Quotessence
Home / Quotes / Quote by Rufi Thorpe

Quote by Rufi Thorpe

Work

Margo's Got Money Troubles

Browse quotes and source details for this work. more

Author

Rufi Thorpe

Browse famous quotes and profile details for Rufi Thorpe. more

You May Also Like

“[New Jersey Democratic senator Bill Bradley] feared the spread of problem gambling, that legalized gambling would supplement rather than supplant illegal gambling, and most of all, the threat of the corruption of sports and of America’s youth. “When young people see the State involved in gambling on sports, can there be any doubt that they will think that that’s what sport is all about?”

“Garnett and the sportsbooks justified the design of their bill by emphasizing the need to compete with the illegal sports betting market. By their telling, Colorado was a state overrun with bookies and offshore gambling websites, and the only defense against these nefarious forces was legal, regulated gambling. DraftKings’ Stanton Dodge estimated that sports betting was already taking place “on a massive scale,” and that 1.2 million Coloradans (one out of every five people) bet a total of $2.5 billion per year illegally, an enormous, un-fact-checkable figure of unknown origin. Proponents implied that so much gambling was happening anyway that HB1327 would not so much expand sports betting as siphon existing illegal players into a taxed marketplace. The black-market bogeyman both got legislators on board and rationalized the industry-friendly aspects of the bill.”

“Garnett chose water as the beneficiary for sports betting as a matter of both good policy and good politics. Water turned gambling skeptics—and maybe even opponents—into believers. Western Colorado state senator Dylan Roberts (at the time a member of the state house) said the water tie-in made it a “no-brainer” for him to support the bill, “not because I love sports betting or anything.”

“The ad campaign focused on the Water Plan, not sports betting. As Perry put it, “No one really understands the nuance of why water is important, but they know it’s important.” In one commercial, Terry Fankhauser, longtime executive vice president of the Colorado Cattlemen’s Association, proclaimed, “DD is a win for Colorado’s water.” While the campaign did not hide that DD benefited sports betting, neither did it place gambling front and center. The campaign turned the ballot measure into a simple equation: A vote for DD was a vote for water. A vote against was a vote against water, and by extension, against the future of Colorado. Of course while the ads never quite claimed sports betting would be a panacea for water, neither did they make clear just what percentage of the Water Plan would be funded by gambling.”

“The election still proved extremely close. At one point on election night, “Yes” led by just eighty votes. Sports bettors across the country stayed up to watch the results. Garnett was awake with them, tweeting at 10:30 p.m. “Just hang tight and enjoy the #sweat,” the term used by gamblers to describe anxiously watching the outcome of a bet. Ultimately, DD would prevail with 51.4 percent. “Yes” votes outnumbered “no” in just seventeen of Colorado’s sixty-four counties, but the campaign was able to run up the score in Denver and its surrounding suburbs. Despite the bipartisan nature of the original bill, the vote fell largely along the state’s established rural/urban, Republican/Democratic divide. In all but nine cases, a county’s vote for DD predicted which way it would swing in the following year’s presidential election, with pro-DD counties going for Joe Biden and anti-DD counties for Donald Trump. According to Brian Jackson, polling conducted after the vote by the Environmental Defense Fund revealed that, without the water tie-in, the proposition very likely would have failed.”

“Richard Schuetz, longtime industry insider and former regulator, … likens states handing control over sports betting to inexperienced regulators with a patient placing their life in the hands of an inexperienced surgeon and hoping for the best.”

“Colorado had the misfortune of launching legal sports betting at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, when all major professional sports leagues were shut down. Some people, like Garnett, were willing to place bets that would not be decided for months (the Broncos finished 5–11). Others wanted action right away, wherever on the globe they could find it. Among the most popular sports in those early months were South Korean baseball, Costa Rican soccer, and Russian ping-pong. In May and June, Coloradans bet $15.7 million—roughly a quarter of the total bet on all sports—on table tennis, which was exciting, fast paced, and played at all hours of the day. Even if many bettors were simply picking players at random, they were not going to miss the chance for convenient, legal betting.”

“As one of [Colorado]’s problem gambling therapists predicted in early 2019, “We just are not ready for this.” They weren’t, and still aren’t. As of 2024, the state still has no inpatient or intensive outpatient treatment centers dedicated to problem gambling, and the PGCC website lists thirteen certified treatment providers for the entire state.”

“In interviews, many current and former lawmakers and industry representatives acknowledged the flaws in Colorado’s initial sports betting system, which they attributed to the fact that Colorado was an early adopter and had few models to learn from. (It was the sixteenth state to launch sports betting after Murphy, and the ninth to launch full online gambling.) But there was nothing forcing the state to adopt so early other than a gambler-esque hope for a quick windfall. Colorado could have sat back and assessed the results from New Jersey and Delaware and designed regulations that addressed the issues faced in other states. With money—or water—in their eyes, it chose not to.”

“States were unprepared for the onslaught of lobbying that followed the Murphy decision and were caught flat-footed by an aggressive campaign to set up industry-friendly sports betting systems. Facing the promise of a new source of tax revenue, lawmakers largely went along with sportsbooks’ desires without considering the potential harm that could ensue from gambling arriving onto every cell phone in the state.”