Part 2!
Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman, and I would like to respond to the gentleman from Texas and the gentleman from Massachusetts and tell you why we need this bill and we need it desperately.
We have been trying to move this legislation for 5 years, and in the 5 years that we have failed to move it, as many as half a million young teenagers have become compulsive gamblers. Now, the Harvard Medical School, the University of South Florida, and the American Psychiatric Association have all told us that the younger someone is exposed to gambling, the younger they start gambling, the more addictive it becomes. In fact, about three times more addictive.
The University of Connecticut did a recent study, and I am going to introduce it for the RECORD, that says Internet gambling is three times as likely to produce a problem gambler. Seventy-four percent of the young people that they surveyed who said they had gambled on the Internet developed a serious addiction.
Now, what happens when they gamble and they get an addiction? McGill University did a study, and they said that teenagers who gamble on the Internet show increased criminal activity, strained family relationships, and depression. Thirty percent of those who became addicted to gambling on the Internet actually attempted suicide. That is why Mr. Leach talked about the young man who was the class sophomore president at Lehigh University who actually robbed a bank. A 17-year-old who lost a $6,000 bet on the Internet committed suicide. We have got to move against this.
Finally, let me conclude with this: let me tell you what has happened in the past year. According to the University of Pennsylvania, in the last year we have gotten another 150,000 young compulsive gamblers.
It is already illegal. What we are doing is stopping it. You have got the criminals on one side, and you have got young people on the other side; and we must protect the young people from these criminals.
[Begin Insert]
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4411, the Goodlatte-Leach Internet Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act.
I want to begin by thanking Chairmen Oxley and Sensenbrenner and Congressmen Goodlatte and Leach for bringing H.R. 4411 to the Floor today and for their undying determination to put an end to Internet gambling in the United States. H.R. 4411 would help stop the growing threat that Internet gambling poses to the most vulnerable in our society, kids and problem gamblers.
H.R. 4411 provides strong new enforcement mechanisms to stop the offshore casinos that flagrantly violate existing state and federal laws against Internet gambling. This bill enables our financial regulators to prescribe regulations limiting the acceptance of financial instruments for unlawful Internet gambling. In addition, H.R. 4411 amends the Wire Act of 1961 to expressly prohibit illegal online interstate gambling. H.R. 4411 was reported by both the Financial Services and Judiciary Committees. Similar legislation has passed the
[Page: H4987] GPO's PDFHouse in the previous two Congresses. Now is the time to cut off illegal Internet gambling once and for all.
We have been discussing this issue for years. It has taken way too long. In the time we've been debating this issue, Internet gambling sites have virtually overrun the Internet. Five years ago, there were less than 50 Internet gambling sites. Today, there are more than two thousand sites that will generate upwards of $5.9 billion this year alone, nearly half of the $12 billion bet worldwide on Internet gambling.
Support for our efforts to stop the money flow to illegal gambling sites have been nearly universal, from family and religious groups to anti-gambling groups, from professional sports to college athletics, from major players in the banking and credit card industries to law enforcement and Internet service providers. Mr. Speaker, it is far easier and far quicker to just list who doesn't support our efforts. That would, of course, be the illegal gambling industry itself. They have launched an all-out effort at obfuscation and mischaracterization in hopes of defeating this bill and perpetuating their noxious activities.
The ability of the Internet to penetrate every home and community has both positive and negative consequences. It can be a valuable source of information and a way to communicate quickly with loved ones. But, the Internet can also override community values and standards. Gambling is an excellent example of this. Gambling is currently illegal in the United States unless it is regulated by the states. With the Internet, however, prohibitions against gambling and regulations governing gambling are turned on their head.
The negative effects of gambling have been widely documented. All too often, gambling results in addiction, bankruptcy, divorce, crime and moral decline. Internet gambling magnifies the destructiveness of gambling by bringing the casino into your home. According to an extensive survey done by the University of Connecticut Health Center, 74 percent of those who have used the Internet to gamble have serious problems with addiction, and many of those have resorted to criminal activities to pay for the habit. We heard testimony at one of our hearings that Internet gambling is proving to be a serious problem for many college students. One student reportedly lost $10,000 on Internet sports gambling over a three-month period.
Imagine if you found out that a casino was being built next door to your house, and that they had invited your children to participate in gambling activities. You would probably think that was unacceptable. But Internet gambling Web sites are actually worse than that. Sitting right on the computer desk in your home or in your child's bedroom is a computer with easy access to more than 2,000 Web sites that offer illegal Internet gambling services.
Worse yet, your kids could use your credit card to gamble on the Internet and run you into bankruptcy--without you even knowing it.
In addition, Internet gambling has been linked to terrorists and organized crime. The FBI and the Department of Justice have testified that Internet gambling serves as a vehicle for money laundering that can be exploited by terrorists. These Internet sites--most of which are operated offshore--represent a serious money laundering vulnerability for our country.
So what would H.R. 4411 do?
H.R. 4411 addresses the problem of Internet gambling in four ways:
First, it clarifies that the Wire Act covers all forms of gambling including Internet gambling and increases the maximum penalty for violations of the Wire Act from two to five years in prison.
Second, and most importantly, it cuts off the flow of money to Internet gambling Web sites by regulating the payments system.
The legislation directs the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve to jointly develop regulations preventing financial transactions related to illegal Internet gambling.
Third, the legislation authorizes State and Federal law enforcement to seek injunctions against persons who facilitate illegal Internet gambling; and
Fourth, the U.S. government through the Treasury Department is exhorted to advance international cooperation in law enforcement efforts against illegal gambling and related money laundering.
Internet gambling is already illegal under Federal and State law, but most of the more than two thousand Internet gambling sites operate from offshore locations. Currently, these ``virtual casinos'' advertise the ease of opening betting accounts mainly through the use of credit cards. Therefore, they operate beyond the reach of our law. The regulations and anti-money laundering laws that apply to casinos in our country do not apply to these fly-by-night offshore Internet operators. Shutting off the money source is the only way to shut down these illegal Internet gambling Web sites.
In closing, Mr. Speaker, let me just say that a vote for this bill is a vote against illegal Internet gambling. This bill shuts off the money. That is what these people are waiting for, the money. If we shut off the money, we shut off the sites.
My thanks again go to Chairman Oxley, Chairman Sensenbrenner, Congressman Goodlatte and Congressman Leach for their tireless efforts in moving this bill forward and bringing it to the floor today. I urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of this legisiation.
[End Insert]
DISORDERED GAMBLING AMONG UNIVERSITY-BASED MEDICAL AND DENTAL PATIENTS: A FOCUS ON INTERNET GAMBLING
George T. Ladd and Nancy M. Petry--University of Connecticut Health Center.
The authors evaluated gambling behaviors, including Internet gambling, among patients seeking free or reduced-cost dental or health care. Three hundred eighty-nine patients at university health clinics completed a questionnaire that included the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS; H. R. Lesieur & S. Blume, 1987). All respondents had gambled in their lifetimes, with 70% gambling in the past 2 months. On the basis of SOGS scores, 10.6% were problem gamblers, and 15.4% were pathological gamblers. The most common forms of gambling were lottery, slot machines, and scratch tickets. Internet gambling was reported by 8.1% of participants. Compared to non-Internet gamblers, Internet gamblers were more likely to be younger, non-Caucasian, and have higher SOGS scores. This study is among the first to evaluate the prevalence of Internet gambling and suggests that people who gamble on the Internet are likely to have a gambling problem. Results also illuminate the need to screen patients seeking health care services for gambling problems.
The fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (American Psychiatric Association, 1994) describes pathological gambling as a disorder that involves preoccupation with, tolerance of, and loss of control relating to gambling behaviors. A recent meta-analysis of prevalence rates (Shaffer, Hall, & VanderBilt, 1999) concluded that approximately 1.6% of North American adults may be Level 3 (pathological) gamblers. An additional 3.9% may be Level 2 (problematic) gamblers, bringing the combined percentage of disordered gamblers to more than 5%.
Although prevalence rates in general populations have been described (Shaffer et al. 1999), there is a paucity of studies that have focused on the prevalence of gambling among primary-care patients (Miller, 1996b; Pasternak & Fleming, 1999; Van Es, 2000). As a consequence, health care professionals may not be aware of the impact that gambling behaviors can have on the health of their patients. Health comorbidities found to be associated with pathological gambling include substance abuse, circulatory disease, gastrointestinal distress, sexual dysfunction, anxiety disorders, and depression (Bergh & Kuhlhorn, 1994; Daghestani, 1987b; Lesieur, Blume, & Zoppa, 1986; Miller, 1996a; Pasternak & Fleming, 1999).
This study presents two central opportunities for contribution to the existing body of knowledge about disordered gambling. First, we directed our attention toward gambling behaviors among a subset of the population that seeks free or reduced-cost health care. A second focus of this study was the types of gambling activities in which people engage, with special attention paid to Internet gambling. Many researchers have examined the prevalence of disordered gambling (e.g., Shaffer et al., 1999), but few have presented data on the types of gambling in which individuals participate, and no known published studies have focused on the prevalence of Internet gambling.
METHOD
Participants for this study were drawn from patients seeking treatment at the University of Connecticut Health Center (UCHC) each year. Of the 389 patients included in this study, 76.5% were from UCHC dental clinics, which serve primarily uninsured patients. The remaining 22.5% of participants were from other UCHC medical clinics. The UCHC is located 8 miles southeast of Hartford, Connecticut, and is approximately 65 miles from two large casinos.
Procedures
Questionnaires were left in the waiting areas of various UCHC health and dental clinics for 13 months (8/1/99-9/2/00) along with collection boxes. Approximately 2,000 patients were treated in these clinics during the study period. Signs encouraging questionnaire completion were displayed in these general areas. On occasion, a research assistant would approach patients within clinics and ask them to complete a screen. No patients who were verbally asked to complete a questionnaire refused. Nonresponses were probably a result of failure to notice the signs and questionnaires rather than refusal to participate. An overall average return rate of 85.7% across the UCHC clinics was determined on weeks in which the numbers of screens left out and collected were monitored.
Measures
The 2-page questionnaire consisted of the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS; Lesieur & Blume, 1987) as well as questions regarding demographic information and gambling activities.
Data analysis
We used the SOGS (Lesieur & Blume, 1987) component of the questionnaires to classify |
