4 ms·

The dueling commercials for California propositions about sports gambling are such a farce. Neither prop 26 nor 27, actually talk about sports betting all, and

• whartung 4y ago
  Both are large gambling expansions. 27 is "worse" as it enables online sports betting, but all they talk up is homelessness and impoverished native tribes. 26 expands the native casinos to roulette and dice games. It's also fair to note, that folks can vote "No" on both of them, and neither would take place. It's not "one wins if the other loses". I dunno what happens if they both "win", perhaps "biggest winner" wins. The concern is that since sports gambling is getting more legalized, then the tribes can get their permission from the Federal Government rather than from the State, but I don't really understand the mechanics of that other than simply the State losing some aspect of control.
• ec109685 4y ago
  It’s inane. Prop 27 will provide less than 500M of state revenue / year, which is < .2% of the state budget, yet the proponents make it seem like this is a huge amount of funding. I really wish News sources were better at putting big numbers into context.