NJ had a reason for adding online gaming, in that over 90% of its population was more convenient to a casino, or tracks with slots, in PA, DE and NY. But there was a much better solution available, by offering slots or a full casino at the Meadowlands Harness Racetrack. Since the track was willing to pay the PA tax rate, NJ could have replenished the $200 million plus, lost to senior and disabled programs, from Atlantic City's casino tax. But it could have also given AC programs a similar amount, for giving up its casino monopoly.

Instead of saving $250 million (online gaming revenues), from the $3 billion lost to gaming in other states, a Meadowlands casino would have earned a billion dollars or more in revenue and provided an estimated $450 million in taxes on win. My revenue numbers may be conservative, because this would be the closest casino to North Jersey's 7 million population, and also closer to New York's Orange Co., Staten Island and Manhattan. Plus, there are 100,000 hotel rooms, just across the river, filled mid-week, with businessmen and conventioneers, looking for different kinds of entertainment - many only 15 minutes away, by car, bus, rail or helicopter.

Sports betting online will definitely increase the compulsive gambling problem in NJ and especially our younger adults. I agree with Keith, once an executive with the American Gaming Association, that this is a Frankenstein Monster that will dramatically raise compulsive gambling in NJ.

But as a previous casino operator, I am more concerned with online gaming, including sports betting, reducing the need to visit a live gaming establishment. In the US, we offer mega casino resorts, unlike the United Kingdom, where most gaming is conducted at betting shops. So, for America, the likelihood of online gaming, reducing attendance at our casinos and race tracks, means operational downsizing, which leads to job and tax losses, reduced company earnings and dividends, and the likelihood of more bankruptcies.

Not a pretty picture for a once healthy industry. And the states that are responsible, looking for maximum tax revenues from gaming, can actually wind up with less revenue, as Illinois discovered, when it put 5 video gaming terminals at any business that could qualify for a liquor license, in receptive communities that shared in the tax booty. Now Pennsylvania is doing a good job in replacing Illinois, as the most irresponsible gaming state.

And now, as an individual that assisted with the 1976 Casino Referendum, the drafting of the Casino Control Act, and the opening of the first legal casino outside Nevada, I am disturbed at NJ’s effort to increase online gaming taxes, in spite of the negative impact it has on Atlantic City. And when considering the reduction in taxes from casino win, hotel occupancy, food and beverage sales, entertainment and retail, I have to wonder if the state is going to earn even less in overall taxes from casino gaming.