Video Gambling and H.B. 5438
UPDATE: According to information I have read, the Kane County Board of Supervisors is scheduled tonight (Tuesday, February 23rd) to discuss and possibly vote on repealing its ban on video gambling within the unincorporated areas of the county. I pray that it does not happen. I pray that the Board will STAND FIRM and not give in to the attempted extortion of some members of the General Assembly. I will follow this issue and report back on any action taken at the meeting.
House Bill 5438 (H.B. 5438) is one of three bills, that I know of, that have been introduced into the Illinois House of Representatives this session to alter an originally passed law—H.B. 255. H.B. 255, which was passed last year in violation of the Illinois Constitution, allows video gambling within communities (unincorporated areas of a county) under prescribed circumstances and also allows communities (counties) to opt out or ban video gambling within the community (unincorporated areas of a county) if so desired. First, I’m posting three short items in relation to H.B. 5438 and then giving my take on this particular bill.
1) From http://www.ilcaaap.org/ (Illinois Church Action on Alcohol & Addiction Problems)
“February 9, 2010
Gambling Action Alert
Legislation aimed at keeping communities from banning video gambling
Top mobsters have been caught on secret FBI recordings welcoming the legalization of video poker machines (Is this a surprise? Gambling in this nation has always been a revenue source for immoral individuals and criminal elements—it preys upon the vices and weaknesses of individuals. What is relatively new is that governments have joined the procession and are also trying to benefit financially from this evil. GANGSTER GOVERNMENTS!—my addition), a business they have dominated over the years, according to the Southtown Star.
The legislative intent of the Video Gaming Act (HB 255) was to allow municipalities and counties to decide for themselves if they wanted to legalize video gambling in their jurisdictions. The law included two ways for communities to ‘opt out’—by local ordinance or citizen referendum. HB 5438 changes the rules and stops funding for capital construction projects in communities that ban the machines. HB 5438 forces communities to accept video gambling machines and prey upon their own residents or else. Municipalities should not be punished for exercising local control.” (I’m not sure that H.B. 5438 actually does this. I’ve included a synopsis of the bill as provided in the bill as the third item. Read it and decide what it says for yourself—my addition.)
“1) Contact your State Representative and ask him/her to vote NO on HB 5438.
2) If your community has already banned video gambling, ask your local officials to contact State Legislators to OPPOSE HB 5438.
3) Share this alert with your faith community.
4) Forward to 10 others.”
2) A Chicago Tribune editorial contained the following information concerning H.B. 5438.
“A House bill sponsored by Reps. Saviano, R-Elmwood Park, Dan Reitz. D-Sparta, and Brandon Phelps, D-Harrisburg, would ban the funding of capital projects with revenues from video gambling in locales that have opted out of it. Legislative researchers can’t tell us of any similar existing penalties—say, limiting the use of liquor revenues in locales that vote themselves dry.”
3) The H.B. 5438 synopsis:
“H.B. 5438
by Representative Dan Reitz - Angelo Saviano - Brandon W. Phelps
SYNOPSIS AS INTRODUCED:
30 ILCS 105/6z-77
30 ILCS 105/6z-78
Amends the State Finance Act. Provides that, if a municipality or county prohibits video gaming pursuant to the Video Gaming Act, then (i) capital projects and the payment of debt service on bonds issued for capital projects within the municipality or county may not be funded from proceeds of video gaming that are deposited into the Capital Projects Fund and (ii) the proceeds of video gaming that are deposited into the Capital Projects Fund may not be used for the purpose of paying and discharging the principal and interest on bonded indebtedness for bonds issued for capital projects within the municipality or county. Effective immediately.”
As a reminder, the capital building program is to be funded from several sources including increased taxes on selected products and the tax on video gambling. Video gambling is suppose to provide about 30% of the funds for these projects. Thus, if I read this proposed bill correctly, the communities would not receive funds from video gambling but could receive funds from the other sources. When Morton passed the ban on video gambling the mayor specifically said that Morton should not receive any money from video gambling source income. I personally agree with that position. I don’t want to fund projects will immorally gotten revenue.
That said, the bill should not be passed as written. Clearly, this bill as proposed is an ex post facto law which is prohibited by the Illinois Constitution. Article I—Bill of Rights, Section 16 declares “No ex post facto law … shall be passed.” An ex post facto law is a law that restricts some entity for doing something that was legal in the past.
The original law (H.B. 255) allows communities to ban video gambling and places NO restrictions on that action. To now, after the fact, place any restriction on that action is obviously unconstitutional. OBVIOUSLY! (Well, maybe not to legislators.) Can you say LAW SUIT!!!
UPDATE: According to information I have read, the Kane County Board of Supervisors is scheduled tonight (Tuesday, February 23rd) to discuss and possibly vote on repealing its ban on video gambling within the unincorporated areas of the county. I pray that it does not happen. I pray that the Board will STAND FIRM and not give in to the attempted extortion of some members of the General Assembly. I will follow this issue and report back on any action taken at the meeting.
House Bill 5438 (H.B. 5438) is one of three bills, that I know of, that have been introduced into the Illinois House of Representatives this session to alter an originally passed law—H.B. 255. H.B. 255, which was passed last year in violation of the Illinois Constitution, allows video gambling within communities (unincorporated areas of a county) under prescribed circumstances and also allows communities (counties) to opt out or ban video gambling within the community (unincorporated areas of a county) if so desired. First, I’m posting three short items in relation to H.B. 5438 and then giving my take on this particular bill.
1) From http://www.ilcaaap.org/ (Illinois Church Action on Alcohol & Addiction Problems)
“February 9, 2010
Gambling Action Alert
Legislation aimed at keeping communities from banning video gambling
Top mobsters have been caught on secret FBI recordings welcoming the legalization of video poker machines (Is this a surprise? Gambling in this nation has always been a revenue source for immoral individuals and criminal elements—it preys upon the vices and weaknesses of individuals. What is relatively new is that governments have joined the procession and are also trying to benefit financially from this evil. GANGSTER GOVERNMENTS!—my addition), a business they have dominated over the years, according to the Southtown Star.
The legislative intent of the Video Gaming Act (HB 255) was to allow municipalities and counties to decide for themselves if they wanted to legalize video gambling in their jurisdictions. The law included two ways for communities to ‘opt out’—by local ordinance or citizen referendum. HB 5438 changes the rules and stops funding for capital construction projects in communities that ban the machines. HB 5438 forces communities to accept video gambling machines and prey upon their own residents or else. Municipalities should not be punished for exercising local control.” (I’m not sure that H.B. 5438 actually does this. I’ve included a synopsis of the bill as provided in the bill as the third item. Read it and decide what it says for yourself—my addition.)
“1) Contact your State Representative and ask him/her to vote NO on HB 5438.
2) If your community has already banned video gambling, ask your local officials to contact State Legislators to OPPOSE HB 5438.
3) Share this alert with your faith community.
4) Forward to 10 others.”
2) A Chicago Tribune editorial contained the following information concerning H.B. 5438.
“A House bill sponsored by Reps. Saviano, R-Elmwood Park, Dan Reitz. D-Sparta, and Brandon Phelps, D-Harrisburg, would ban the funding of capital projects with revenues from video gambling in locales that have opted out of it. Legislative researchers can’t tell us of any similar existing penalties—say, limiting the use of liquor revenues in locales that vote themselves dry.”
3) The H.B. 5438 synopsis:
“H.B. 5438
by Representative Dan Reitz - Angelo Saviano - Brandon W. Phelps
SYNOPSIS AS INTRODUCED:
30 ILCS 105/6z-77
30 ILCS 105/6z-78
Amends the State Finance Act. Provides that, if a municipality or county prohibits video gaming pursuant to the Video Gaming Act, then (i) capital projects and the payment of debt service on bonds issued for capital projects within the municipality or county may not be funded from proceeds of video gaming that are deposited into the Capital Projects Fund and (ii) the proceeds of video gaming that are deposited into the Capital Projects Fund may not be used for the purpose of paying and discharging the principal and interest on bonded indebtedness for bonds issued for capital projects within the municipality or county. Effective immediately.”
As a reminder, the capital building program is to be funded from several sources including increased taxes on selected products and the tax on video gambling. Video gambling is suppose to provide about 30% of the funds for these projects. Thus, if I read this proposed bill correctly, the communities would not receive funds from video gambling but could receive funds from the other sources. When Morton passed the ban on video gambling the mayor specifically said that Morton should not receive any money from video gambling source income. I personally agree with that position. I don’t want to fund projects will immorally gotten revenue.
That said, the bill should not be passed as written. Clearly, this bill as proposed is an ex post facto law which is prohibited by the Illinois Constitution. Article I—Bill of Rights, Section 16 declares “No ex post facto law … shall be passed.” An ex post facto law is a law that restricts some entity for doing something that was legal in the past.
The original law (H.B. 255) allows communities to ban video gambling and places NO restrictions on that action. To now, after the fact, place any restriction on that action is obviously unconstitutional. OBVIOUSLY! (Well, maybe not to legislators.) Can you say LAW SUIT!!!
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 4:56 AM
1 Comments:
"An ex post facto law is a law that restricts some entity for doing something that was legal in the past."
No that not what an ex post facto law is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences of actions committed or relationships that existed prior to the enactment of the law. If an ex post facto law had the definition that you give then any law banning any activity that was ever legal would be unconstitutional.
Unless there is something more in that house bill than you posted the state is not doing to alter the ability of communities to ban gambling, it is just making the very reasonable addition that if community does not want to allow the revenue generating activity they should not receive any of the revenue.
Post a Comment
<< Home