So, California is still broke, right?

Solution? Internet gambling legalization, for one thing.

Not that it would solve the state’s pathetic financial situation.

But it sure would help.

A little.

Bills to legalize online gambling are likely headed for another year of debate. A few bills have already been around for a couple of years.

In a letter to US Attorney-General Eric Holder, NJ Senator Raymond J. Lesniak – one of the sponsors of New Jersey’s proposed sports betting and Internet gambling legislation – said “(t)he State of New Jersey should not be impeded in any manner from exercising our rights under our state constitution and under federal law.”

Earlier this year, New Jersey’s legislature overwhelmingly voted for a bill to permit casinos in Atlantic City to offer intra-state Internet gambling on casino games and poker.

Though Gov. Chris Christie vetoed the bill, both he and the legislature indicated a desire to make New Jersey the first state in the US to legalize Internet gambling. A new bill is expected to be introduced sometime later this year.

Lesniak’s letter was in response to one sent a week earlier to USAG Holder by US Senators Harry Reid and Jon Kyl.

Both Reid and Kyl insisted that the DOJ crackdown on efforts by states to pass intra-state Internet gambling legislation, claiming it violated federal law including the Wire Act of 1961.

Lesniak pointed out that under the 2006 Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA), intra-state Internet gambling was permissible, and cited the specific passage in the law’s text:

“The term ‘unlawful Internet gambling’ does not include placing, receiving, or otherwise transmitting a bet or wager where…the bet or wager is initiated and received or otherwise made exclusively within a single State.”

Lesniak also pointed out that “intermediate routing” of Internet network traffic across state lines by Internet service providers (ISPs) did not violate either UIGEA or the Wire Act. UIGEA specifically states that intermediate routing did not affect the location of the bet, Lesniak wrote, and the Wire Act was intended for criminal enterprises using telecommunications to conduct illegal interstate sports betting, and was not intended for state-licensed and regulated intra-state gaming.

Both Reid and Kyl voted for UIGEA with the intra-state exemptions included in the final text of the law.

Lesniak also contradicted assertions by Reid and Kyl that all Internet gambling, including intra-state, was illegal.

“Were you to accept Sens. Reid and Kyl’s letter on its merits, you would have to prosecute the Nevada Gaming Board, which this year approved sports betting via mobile Internet within the confines of the state of Nevada. Nevada has also approved other forms of Internet and remote wagering on casino games, poker and sports within Nevada by firms like Las Vegas Sands and Station Casinos.

Lesniak went on to write, “(f)or that matter, New Jersey and 37 other states would also have to be prosecuted for permitting online wagering on horse races, which has existed for years.”

Even casinos are laying off people…in Vegas (it has been a given in Atlantic City).

But it is somewhat surprising that floor supervisors, who after all… are there to watch over theft and cheating… are being laid off.

No doubt (if you’ve been to Vegas recently) there are fewer suits hovering around blackjack, roulette and craps tables these days to make sure there’s no monkey business.

Casinos are trimming their biggest expense — labor — and relying on technology to fill the gap.

But will it work?

Security experts and casino employees suggest that downsizing comes at a price — the risk of the theft of cash and chips when the temptation to steal is at an all-time high.

In Las Vegas, supervisors who used to watch one to four tables per shift watch six to 10 tables, reflecting a gradual, years-long downsizing.

Their immediate supervisors, the pit bosses, have been phased out at some casinos, following the same fate as other casino jobs now performed by machines or remaining employees.

The trend, coupled with more sophisticated video surveillance, has also changed the role of some supervisors, who earn from $60,000 to $80,000, from security eyes to customer-service workers focusing on high rollers.

The supervisors also have been freed up from tracking gambling action at the tables, thanks to the use of loyalty cards and computers.

I guess we’ll see if all this ultimately pays off for casinos.

A Minnesota Capitol undercurrent for months has suggested gambling as a way to help solve a budget impasse.

“The governor wants more revenue, Republicans want no new taxes,” Rep. John Kriesel recently tweeted. “Enter racino and Block E. True compromise. Both sides win. Minnesota wins.”

So, OK…what is the holdup?

Many state lawmakers oppose more gambling or have said little about using it as a way to bring more money into the state treasury, that’s the problem.

On Monday, the idea of adding slot machines to horse-racing tracks, known as a racino, gained a radio campaign and support of a major agriculture group.

The Running Aces harness-racing track in the northern Twin Cities began running pro-racino radio commercials in the Twin Cities, Brainerd, Fergus Falls, Mankato, Marshall, Rochester and Willmar.

Running Aces and Canterbury Park in the southwestern Twin Cities asked for permission to become racinos.

Also Monday, the Minnesota Agri-Growth Council announced its racino support. The council, which promotes the state’s food and ag industry, only said it backs a Canterbury racino.

Besides helping the state budget, the council said the ag industry would benefit from higher purses paid at tracks with racinos.

The trouble for gambling supporters is lack of widespread legislative support.

“We have very divided caucuses,” House Speaker Kurt Zellers, R-Maple Grove, said. “We have folks who want to repeal the lottery and gaming in the state, period. And we have folks on every one of the gaming bills who say open it up: racino, block E, slots in bars, you name it. We have a wide variety, to say the least.”

And, the speaker said, he is not sure Democratic Gov. Mark Dayton would accept gambling as a replacement for all or part of his proposed tax increase on the best-earning Minnesotans.

“We need to know if the governor would sign it before we go to our caucuses,” Zellers said.

Dayton on Monday said that gambling arose in budget talks a couple of weeks ago, but it appeared legislative leaders did not think they could convince members to pass any expansion.

Also, the governor said, it would be tough to count on gambling money in the current budget because court actions could be expected to delay any new gambling program’s implementation.

On the other hand, a former Senate GOP leader and racino supporter felt good about its chances.

“I have this embedded feeling that it will come up before it’s over…” Sen. Dave Senjem, R-Rochester, said. “It has got to be a player in the end.”

The major gambling expansion proposals come nowhere near the $1.8 billion Dayton wants in new revenue in the two-year budget. Racinos would bring in an estimated $250 million over two years, a bit more than pegged for a downtown Minneapolis casino in an area known as Block E.

Most other gambling proposals would bring in less money and appear to have less legislative support.

”It is not a cure-all for the problem,” one legislator added. “I am not excited about the idea about expanding gambling.”

And a big one.

A lot of legislators talk about finding ways to legalize online gambling (as a way to collect more tax money). Now, two Congressmen have put their reputations on the line legalizing online poker, and possibly other games.

Of course, there are always pitfalls, for example the number of regulatory measures that would be put in place as a result.

The bill would let states choose whether they want to allow residents to play poker on the Internet and require operators to already have gambling licenses in at least one U.S. state.

The three biggest online poker companies were indicted by the U.S. Justice Department this past April, ending online poker in the U.S.

“This bill is indeed good news, but for now, if you’ll pardon the pun, I’m keeping a ‘poker face’ on at least one part of it,” said Maureen Martin, senior partner at the Heartland Institute.

“Legalizing online poker is an outstanding idea, but establishing still another federal agency to regulate it is where I’m going to hold, for two reasons. First, many online poker platforms are based in foreign countries, and thus are beyond the regulatory powers of the United States. Second, if these platforms cheat customers, that’s fraud. It’s already illegal in the United States and such laws are enforced by the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission. Enough is enough.”

“We’re going to try to get a bill on the President’s desk in this Congress,” Barton said.

We shall see. We shall see….

The group said it’s gonna start collecting signatures to put the issue on the ballot in November 2012.

”Michigan is Yours” members are confident the group will be able to get the more than 300,000 signatures necessary to put the measure before voters.

During a press conference Thursday in Romulus — one of the cities that would be home to a new casino — group members said the additional gaming halls would create jobs and spur economic growth.

”I think every city needs to look at something that creates opportunities for tourism and bringing people into the city,” Romulus developer and “Michigan is Yours” organizer Tony Gray said.

Under the proposed constitutional amendment, casinos would be built in Grand Rapids, Lansing, Romulus, Benton Harbor, Saginaw and Mount Clemens.

The language of the ballot proposal has already been approved by the state Board of Canvassers, and the group will have 180 days to collect the required number of signatures.

The measure would require the casinos to pay the same 19-percent wagering tax paid by corporate casinos in Detroit. That would provide revenue for “Michigan’s struggling urban centers,” the group says.

I think it’s a good idea. No, a grand idea.

Why the hell not?

Jobs, money for the state…and legal gambling. I’m for it.

You?

Well, scratch that thought.

Gov. Chris Christie, he of the hefty heft, vetoed the bill this week. Damn it,  declaring it would break the state’s constitutional limits that keep gambling in Atlantic City.

But Democratic supporters of the plan said Christie’s message held out hope, noting that he would work with them on a solution that could again put New Jersey ahead of other states in legalizing the practice for residents within its borders.

We’ll see. Remember, despite his protestations, Christie wants to be president.

The governor, a Republican, used his veto message to reiterate his administration’s “commitment” to Atlantic City, specifically to protect the resort from the threat of making what he called “convenience gambling” available anywhere within reach of an Internet connection.

The state’s constitution allows gambling only within the limits of Atlantic City.

So OK… I understand that, but…

The bill, championed by Sen. Raymond Lesniak, D-Union, wanted to open up a network of online-gaming portals operated solely by casino companies who were already licensed in New Jersey.

By specifying that all equipment used for the portals — including the computer servers themselves — sit in Atlantic City, Lesniak argued the state could allow the practice without bending or breaking the constitution.

Christie disagreed.

And I disagree with Christie.

So did legislators, who passed the bill.

It was a report put out by a group (I’d never heard of) called the Global Betting and Gaming Consultants (GBGC).

The report said the online gambling market in 2010 increased by twelve percent to $29.3 billion dollars.

Pretty amazing, huh?

Such an incredible growth rate makes online gambling one of the fastest growing industries in the world.

Do you hear that state legislators?

A further look at the numbers reveals that the twelve percent growth amounts to an average monthly gain of 330 million dollars over the last year.

Well, a lot of this was online sports betting. No big surprise there.

All in all, the future looks pretty bright for LEGITIMATE online internet gambling.

Can you imagine how much money a state could make by putting up a legitimate, state sponsored gambling web site.

Hell, I’d go to it.

As more countries begin to license, regulate and tax online casinos as well as online gamblers, the industry will continue a steady rate of double digit yearly growth for the next foreseeable future, the report said.

Why?

They are $15 billion…that’s BILLION…in the red. So it’s either raise taxes OR legalize casino gambling. Which would not solve all the state’s problems, but will help.

At least one bill calling to legalize casino gambling is expected this legislative session and getting support from some Democrats who traditionally support such measures.

Two years ago when the Legislature last met, there were several gambling bills put forward.

But none passed.

But with a budget crisis looming — and funding to public education, health care and other state services on the chopping block — gambling opponents aren’t taking any chances.

Both sides have said legalizing gambling could generate at least $1 billion in state revenue, which lawmakers could dole out as they see fit.

Even with a more conservative Legislature this year, some believe a billion-dollar temptation could sway more lawmakers.

“It’s a situation where a lawmaker could hold his nose and say, ‘public education is too important for me to not take advantage of this financial opportunity,’” said Chuck McDonald, a legislative consultant in Austin who has worked on pro- and anti-gambling efforts in the past.

So we’ll see what happens.

But here’s a good bet.

Casino gambling will soon be legal in Texas.