The decision of a three-judge panel of the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals on Aug. 24 obviously took the Markell administration by complete surprise. With its’ decision that single-game sports betting on football, basketball, baseball and hockey games violates federal law, the court pretty much brought the administration’s plans to use this form of gambling as a means to fill budget holes to a screeching halt.
The question now is, what’s next?
If Markell wants to continue his pursuit of this form of revenue, the state either will have to appeal the decision to the court’s full panel of 14 judges or go to the United States Supreme Court. According to some legal experts, the latter stands just about a zero chance of succeeding. Going to the full Third Circuit Court could provide better odds, no pun intended, but probably not much.
So, apparently the thing to do is to find a way to expand the allure of parlay betting on football games only, find another, non-gambling source of revenue or figure out a way to cut more state expenditures.
None of these tasks will be easy. Parlay betting is not as popular as single-game bets because bettors wager on more than one game, and if one team loses, the entire wager loses. Parlay games pay out more, but the odds against any payout are considerably higher than with single-game bets.
Legislators also have resisted calls to reconvene the General Assembly in September to consider anything more than some routine judicial appointments, but this issue may force their hand.
According to one estimate, loss of single-game betting means a little more than $50 million in projected revenue just went up in smoke. Although it is showing some signs of improvement, the still precarious state of the economy may not make it wise to wait until the legislature’s scheduled return in January.
To borrow an old colloquialism that many of the younger generation may not recognize, it appears the administration may have bought a pig in a poke, i.e., taking on a risky plan without fully anticipating the results of it not working out.
As I’ve mentioned before, I’m no fan of using gambling to keep Delaware’s finances in order, and it appears relying on sports betting — especially when the federal law seemed very clear about what was allowed and what was not — was not as well thought out as it could have been.
Perhaps former Gov. Ruth Ann Minner, who adamantly opposed the idea throughout her eight years in office, had it right after all.
Email Jeff Brown at jeff.brown@doverpost.com.
