PDA

View Full Version : West Virginia proposed Source Market Fee


adwplayingfool
02-18-2016, 03:14 PM
Horrible timing. I had literally just began looking at housing in the Harper's Ferry area. I was excited about being able to get some worthwhile rebates on my handle after all these years being a victim of Virginia's source market fees. The rebates available to WV residents was a huge swaying factor in whether to move from Fairfax to Loudoun County, VA or cross over to Jefferson. I guess I might as well stay in Virginia. Short sighted politicians everywhere. :bang:


WEST VIRGINIA LEGISLATURE
2016 REGULAR SESSION
Introduced
Senate Bill 562
By Senator Snyder
[Introduced February 10, 2016;
Referred to the Committee on Finance.]
A BILL to amend the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, by adding thereto a new section, designated §19-23-12e, relating to the licensing of advance deposit wagering; providing for source market fees; providing for the distribution of those fees from wagers made by account holders located within West Virginia but not within thirty miles of any licensed racing association, for distribution of those fees from wagers made by account holders located within thirty miles of a licensed racing association and for distribution of those fees from wagers made by account holders located within thirty miles of two or more licensed racing associations; providing for regulatory authority in the Racing Commission over advance deposit wagering; providing for the assessment and imposition of regulatory fees and taxes on advance deposit wagering licensees' wagering in West Virginia and for the distribution of the fees and taxes; prohibiting advance deposit wagering in West Virginia unless conducted through an advance deposit wagering licensee or as otherwise provided by law; providing that all advance deposit wagers placed by residents or nonresidents within the state are considered to be wagering within West Virginia subject to the laws of this state and rules of the Racing Commission; authorizing rulemaking; and defining terms.
Be it enacted by the Legislature of West Virginia:

That the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, be amended by adding thereto a new section, designated §19-23-12e, to read as follows:
ARTICLE 23. HORSE AND DOG RACING.

19-23-12e. Licensing of advance deposit wagering.
(a) As used in this section:
(1) "Account" means an advance deposit wagering account or ADW account owned by an account holder and managed by an ADW licensee that the Racing Commission has determined will maintain a specific identifiable record of account deposits, wagers, credits, debits, and withdrawals and protect the account holder's confidential information.
(2) "Account holder" means an individual at least eighteen years of age who applies for, and successfully opens an account with an ADW licensee, including all resident account holders and nonresident account holders to the extent that nonresident account holders place their account wagers from within West Virginia, provided that the Racing Commission determines that including the nonresident account holders' wagers would further West Virginia horse racing.
(3) "Advance deposit account wagering," "advance deposit wagering" or "ADW," means a method of pari-mutuel wagering that is permissible under the Interstate Horseracing Act, 15 U.S.C §3001, et seq., in which an individual may establish an account with a person or entity, licensed by the Racing Commission, to place pari-mutuel wagers on horse racing with the ADW licensee via electronic media or by telephone, but not including account wagering conducted through a racing association licensee under subsection (a), section nine of this article, and the Racing Commission's rules thereunder with respect to wagering conducted pursuant to Racing Commission Rule §178-5-5.
(4) "Advance deposit wagering licensee" or "ADW licensee" means an entity licensed by the Racing Commission to conduct advance deposit wagering that accepts deposits and wagers, issues a receipt or other confirmation to the account holder evidencing the deposits and wagers, and transfers credits and debits to and from an account.
(5) "Confidential information" means: (A) The amount of money credited to, debited from, withdrawn from, or present in an account; (B) the amount of money wagered by an account holder on any race or series or races, or the identities of racing associations on which the account holder is wagering or has wagered; (C) the account number and secure personal identification code of an account holder; and (D) unless authorized by the account holder, the name, address, or other information that would identify the account holder to any person or entity other than the Racing Commission or the ADW licensee that manages the account.
(6) "Electronic media" means any electronic communication device or combination of devices including, but not limited to, personal computers, the Internet, private networks, interactive televisions, and wireless communication technologies or other technologies approved by the Racing Commission.
(7) "Located" means, in regard to a resident account holder, where his or her principal residence is, and in regard to a nonresident account holder, where he or she is physically located.
(8) "Principal residence" means the street address identified by a resident account holder as that individual's residential address, as the address may be verified by the ADW licensee to the satisfaction of the Racing Commission.
(9) "Resident" is an individual who: (A) Is domiciled in West Virginia; (B) maintains a place of abode and spends at least one hundred and eighty-three days within a calendar year in West Virginia; or (C) lists an address in West Virginia as his or her principal residence when opening an account.
(10) "Secure personal identification code" means a numeric, alpha-numeric or other secure character code chosen by an account holder pursuant to appropriate security requirements established by an ADW licensee and satisfactory to the Racing Commission, as a means by which the ADW licensee may receive or verify an account holder's instructions for wagers and account deposits, credits, debits and withdrawals.
(11) "Source market fee" means the fee payable by the ADW licensee, which may be no less than six percent, but not more than ten percent of all advance deposit wagers made by account holders, as determined by the Racing Commission in accordance with the best interests of West Virginia horse racing. Source market fees shall be calculated and distributed as follows:
(A) All source market fees derived from wagers of account holders not located within thirty miles of any racing association licensee, shall be prorated by dividing each racing association licensee's total handle by the total handle of all West Virginia racing association licensees, and distributed as follows:
(i) Ten percent of each horse racing licensee's prorated amount to the West Virginia Thoroughbred Development Fund; and, ten percent of each dog racing licensee's prorated amount to the "West Virginia Racing Commission Special Account-West Virginia Greyhound Breeding Development Fund;"
(ii) Forty-five percent to the Purse Fund of each prorated licensee; and
(iii) Forty-five percent to each prorated licensee.
(B) All source market fees derived from wagers of account holders located within thirty miles of a particular racing association licensee, shall be distributed as follows:
(i) Ten percent to the West Virginia Thoroughbred Development Fund established in section thirteen-b of this article, or to the "West Virginia Racing Commission Special Account-West Virginia Greyhound Breeding Development Fund," depending on whether the account holder, when wagering, was located within thirty miles of a horse or dog racing licensee;
(ii) Forty-five percent to the Purse Fund of the racing association licensee; and
(iii) Forty-five percent to the racing association licensee.
(C) All source market fees derived from wagers of account holders who were, when wagering, located in an overlapping area within thirty miles of two or more racing association licensees shall be prorated between the licensees by dividing each licensee's total handle by the total handle of all licensees within a thirty mile radius of the area where the wagering account holder was located, and once prorated, distributed in accordance with subparagraphs (ii) and (iii), paragraph (B) of this subdivision, with ten percent of each licensee's prorated amount distributed to the respective development funds in subparagraph (i) of that paragraph of the type or breed of racing of each prorated licensee.
(12) "Total handle" means the total annual dollar sales amount of all pari-mutuel wagering on horse races conducted at, or generated from imports or exports of simulcast horse racing to or from, a racing association licensee, including all moneys from wagering conducted under sections nine, twelve-a, twelve-b and twelve-c of this article, but excluding refunds and cancellations of the wagering and excluding advance deposit wagering.
(b) The Racing Commission is vested with jurisdiction over any person or entity that solicits account holders located in West Virginia, or offers advance deposit wagering in West Virginia. Any person or entity under the jurisdiction of the Racing Commission shall be licensed, and the Racing Commission may impose a nonrefundable initial licensing application fee not to exceed $5,000, and a nonrefundable annual renewal licensing fee not to exceed $1,000, but the Racing Commission may require any applicant for an initial or renewal ADW license to bear the additional costs involved in conducting background checks and reviews.
(c) No person or entity may conduct advance deposit wagering in West Virginia unless the person or entity has applied for and been granted an ADW license by the Racing Commission. The commission shall also ensure that, except for advance deposit wagering authorized in this section, all pari-mutuel wagering on racing shall be conducted within the confines of a racing association licensee's racetrack or licensed contiguous hotel, as permitted under subsection (a), section nine and subsection (1), section twelve-a of this article, and implementing rules thereunder, including Racing Commission Rule §178-5-5, or within an authorized gaming facility in a historic resort hotel, as permitted under section twelve-d of this article and implementing rules thereunder.
(d) There is hereby assessed an annual regulatory fee of one-half percent of the total dollar amount of all advance deposit wagering conducted in West Virginia, payable to the Racing Commission, but any initial and renewal licensing fees, and additional costs, if any, required for background checks and reviews under subsection (b) of this section shall be credited against this regulatory fee, on at least an annual basis as determined by the Racing Commission. There is hereby imposed an annual ADW tax of one percent of the total dollar amount of all advance deposit wagering conducted in West Virginia payable to the General Revenue Fund.
(e) Advance deposit wagers placed by residents and nonresidents located in West Virginia are considered to be wagering conducted in this state and subject to the laws of this state and the rules of the Racing Commission.
(f) The Racing Commission has the authority to promulgate rules, pursuant to article three, chapter twenty-nine-a, to implement this section, and to provide conditions for the licensing of advance deposit wagering. Those rules are to include, but are not limited to: (1) Standards, qualifications and procedures for the issuance of an advance deposit wagering license in West Virginia; (2) rules establishing initial and renewal license fees, and payment of same to the commission to cover the costs of licensing ADW licensees; (3) provisions regarding access to books and records and submission to investigations and audits by the Racing Commission; (4) provisions regarding the percentage payable as source market fees under subsection (a) of this section, as well as the collection and distribution of those fees; (5) provisions regarding whether and how to include advance deposit wagering by nonresident account holders wagering while located in this state under subsection (a) of this section; and (6) standards and procedures for opening, maintaining and securing ADW accounts, as well as protecting confidential information therein.

NOTE: The purpose of this bill is to provide for the licensing of advance deposit wagering. The bill provides for source market fees. The bill provides for the distribution of those fees from wagers made by account holders located within West Virginia but not within thirty miles of any licensed racing association, for distribution of those fees from wagers made by account holders located within thirty miles of a licensed racing association, and for distribution of those fees from wagers made by account holders located within thirty miles of two or more licensed racing associations. The bill provides for regulatory authority in the Racing Commission over advance deposit wagering. The bill provides for the assessment and imposition of regulatory fees and taxes on advance deposit wagering licensees' wagering in West Virginia and for the distribution of the fees and taxes. The bill prohibits advance deposit wagering in West Virginia unless conducted through an advance deposit wagering licensee or as otherwise provided by law. The bill and provides that all advance deposit wagers placed by residents or nonresidents within the state is considered to be wagering within West Virginia subject to the laws of this state and rules of the Racing Commission. The bill authorizes rule-making. The bill defines terms.
Strike-throughs indicate language that would be stricken from a heading or the present law and underscoring indicates new language that would be added.

Dave Schwartz
02-18-2016, 04:17 PM
This makes my head hurt.

Can someone translate this into a summary for us?

Donttellmeshowme
02-18-2016, 04:51 PM
Yes please someone what does this mean?

lamboguy
02-18-2016, 04:57 PM
means racing commission must authorize fee of at least 6% for adws and can be as high as ten. up to commission to decide but it sucks for anyone in wv. i have heard ny source market fee is going up to 7 1/2% and minnesota will have 7% fee next year. every year racing gets worse and the solution they propose is to increase taxes.

proximity
02-18-2016, 08:23 PM
it means senator snyder was paid off by racing to cripple the ability of west virginia horseplayers to get the rebates they DESERVE.

the funny thing is that this is just a mere drop in the bucket compared to the damage PENN GAMING has done to charles town which has become a JOKE in mid-atlantic gambling. what are you doing about THAT senator snyder???

adwplayingfool
02-18-2016, 08:26 PM
What this means, simply put, is an unnecessary tax hike on horseplayers in West Virginia. If you enjoy rebates from your online wagering website prepare for that to be a thing of the past. They transfer the funds that would be paid back to horseplayers and instead pay corporations that own casinos and tracks that donate to political campaigns. The state senator that sponsored this bill, Senator Snyder, is not even running for re-election as a state senator. He has opted to run for Jefferson County Clerk instead. As a parting gift to Penn National gaming, the owners of Hollywood Casino Charles Town, he wants to steal your money. When you bet on a horse race 15-20% of your bet goes to the website that accepts your wager. They pay back 5-7% of that wager by way of rebate or reward to you, the player. This bill forces the site to pay 6.5-10.5% of your wager to go to the state and track operator. That means the site that used to reward you for playing pays the government and casino operator instead. Your reward is devoured by a greedy and abusive government. If you bet $10,000 on horse racing online in WV per year do you believe that the track and government should receive $600 MORE per year or you should get back $600 as a loyal customer? Vote down Herb Snyder as Jefferson County Clerk.Write your local rep to shoot down a source market fee in WV. It hurts WV residents and horseplayers, and it hurts horseracing. The only person that benefits is Penn National, the owners of Hollywood Casino. It is no coincidence State Senator Snyder proposed this bill on his way out of state politics. Let your representative know you do NOT support tax increases on the hard working people of WV.

lamboguy
02-18-2016, 09:27 PM
means racing commission must authorize fee of at least 6% for adws and can be as high as ten. up to commission to decide but it sucks for anyone in wv. i have heard ny source market fee is going up to 7 1/2% and minnesota will have 7% fee next year. every year racing gets worse and the solution they propose is to increase taxes.

i meant 7 1/2% source fee in ny up from 5%. yes that is what adws have been told as crazy as that sounds

Dave Schwartz
02-18-2016, 09:58 PM
The primary reason most people I know play there is the rebates.

I fear for the track without solid rebates to promote their product.

proximity
02-18-2016, 10:01 PM
i don't live in west virginia but ironically just last week decided to vote anyhow with my feet:

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1945361&postcount=107

and i'm not the only one as in post 131 of the same thread i even make up a little song (set to the music of hail to the redskins) about seeing western maryland high roller track collector more and more in the baltimore casinos instead of charles town.

and you can bet we're far from the only ones senator snyder..... and btw NATIONAL HARBOR hasn't even opened yet pal.

i do feel bad for charles town businesses like the turf motel and rib room, mountain view diner, sheetz, ihop, hampton inn, and others that i'd frequent but pen gaming has forced my hand senator.

Jeff P
02-18-2016, 10:21 PM
In my opinion, source market fee is something all players everywhere need to be acutely aware of - and be ready to take action when tracks and horsemen try to ram it down our throats.

The way I see it, unless players are willing to take action: Tracks and horsemen are going to keep introducing source market fee, one state at a time - until the only players eligible for rebates are those living outside the US.

Maybe that would be ok... IF tracks and horsemen lowered takeout (for every bet on their wagering menu and by the equivalent percentage as the source market fee) so that each time a state goes to source market fee the net effect on players works out to zero.

But that's not what they are doing here.

The way I see it, for the small to mid volume rebated player: source market fee is the same thing as a takeout hike.

When the TOC, CHRB, and California tracks raised takeout in 2011, horseplayers responded with a boycott against California Racing.

Best estimates say that handle at Santa Anita and Golden Gate during the first eleven weeks of their 2011 meets was down more $100M vs. the prior year.

Link:
http://www.playersboycott.org/handleupdate03232011.html

When Churchill Downs raised takeout in 2014, horseplayers again responded with a boycott against Churchill Downs.

Best estimates say that Churchill handle for their 2014 Spring Meet was down about $49.2M vs. the prior year.

Playersboycott recap:
http://www.playersboycott.org/handleupdate06292014.html

Article at DRF.com:
http://www.drf.com/news/all-sources-handle-churchill-spring-meet-down-sharply

Washington Post article by Andy Beyer:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/othersports/bettors-get-a-chance-at-bigger-payouts-tracks-get-a-smaller-takeout-but-profit-from-more-wagers/2014/08/11/9c9b7ebc-2176-11e4-86ca-6f03cbd15c1a_story.html

Yet HANA has made a persuasive case to horseplayers that takeout is an issue worth fighting for, and it has demonstrated that takeout increases don't lead to free money for racetracks.

I'm very much open to suggestions about the appropriate player response here.

Jeff Platt
President, HANA

Hoofless_Wonder
02-19-2016, 04:14 AM
...I'm very much open to suggestions about the appropriate player response here.

Good question. Boycotts appear to have a limited effect on the actions of lawmakers and horsemen, and so the death spiral for the sport continues. Like our idiotic Central Bankers trying to keep the economy afloat, states/tracks/horsemen are making desperate attempts at maintaining the status quo, when the whole business model for the sport needs to be overhauled.

One would think there's enough data out there to support the concept of takeout reduction = growth in handle, but apparently that's not the case - or that that approach is not economically feasible for lawmakers, at least in the short term. I'm not sure if this change in WV is to drive more players to the tracks, or if it's just squeezing the lemon of racing 'cause there's still some juice left. But it appears that the driving force behind this is trying to get a bigger slice of pie, while that pie is still there - before the ever shrinking pool of discretionary income that fuels that sport disappears completely.

Lawmakers know they have the players at their mercy, as only a small fraction of us will permanently boycott their product, move out-of-state to find a home where a horseplayer is treated more fairly, or give up the game completely. Until the sport is revamped through legal changes to provide incentives for growth and/or cooperation across state lines, expect the downward grind to continue - and we'll see something like what's in South America here - high takeouts, low quality racing.

Seabiscuit@AR
02-19-2016, 05:16 AM
Tracks would be making a lot less money now than before rebating became popular. Not only is turnover down but with rebating you make less money on what turnover you do get as the rebates crush your margins

I cannot blame any track or state government for wanting to turn back the clock and bring in source market fees to eliminate the rebates. It is a logical play in fact. There will be more and more states going down this path

davew
02-19-2016, 08:30 AM
I am still confused - does this mean if you are living in or visiting West Virginia and place a bet through an ADW, the ADW pays 6-10% of all bets to West Virginia?

Is the purpose of this to get more people in West Virginia to go to West Virginia racetracks to bet off-track?

Hambletonian
02-19-2016, 09:15 AM
Somebody has to pay for this game.

Look at Great Britain. Great place to bet, purses are pathetic. Good thing racing is a sport of royalty there, because I honestly cannot believe owners turn a profit.

Right now we are all spitting in the wind. Horse racing in this country has one trajectory---downward. Most racetracks don't care if anyone shows up live, and in fact nobody does. Which means they employ far less people, have far less impact on the local economy, and are far less likely to be propped up when they start to fail.

Decoupling is the wave of the future, and I am guessing within the next ten years it will be the norm. The number of racetracks will probably decline by 80%, the breeding market will collapse, and folks will spend their gambling dollars elsewhere.

There is absolutely no future in horse racing here, the gambling market is saturated by options that are better for the operator and the patron.

Enjoy it while you can. Good thing is that when it is gone forever, most of us will be too.

Track Collector
02-19-2016, 11:38 AM
Tracks would be making a lot less money now than before rebating became popular. Not only is turnover down but with rebating you make less money on what turnover you do get as the rebates crush your margins

I cannot blame any track or state government for wanting to turn back the clock and bring in source market fees to eliminate the rebates. It is a logical play in fact. There will be more and more states going down this path

Tell me, do you play the races and seek to make a profit when doing so? I am also curious of what if any vested interest your have. Are you a causal fan, a business person, someone who works in the racing industry, etc.? Please do let us know, as you have consistently railed against rebates, and folks like me would like to understand why.

adwplayingfool
02-19-2016, 11:56 AM
I am still confused - does this mean if you are living in or visiting West Virginia and place a bet through an ADW, the ADW pays 6-10% of all bets to West Virginia?

Is the purpose of this to get more people in West Virginia to go to West Virginia racetracks to bet off-track?

Correct. The ADW has to pay the state and tracks 6-10% of every dollar you bet. It is more a tax/punishment for not going to the track to bet than anything. With that much money being shipped to the track and state it means the player will not get a rebate any more if they bet through an ADW in WV.

EMD4ME
02-19-2016, 01:06 PM
I have a stupid question (s).

In NY there is a source market fee of 5%. I know if Twin Spires takes wagers from a NYS resident, they pay 5% to NYS or NYRA or whatever.

What if the ADW is a NY based ADW? I believe they are not subject to it. SO.....rebates are unaffected to the NY residents who bet via NY based ADWs.

Am I wrong?

Would it be the same in other states? If not, why?

RXB
02-19-2016, 03:41 PM
Tracks have had their pricing wrong for years. Most of their wagering takeouts are too high, yet the fees that they were charging for their signals were too low and thus they were basically giving away revenue to the rebate shops.

In the past few years, the tracks have been correcting the latter issue. But they continue to neglect the former.

OTM Al
02-19-2016, 04:07 PM
Tracks have had their pricing wrong for years. Most of their wagering takeouts are too high, yet the fees that they were charging for their signals were too low and thus they were basically giving away revenue to the rebate shops.

In the past few years, the tracks have been correcting the latter issue. But they continue to neglect the former.

Always felt they would not be able to do the former because of the latter. Not saying that fixing the second issue will cause the first to be changed, but there would be less an excuse not to.

davew
02-19-2016, 05:33 PM
Correct. The ADW has to pay the state and tracks 6-10% of every dollar you bet. It is more a tax/punishment for not going to the track to bet than anything. With that much money being shipped to the track and state it means the player will not get a rebate any more if they bet through an ADW in WV.

So it will only affect the bettor if they are getting a rebate, otherwise less money going to Xpressbet, twinspires, ... unless the ADW decides to drop the track.

adwplayingfool
02-20-2016, 10:08 AM
So it will only affect the bettor if they are getting a rebate, otherwise less money going to Xpressbet, twinspires, ... unless the ADW decides to drop the track.

If you don't get a straight up rebate it may alter the "reward points" you earn at the big two sites. They may also just choose to cut ties with players in WV because the margins just don't make sense. If you are currently in WV it makes little if any sense to be playing at the big two anyways. Their rewards are non existent compared to the rebates some other shops offer. We are talking 10x better rebates/rewards or more, even for a small player at some rebate shops.

adwplayingfool
02-20-2016, 10:11 AM
I have a stupid question (s).

In NY there is a source market fee of 5%. I know if Twin Spires takes wagers from a NYS resident, they pay 5% to NYS or NYRA or whatever.

What if the ADW is a NY based ADW? I believe they are not subject to it. SO.....rebates are unaffected to the NY residents who bet via NY based ADWs.

Am I wrong?

Would it be the same in other states? If not, why?

It completely depends on the wording of the legislation in each state. To me nothing in the WV legislation carves out an exemption for in state operators.

thespaah
02-20-2016, 10:17 AM
means racing commission must authorize fee of at least 6% for adws and can be as high as ten. up to commission to decide but it sucks for anyone in wv. i have heard ny source market fee is going up to 7 1/2% and minnesota will have 7% fee next year. every year racing gets worse and the solution they propose is to increase taxes.
Meaning, that fee will be passed along to the customer in which case any rebates would be gobbled up by the source market fee?...And by using progressive logic, the larger volume players handle will plummet?
This is sort of like how states decide to apply "sin taxes" to tobacco and alcohol for the advertised purpose of increasing revenue when the usual result is just the opposite. Fewer people smoke or drink. Or they travel across state lines to make their purchases there to avoid the tax.
WV is creating a new tax which the politicians say they should get "a piece of the (horse betting) action".....The tax will have the opposite effect. Lower handle

Valuist
02-20-2016, 10:54 AM
Tracks would be making a lot less money now than before rebating became popular. Not only is turnover down but with rebating you make less money on what turnover you do get as the rebates crush your margins

I cannot blame any track or state government for wanting to turn back the clock and bring in source market fees to eliminate the rebates. It is a logical play in fact. There will be more and more states going down this path

Isn't that short sighted thinking? You screw over rebate players, they are not necessarily going to keep playing. Especially with sports betting getting close to legalized in states beyond Nevada. Once another state legalizes it, the other states will fall into place. But we are talking about an industry that has acted foolishly, and with no foresight.

Track Collector
02-20-2016, 12:08 PM
Isn't that short sighted thinking? You screw over rebate players, they are not necessarily going to keep playing. Especially with sports betting getting close to legalized in states beyond Nevada. Once another state legalizes it, the other states will fall into place. But we are talking about an industry that has acted foolishly, and with no foresight.

Seabiscuit@AR indicates in another post the use of BetFair. Would he also be in favor if ALL tracks assessed an additional 5-10% Source Market Fee on ALL players using BetFair?

Stillriledup
02-20-2016, 12:10 PM
WV has 'take it or leave it' racing. They're playing hardball with a product people can easily do without?

Track Collector
02-20-2016, 12:13 PM
Not sure if it is still a policy, but mostly of the other ADWs other than XPressbet and Twin Spires (i.e. those who offered significant rebates) could take WV residents, but they were not allowed to wager on Charles Town or Mountaineer.

Track Collector
02-20-2016, 12:19 PM
WV has 'take it or leave it' racing. They're playing hardball with a product people can easily do without?

This new proposal is an attempt to secure more funds because of the following:

(a) Overall casino revenues have been shrinking.
(b) Lawmakers, like in other states, continue to divert a higher percent of the funds originally designated for racing to other areas.

If you push folks hard enough, they WILL learn to do without it.