Connecting the dots...

On Yahoo today, read a reuters article, where the Obama administration has loosened their interpretation of online gambling laws (Wire Act of 1961).

http://news.yahoo.com/gambling-gets-boost-obama-administration-113418228--spt.html

Essentially, it says that the path has been cleared for states to legalize internet poker and gambling, and clarifies the regulations to mean that only sporting events cannot be bet on.

Until now, the department held that online gambling in all forms was illegal under the Wire Act of 1961, which bars wagers via telecommunications that cross state lines or international borders.

The new interpretation, by the department's Office of Legal Counsel, said the Wire Act applies only to bets on a "sporting event or contest," not to a state's use of the Internet to sell lottery tickets to adults within its borders or abroad.

Follow the money trail of course, because the article points out that this has the potential for states to reap BILLIONS in tax revenue.

The Obama administration cleared the way for U.S. states to legalize Internet poker and certain other online betting in a switch that may help them reap billions in tax revenue and spur web-based gambling.

The next dot I want to connect, relates to the article where it says that this ruling essentially legalizes gambling that was previously considered illegal, as long as it is legal in the state where the gambling occurs. It also goes on to say if states legalized intra-state gambling and poker, such as DC and Nevada have done, then there is no federal law which could apply.

But the department's conclusion would eliminate "almost every federal anti-gambling law that could apply to gaming that is legal under state laws," Rose wrote on his blog at www.gamblingandthelaw.com.

The dot? If the fed admits it cannot supercede state law, regarding gambling, then what happens now, when states make their own gun laws? Montana passing their law saying guns built, sold, and used in Montana are BATFE exempt, might not even need to take it to the SCOTUS now, if this precedent is set.
All the other dots... health care, welfare, gay marriage laws, medical (or even legal) marijuana laws? Those state laws could all supercede federal law if the President did indeed clear the way for this type of legislation, all because of wanting more of your dollars!

I understand that this is more the administration picking and choosing what laws it wants to enforce and how it interprets them, in the name of the almighty dollar, but give an inch, take a mile sounds like a solid plan for the States in this situation. The federal government has nickle and dimed the States out of rights and powers, and with this, the States could start getting some of their "change" back.

Talk about one of your all-time backfires!