Time out from Omaha. Instead let’s join the hue and cry. I was reading Steve Fox’s article about the “Scary Death of Colorado Poker”, and I couldn’t help thinking of Matt Goerning’s bumper sticker, “Life’s a bitch and then you die?”. Most of us “Poker Players of America” have generally had to put up with a lot of hassle during this past century. But things do seem to be looking up for the next century.It simply takes some time for a “free” society to adjust itself to real freedom. We humans very seldom get complicated things like freedom right the first time. It took us nearly a hundred years just to abolish slavery. Delicate subjects like drinking and gambling take longer.

Plato asked, in a “free” society should people be allowed to do what they want to do, or does human nature require protective laws and restrictions? If we humans were all philosopher kings, perfectly intelligent and motivated, we would not need laws. Since this is clearly not the case, our civilization needs at least some laws to protect our citizens. But just how protective and restrictive should the laws be? Isn’t the quality of life better when there are generally more things to do, as opposed to less things to do?

Thus, the “preferred view”, as we learned in law school, is based on the historical fact that liberal societies with the least restrictive laws flourish and have the most progressive, innovative and optimistic citizens. The counter argument is that with fewer restrictive laws there might be more unreasonable behavior, injury and death.

In order to ascertain if any given law is really needed, one of the tools lawmakers often use is the REAL DANGER test. Minority views and activities should not be prohibited unless a REAL DANGER to the public exists. In a truly “free” society, mere philosophical or moral OPINIONS should NOT be the basis of laws.

Otherwise put, when YOU, the individual, tacitly consent to participate in civilization (by being born), you give up some amount of your natural freedom, presumably for the good of society - as determined by the legislature. If the legislature perceives a danger, it is their function to pass laws to protect the public, whether the public wants the protection or not. And over the years there have always been many “concerned” people around (like Jesse Helms) who have tried to protect the public from numerous “moral” dangers ranging from the theory of evolution, to school prayer, to obscene art.

But NOW, as we approach the twenty-first century, it is most gratifying to see people all over the world speaking out and successfully demanding FREEDOM.
Freedom means freedom of choice. And freedom of choice should not be legislated away without VERY STRONG justification.

Off my soapbox. Let’s look at some familiar examples. Are alcohol, abortion, and unmarital sex (not to mention that other kind of sex) wrong and/or immoral? Although we are all entitled to our own personal opinions on each of these subjects, it is indeed the various legislative bodies which tell us what is LEGAL. And what is LEGAL is by definition “RIGHT” - at least until the legality changes. Do all of you fully appreciate the protections we have received in the past from the various legislatures on the above? Note that the laws on all of the above have fluctuated within this century.

In most of these delicate and philosophical subject areas, TIME has been an important element. It is often not a question of whether something IS absolutely wrong and/or immoral, but WHEN, on this planet, society fashions it to be wrong and/or immoral. The wisdom of the ages teaches us that public passions are fleeting. And alcohol, abortion and sex are all good examples of this.

So is playing poker wrong and/or immoral TODAY using today’s norms? How about gaming and gambling in general? Are there any REAL DANGERS involved? Is this whole subject an OPEN matter of opinion, or a matter which has ALREADY BEEN RESOLVED by our society? The most precise answer is, it all depends WHERE you are and WHEN you are there. On the whole, gambling is in a transitional stage in this country. But the overall implications now clearly indicate that our society is in the process of actually accepting gambling.

It is interesting to compare the subjective perceptions of the various legislative bodies which currently allow some amount of gambling. Nevada has apparently been “wide open” the longest. Well over half the states allow race tracks or have state lotteries (22 states have lotteries). Several states allow gambling in specific locations. Some recent examples are the Mississippi River in Iowa and Deadwood, South Dakota (where Wild Bill lost big with aces and eights). And the Gary, Indiana legislature is about to vote on the matter.

California has chosen to distinguish between “gambling” and “games of skill”, that is, it is legal to wager on games of skill like bridge and poker, but not the usual gambling games. Thus California has its many poker parlors. In Atlantic City it is the other way around, namely all the usual gambling games are allowed but there is no (legal public) poker. Prince George’s County, Maryland chooses to prohibit dice games of all kinds.

I have always felt a certain awe for Nevada (a place which seems far away to us on the East coast). Maybe that is because gambling has always been legal there (during my lifetime), and, it used to be the only state without a speed limit.
Do these liberal tendencies mean that Nevada is somewhat lawless or less civilized? Or is Nevada more civilized because its citizens have more personal freedoms? Do Nevadans really feel safe living way out there in the wild wild West? Were not some extra people killed because of the lack of a speed limit?

But many people undoubtably have been killed because of the repeal of Prohibition. Wouldn’t more stringent speeding and jaywalking laws and strict curfews save even more lives? And we could save still more lives if we prohibited all cars and planes! Why does our society choose not to save these extra lives by passing laws against all cars and airplanes? Some abstract things must be more important even than saving lives! There are many reasons to draw many lines, but it is not always clear where the LAW should draw these lines.

My home turf, Prince George’s County, Maryland (PG County), established in 1696, borders the eastern side of Washington, D.C. For many years Prince George’s county has permitted charitable gambling, usually in the form of “Las Vegas Nights”, where the proceeds go to a non-profit fraternal or municipal organization (typically a group which uses the proceeds to buy fire engines for the community). A typical site might be a firehouse hall with ten blackjack tables, four poker games, and one roulette wheel. Reflecting the national trend toward increased gambling activity, within the last five years, “Las Vegas Night” activity has proliferated throughout PG County to the extent that there are at least two sites going every week night (all close at eleven PM), and at least five sites going each weekend (until 2 AM).

The county fathers have instituted a number of controls, most of them wise. For example, players are limited to cashing only one check, not to exceed two hundred dollars. To keep certain “professional” outsiders out, all employees are required to be members of the sponsoring organizations. And these sponsoring organizations have been sharp enough to keep out the seedy types. Most of us feel that the county fathers go one step too far by prohibiting the dealers and waitresses from being paid and accepting tips. The Las Vegas Night activities should be realistically run like any other business.

Of the whole civilized East coast, why has this gambling freedom occurred in Prince George’s County? Probably because PG County is in Maryland, a state with a great tradition of freedom that dates back to pre-revolutionary times. To times when other American colonies were actually persecuting the non-majority religions (Roger Williams, the founder of my home state, Rhode Island, was forced to leave the Quakerish Massachusetts Bay colony). In those times, Baltimore was the one American colony which guaranteed all minorities religious freedom. And it was there that Francis Scott Key wrote the Star Spangled Banner while the British were pounding Fort McHenry.

Maryland was one of the fiercest objectors to prohibition. During much of the prohibition era, “moonshine” was sold almost openly in Western Maryland, just a few miles from where the Whiskey Rebellion had taken place in 1794.

Gambling has always been more tolerated in Maryland than in other states. Maryland has always been “horse country” and permissive with race tracks. Maryland was one of the early (1973) and innovative lottery states. When I first came to this area in the late sixties, I was very amused to find money slot machines at an old amusement park, Marshall Hall, just a short Potomac boat ride away from downtown Washington. Many of my older friends remember that slots had been prevalent on Maryland’s Eastern shore during the forties and fifties when the rest of American society was relatively “tight”.

And many Marylanders “have an attitude” about their “land of the free” heritage. When neighboring Virginia and the District of Columbia tried to influence Maryland to make radar detectors illegal, a state legislator stood up and proudly proclaimed that barring radar detectors was not consistent with the state’s traditions.

For some time now there has been a storm brewing over Prince George’s County re this whole charitable gambling issue. Is it the forces of good and righteousness versus the forces of evil? If so, which are which?

Just what are the REAL arguments against gambling? Is it that weak willed people might lose their rent money? But we are living in relatively permissive times. If people are inclined to lose their rent money, they would probably lose it at the track or in the state run lottery (or illegal betting, or even for drugs or other illicit purposes).

Is it because we fear that big time gambling interests might move in? There seems to be universal agreement that PG is totally free of the “organization”. As a matter of fact, rumor has it that Atlantic City interests have recently been lobbying against the PG gambling activity, since it clearly diverts some amount of dollars from AC to PG.

But probably what most people would consider to be the BIG question about gambling, HAS ALREADY BEEN RESOLVED! The question about the actual MORALITY of gambling in this country has now been asked and answered - at least in most states. But many people do not seem to recognize this fact. It is a FACT that most legislatures in this country permit and actually profit from some forms of gambling. The implications of this FACT are inescapable. What is legal is simply right by definition. It follows that our legislatures would not sponsor immorality. What is considered moral in many states can hardly be condemnable in the other states.

Thus, in 1989, here in the United States of America, gambling per se, by legal implication, MUST be reasonably moral. And slowly but surely, all over the country, various localities are getting in on the ground floor. Since Prohibition there has been a steady progression of church bingos and race tracks, culminating with the legalization of lotteries and offtrack betting. If church and state accept
the revenues of gambling, gambling IS OBVIOUSLY LEGAL, and hence by definition IS now RIGHT and MORAL! Amen. If a synagogue holds out its hand and accepts the proceeds of gambling to do God’s work, is it appropriate for a rabbi from the same synagogue to condemn gambling? Did God forget to tell Moses, “Thou shall not gamble”?

Are there any actual advantages to gambling? Well if you happen to like gambling as a form of entertainment, the answer is clear. But even if you do not do gambling, note that charitable gambling has always been a great revenue raiser. People are tight about giving their money away, but they don’t seem to mind losing it, fairly, in the name of a reasonable cause. PG County probably has the best fire engines in the whole country. Gambling is a social event and is often the center of a show business type activity (which pays salaries, rent and taxes). When we have out-of-town guests, taking them out for a good meal and a couple of hours of gaming in PG County makes a congenial evening.

So who is for gambling in PG County? Mostly the people who like to gamble as a form of entertainment. This includes weekend daters, many young (at least young at heart) dating age people from the D.C. area who occasionally bring their dates out for fun and games instead of a night club, race track, or movie. These types are usually seen at the low stakes tables. At the higher stakes blackjack tables you often see foreign types with large bankrolls, which of course is the source of much of the total proceeds. And of course these are the people who might otherwise take the new train to Atlantic City.

Who is against gambling in PG County? Some moralist types (whatever that means in this modern day)? Some politicians looking for a drum to beat? How about some agents of Atlantic City?

A surprizing number of Washington professionals (for example many lawyers like myself) frequent PG County for their weekly poker action. Many of us (including eminent judges and prosecuting attorneys) have played poker for years in our private circles. But arranging private games is always a hassle for somebody, and it is nice to have an ever-available many-handed game which is convenient and legal.

A typical local old lady’s comment to me was “I do much better at blackjack than I use to do at bingo”. Indeed she probably does. Her odds of having an “enjoyable” (I think she meant winning) evening at blackjack certainly are at least five times better than at typical bingo odds.

Thus, a key reason why PG County type gambling may well be here to stay is because a large minority of people really seem to like it - and not that many people are really against it. One lesson that we learned from Prohibition was that people will usually find a way to do what they want to do, especially if it is NOT REALLY WRONG (moral turpitude) or does not involve a REAL DANGER. I understand that both the Romans and the English tried to prohibit gambling and found it unenforcable.

It is clear that, as usual, some segments of society are having trouble adjusting to the times. But it is more realistic to be in tune with the future than the past. Like it or not, prohibition is dead, and gambling IS now considered OK! Amen. And amazingly enough our later twentieth century legislatures are finally
adopting the “preferred view” on most of these matters. If occasional incidents seem to give gambling a black eye, just remember that all other human endeavors have their black sheep also. Not only politics and business, but also law and medicine and even religion (bon voyage, Jimmy Baker).

Apologies for devoting this article to such ramblings, but these subjects are close to all our hearts. Many of us are like children who fear that they will take our playground away - especially those of us who like to see things nice and legal. But legality and permanency (is anything permanent?) are probably but a wisp of time away. As in Colorado, and in the rest of the country, there is so much momentum that the whole “movement” is merely awaiting the next appropriate political change. It is only a question of where and when. It would be nice if while traveling on business to any city, you could stop in at the local poker club - legally. From all indications, this will probably happen fairly early in the next century. Next time it will be back to Omaha business as usual.