|Jim Rockford |
Member since May 2011
Sheldon Adelson's quid pro quo with the GOP (Posted on 3/26/14 at 1:30 pm)
Capitol Hill conservatives are bracing for a fight they do not want to fight—the push by Las Vegas mogul Sheldon Adelson to legislate a federal ban online gambling.
The fight begins as soon as companion bills are filed in each chamber before the end of the week by Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R.-S.C.) and Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R.-Utah).
The bills were written by the staff of the Coalition to Stop Online Gambling, the advocacy group funded by Adelson, who has pledged to “spend whatever it takes” to see the legislation passed.
What gives this fight the “#awkward” is the huge give and the huge ask.
The Give: In the 2012 election cycle, Adelson, the chairman and CEO of the $14 billion-a-year Las Vegas Sands conglomerate, gave tens of millions of dollars to GOP presidential candidates former speaker Newton L. “Newt” Gingrich and former Massachusetts governor W. Mitt Romney, in addition to other candidates and the Republican Party. He spent $150 million to defeat President Obama, including giving almost $40 million to Karl Rove and his American Crossroads project.
The Ask: As states like New Jersey, where it is now legal, and Massachusetts, where there is a move to legalize online gaming, Adelson is convinced that online gambling competes with his brick-and-mortar poker rooms. To this end, he is calling on the Congress, and specifically his Republican friends, to outlaw his competition.
The ask has put Republicans in a precarious situation where they are forced to choose between philosophical principles, like federalism, and their opposition to crony capitalism against the obligation to hear out and support Adelson.
Texas Gov. J. Richard “Rick” Perry, for instance, was once one of the leading voices for federalism. But, he appeared to be balancing other priorities when he released his March 24 letter asking Congress to restrict his own state from emulating what New Jersey and others have done or are doing.
The jury was still out when in 2011, Conor Friedersdorf called Perry a “Tenth Amendment turncoat” in The Atlantic. Now we see the verdict vindicates Friedersdorf.
The feeling on Capitol Hill is that the bills will not pass, which sets up the situation, where Republicans take Adelson’s money with their fingers crossed.
The fear is that if enough Republicans sign up for the Adelson gravy train, the bills might reach an irreversible point of no return, where they cannot be turned back
Graham, in a primary fight against Tea Party candidates, has suddenly become interested in a federal solution.
Freedom Works’ Julie Borowski wrote: “Surprise, surprise. Adelson and his wife hosted a Graham fundraiser last year. According to Politico: ‘Adelson has not been a long-time Graham supporter, but in 2013 he and his wife Miriam — who have spread their money widely among Republicans — cut checks for $15,600 in campaign contributions to Graham.’”
Interestingly, Graham is without his fellow members of the new Three Amigos. Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R.-N.H.), representing the “Live Free or Die” state, has so far stepped away from supporting the Graham project.
State leaders in the Granite State recently opted against allowing gambling in the state, a state prerogative that could be threatened by legislation being pushed by Adelson.
In interfering with states’ rights and establishing federal supremacy to forbid online gambling Congress would also inherently be grant the power prevent states from outlawing the same activities when circumstances or administrations change.
As for the other amigo, Sen. John S. McCain III (R.-Ariz.), one doubts he will join Graham—especially after he was caught playing online poker on his iPhone during a three-hour hearing on whether or not to bomb Syria in September.
New Orleans Saints Fan
Member since Mar 2007
re: Sheldon Adelson's quid pro quo with the GOP (Posted on 3/26/14 at 3:14 pm to BBONDS25)
This is your MO. How disingenuous can you be? His company self-reported possible violations after an annual internal audit. According to YOUR LINK!
In its annual regulatory report, filed with the commission on Friday, the Sands reported that its audit committee and independent accountants had determined that “there were likely violations of the books and records and internal controls provisions” of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
Yeah, that's several months after the federal investigation was first made public. I guess that was their way of trying to come clean with it.
How am I being disingenuous to say he's had an issue with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act? Explain yourself.