.
“From an ethical standpoint, I think it should be part of the process,” said Ted Hartwell of the Nevada Problem Gambling Council.
Ray, who is fluent in the language of compulsive gambling, swears that if it weren’t for the host’s free play offer, his gambling days would have been over. Complaints he filed with the resort, as well as complaints to the Gaming Control Board, did not yield any findings of wrongdoing, according to an email provided to the organization. nevada current.
“Most therapists would say, ‘Well, casinos have some responsibility, but you also have personal responsibility. Relying on casinos to stop you from gambling is probably not the best idea. ,” White said.
“In Nevada, we are proud of the fact that we have the first regulations regarding problem gambling and responsible gambling tools. We are proud to have stronger regulations that provide protection and education for our patrons. “We’ve been way behind many other states in the state,” said Hartwell of the Nevada Council on Problem Gambling, the state affiliate of the National Council. “Many of us want a process of true self-exclusion, both in the field of advocacy and in the field of recovery and treatment.”
“As you can imagine, there was pushback from the gaming industry,” White said, noting that a one-size-fits-all regulation would “prevent consolidation among Nevada licensees of various sizes, including small mom-and-pops.” It is based on the idea that “it is troublesome”. From business offices and grocery stores to large resort casinos. But I think it’s absolutely possible. ”
White said Nevada also needs a centralized system that all licensees can access. “If you have a gambling problem at your facility, I have a gambling problem at other facilities.”
A person with close ties to the gaming industry, who requested anonymity, said Nevada’s lack of a self-exclusion law is “outrageous.” “If you believe in responsible gambling, it’s your commitment to customer service. Instead of doing what’s best for you, do what’s best for your customers.”
“Mandatory regulations can have unintended consequences, so I focus on addressing this within company policies and practices,” Feldman says.
Problem with gambling funds not being flushed
Lobbying for self-exclusion laws would require resources that the Nevada Legislature does not have. Indeed, it has struggled to secure dedicated state funding since the quarterly $2 per vehicle fee approved in 2005 was repealed in 2019.
“By the time we separated that approach, the actual number of machines on the floor had decreased by more than 15%,” Hartwell says. “So when you factor in both the real dollar decline plus the cost of living and inflation, it was a significant hit.”
The council’s funding shrank from $1.7 million in 2008 to about $1.3 million in 2017. That same year, the Nevada Governor’s Advisory Committee on Gambling failed to find support for a proposal that would have provided at least $1 per resident to the state’s 3 million residents. Increase in cost of living each year.
2019 Legislation effort It eliminated the $2 quarterly fee, but failed to garner support for a proposal to replace it with an amount equal to 0.6 percent of the total gaming tax. Gross gaming taxes are paid by resorts, but not by restricted licensees (those with fewer than 15 machines) such as taverns, convenience stores, and slot bars such as Dotty’s.
In 2021, during the worst of the pandemic, Congress cut funding for problem gambling to about $1.2 million annually, resulting in cuts to the program.
By contrast, states will spend between $73 million and $94 million in public funding for problem gambling from 2016 to 2021, according to an independent report by The New York Times and the National Association of Problem Gambling Service Administrators. increased by 28%.
Of the 42 states investing in problem gambling services, government funding has increased to $1.66 per capita, from a low of less than half a cent in Colorado, which had $1.4 billion in gambling revenue in 2022. The dollar ranges all the way to the highest dollar value in Oregon. Gambling revenue reached $49.5 million last year, according to the Times.
The National Council on Problem Gambling recommends that states invest in problem gambling services commensurate with the size of their gaming industries.
Last year, Nevada spent $0.40 per person on problem gambling treatment and prevention. According to the Nevada Gaming Control Board, gambling generated $14.8 billion in revenue in 2022, a record and an increase of 10.5% from 2021.
“Nevada’s leadership in the gambling industry is increasingly under pressure from other states,” said White of the National Council. “In the gaming capital of the United States, the Nevada Gaming Control Board should be the most well-funded organization. If you think about how things are done, companies are headquartered there.”
“We need to put in place more stringent procedures and policies to protect the health and well-being of consumers, which I think is essential to the success of the modern gambling industry,” White said. He added that the state’s approach is “pretty minimal as a policy.” And it’s outdated with modern gambling regulations. ”
treatment and regulation
Experts say self-exclusion programs alone are not effective in encouraging responsible gambling.
“You should see a therapist before signing up for self-exclusion,” says White. “If you suffer from a gambling disorder, you may not be able to make an informed choice about whether or not to self-exclude and for how long.”
White said gaming regulators “take very seriously” violations in states with self-exclusion laws. Most self-excluded gamblers are detected not when the player is losing, but when they have won an amount that requires identification for tax purposes.
“That creates a horrifyingly cynical view among most gamblers of, “See, I told you there was a problem.” I ruled it out, but then I went back to this casino and sat down and made another 10,000. I lost a dollar. You didn’t stop me until I won,” White says. “It’s a great concept, but it should be seen as a therapeutic intervention rather than security or coercion.”
In highly regulated states, self-excluded gamblers must complete their chosen exclusion period before being allowed to play, White said.
White said technology is coming soon that will allow states to share access to self-exclusion data.
Caesars Entertainment, considered a leader in responsible gambling, has had an internal self-exclusion registry shared among its U.S. properties for 20 years, said Jan Jones Blackhurst, a member of the company’s board of directors. Stated.
“We are the only gaming company that is integrated through our customer management services,” says Jones-Blackhurst. “A customer can choose whether he wants one year, five years, or forever. They can only choose to be excluded from local casinos, but continue gambling when they come to Las Vegas.”
Jones Blackhurst said that in states with self-exclusion laws, the winnings of gamblers who are excluded for violating the system are donated to charity. However, given the lack of regulation in Nevada, gamblers who violate company policies within the state must be allowed to keep their winnings.
The annual social cost of problem gambling to the nation is $7 billion, according to the Council of States, and unlike other addictions and mental illnesses, the federal government spends nothing on problem gambling. .
“Part of the problem at the federal level was the shame and stigma surrounding problem gambling, which led to a special exemption from the Americans with Disabilities Act,” White said.
Additionally, he says gambling is taxed and regulated at the state level and does not require federal involvement.
“However, there are two federal taxes that are specific to gambling: a withholding tax on jackpots and an excise tax on all sports betting. Together they generate approximately $8 billion in revenue for the federal government. , there is a good case for federal support,” he says.
nevada law The law, passed in 1991, prohibits gamblers from using mental illness as an excuse not to pay their gambling debts.
September is Problem Gambling Awareness Month
The national hotline for gambling addiction assistance is 1-800-GAMBLER.
