Law Allowing Gamblers to Ban Selves Would Get “Teeth”

Gamblers who voluntarily ban themselves from Iowa casinos could face new penalties if they are caught re-entering a licensed casino.

Proposed legislation would update a 2004 Iowa law that mandated a statewide self-exclusion program allowing patrons to irrevocably ban themselves for life from the state’s 17 licensed casinos. The ban list contains the names of 2,450 Iowa gamblers whose information is maintained in a database and shared among the casinos.

Patrons on the list who are caught in any part of a casino’s facilities can be turned away, arrested and have their winnings confiscated. But, under the proposed law, HF 2051, a banned person caught at a casino could also face simple misdemeanor charges.

“If it does pass, there is some added teeth to help somebody understand that if you’re signing the form, to take it seriously and not come back and to know that they could be cited for a misdemeanor as well,” said Wes Ehrecke, president of the Iowa Gaming Association, a trade group.

The Iowa Senate is also considering a proposal, SF 2062, to allow the self-ban to be revoked with good cause, which has concerned some treatment providers with the Iowa Council on Problem Gambling.

Gamblers in Iowa who have placed themselves on the statewide list forfeited winnings of $180,000 in 2005 and $163,000 in 2006 to the Iowa Gambling Treatment Program, Ehrecke said. The gambling industry already provides about $5 million each year for treatment programs, such as 1-800-BETSOFF (1-800-238-7633), he said. 

Keith Whyte, executive director of the National Council on Problem Gambling, said an increased number of states and gaming companies recently have begun offering self-exclusion programs.

He said the program is an effective tool for problem gamblers when it’s coupled with treatment programs.

“It’s important when the legislature is considering gambling policy to note that we really  need to look at all the implications it will have on problem gamblers,” he said. “Self-exclusion is a great thing, but you’re modifying a program that serves people with a mental health disorder. We always need to be very careful of modifying these things and looking at the impact.”

No demographic data is available about people on the statewide list, which is kept confidential, Ehrecke said.

Not all of those who place themselves on the list are problem gamblers; some people might be going through financial difficulties, marital and other problems, Ehrecke said.

“We are trying to indicate that this is a deterrent for someone who feels this is not a good thing for them,” he said. “Unfortunately, some people are prone to compulsive behavior.”

Patrons previously had the option to ban themselves from specific casinos, but once the statewide ban went into effect in 2004, most casinos have ended location-specific programs, Ehrecke said. The ban does not cover the state’s three American Indian casinos.

“Ninety-eight percent of people can go to the casino for fun and entertainment that it’s intended to be,” Ehrecke said. “But for that small percentage, this might be an additional deterrent.”

Some gambling treatment providers support the proposal.

“It’s just another added piece to help people with their impulse control disorder,” said John Hostetler, president of the Iowa Council on Problem Gambling. “It has to have some teeth and ways to be enforced. So yes I think that’s a good move.” 

Some casino personnel have told the Iowa Racing and Gaming Commission about the difficulties they have experienced in administering the self-exclusion program because some people on the list find ways to circumvent the rules, according to a review of the commission’s meeting minutes.

In October 2007, a person on the self-ban list entered the Riverside Casino & Golf Resort Casino in Bettendorf, and the casino created a Player’s Club account for the individual, who played 14 separate times and began receiving promotional mailings from the casino. The minutes state a casino employee failed to run appropriate checks. The issue wasn’t discovered until the patron inquired whether he had more than one account. A $20,000 administrative penalty was assessed against the casino, according to the minutes. 

In November 2007, an individual on the list complained to the Iowa Gaming Association about receiving promotional mailings from Riverside.

In November 2005 at the Catfish Bend Casino in Burlington, a banned patron showed his driver’s license to a casino cashier and received a promotional scratch ticket and duplicate Player’s Club Card. He played table games for nearly four hours. Later a cashier recognized him and discovered he had two Player’s Club cards. One card was flagged, but the other was not. He won $50, which was forfeited to the Iowa Gamblers Treatment program, according to meeting minutes from July 12, 2007. A $20,000 penalty was assessed against the casino, according to the minutes.

Similar problems with enforcement have occurred in other states, such as neighboring Illinois. The National Council on Problem Gambling issued a position statement on a proposal in Illinois to strengthen the casinos’ ability to detect patrons who participate in the self-exclusion program.

“No program can guarantee 100 percent compliance, but it is likely that a requirement to check identification at the door would improve the effectiveness of exclusion programs,” the statement read.

To get on Iowa’s gambling self-exclusion list, patrons must complete an application, have it notarized, take it to a gambling treatment site or casino and attach a photo. The information is entered into a database that is available to casino personnel at 17 licensed casinos.

“If they are going to sign it, take it very seriously,” Ehrecke said.