Skip to footer

New Jersey's bad call on sports betting

New Jersey plans to allow sports betting early next year in defiance of federal law and possible corruption of the culture of sports. The state even admits such gambling would harm its own teams.

|
AP Photo
Gov. Chris Christie is defying a federal ban on sports betting with a new law that lets people in New Jersey bet on the outcomes of football, basketball and other games – except the state's own college games.
  • By the Monitor's Editorial Board

New Jersey announced Monday that it will start to issue licenses for betting on sports early next year – in full defiance of a federal law that bans it. If upheld in court, New Jersey’s move would be a legal opening for other states to allow wagering on professional and collegiate games.

But don’t bet on it.

For starters, New Jersey admits the potential assault that such gambling might have on the integrity of sports. The law authorizing this step also bans gambling on the state’s own college teams or any collegiate sporting events held within the state.

New Jersey’s hypocrisy lights up the legal skies like Atlantic City at night. And for some in the tri-state area, memories remain of the bribe-taking antics of the 1951 basketball team at City College in New York.

Then there’s the response from the National Collegiate Athletic Association immediately following the state’s announcement. The NCAA will pull five championships out of New Jersey next year. Like many sports organizations, the NCAA sees how sports betting, especially in the Internet age, has increased in Asia and Europe, corrupting enough games to scare away fans.

But New Jersey is itching for a legal fight anyway. It hopes the Supreme Court will overturn the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act passed by Congress in 1992. That federal law bans sports betting in all but four states  – Nevada, Delaware, Oregon, and Montana – that had it at the time. 

The state is up against a united front. The major professional sports leagues in baseball, basketball, football, and hockey – in addition to the NCAA – have started a federal lawsuit against New Jersey’s action. Legalizing sport betting would not only expand the gambling that now goes on illegally for many pro games, they say, but will taint the culture of sports in ways far more damaging than other corrupting activities, such as doping.

Pro sports would be damaged if governments approve the effort to treat sports as a game of luck rather than skill. The culture of sports rests on a pursuit of talent and faith on a level playing field. And adding the e-commerce of betting, especially live during a game, has been shown in other countries to attract organized crime because of the ease of hiding its involvement.

MONITOR'S VIEW: Obama's new tax on the poor in state gambling ruling

New Jersey also admits the potential harm of sports betting in its decision to have it run by Atlantic City casinos and horse racing tracks. If it’s so harmless, why not let every lottery stand run it?

The state’s desire to raise revenue through sports wagers – perhaps $120 million a year – would be more than offset by the loss of spectators and sports leagues that will always be suspicious of game-fixing by powerful gamblers.

The state should take a long timeout on this plan.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.
editor@csmonitor.com
Subscribe
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

QR Code to New Jersey's bad call on sports betting
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2012/1016/New-Jersey-s-bad-call-on-sports-betting
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe