NH Lottery offering online gambling games

Jun 25, 2010, 7:30 am (11 comments)

New Hampshire Lottery

CONCORD, N.H. — Gamblers will be able to buy lottery tickets in New Hampshire next week to play online — a move seen by some as an expansion of the kind of gambling that state lawmakers oppose.

PlayNowNH interactive games go on sale July 1.

In them, players choose the game — baseball, super slots, speed bingo or New Hampshire poker — and the amount they want to play.

For example, players can buy chances for the $1 baseball game on one ticket or a separate ticket with chances for the $5 poker game. They can buy tickets with total chances per game worth up to $100 and play on their home computers, using a 30-digit access code.

Since the prizes associated with the tickets are determined at sale, players also can check at lottery outlets to see if the tickets are winners — without playing the games.

Lottery Commissioner Paul Holloway described the games as similar to scratch tickets. Winners must claim prizes in stores and cannot buy more chances online, he said.

"A lot of people are reluctant to stand in a store and scratch a ticket," he said Thursday.

Maura McCann, commission marketing director, said the idea is to attract younger players who can play on their computers or smart phones, if they have access to the Internet. She said a similar game is offered in British Columbia.

Players must be 18 or older to buy lottery tickets in New Hampshire.

Colin Manning, spokesman for Gov. John Lynch, said the Lottery Commission said it would investigate new games a year ago.

"This is one of their new modernized games," he said.

But the game's announcement surprised lawmakers, including the sponsor of a bill to legalize video slots that was rejected this month by the House and opposed by Lynch.

Senate Finance Chairman Lou D'Allesandro, the gambling bill's sponsor, said he recognizes the Lottery Commission is charged by the state to raise money, but said he can't understand why online gambling is being allowed when his bill to legalize video slots was rejected this month.

"I don't like online gambling," added D'Allesandro, D-Manchester. He said sitting at home in front of a computer gambling is "very dangerous." He also said critics said his proposal would lead to proliferation of gambling to the detriment of the state.

PlayNowNH, he said, now brings gambling into homes across the state rather than containing it in a few casinos.

D'Allesandro said his proposal also would have created jobs to build and operate casinos, while the new lottery game did not.

House Finance Chairwoman Marjorie Smith, D-Durham, also questioned why the Lottery Commission did not present the proposal to lawmakers with any estimate of additional revenue, especially since they were struggling to balance the state's budget this month with as few cuts to programs as possible.

Smith also said expanding into interactive online games is bad policy.

"I'm sure you can say it's no different (than scratch tickets), but we know from the research that's been done there is nothing more addictive than being able to play games on the computer," said Smith.

Holloway said he was surprised by the reaction.

"This is just a little quirk. It's not slots," he said.

State Rep. David Hess, a longtime opponent of video slots, said the interactive game and casinos are a "quantum leap" apart.

"I don't think it's anywhere close to casino gambling or a harbinger of casino gambling," said Hess, R-Hooksett.

AP

Comments

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Hopefully, if successful, this can be a slight foot-in-the-door that may facilitate an easing of opposition to online lottery play across state lines.

As would be expected though, the wishes of most of the politicians are in direct conflict with those of the people.

ressuccess's avatarressuccess

I don't know why there are going to be online games in New Hampshire?

maringoman's avatarmaringoman

online gambling? oh boy. That somebody can gamble away all their money from the comfort of their studio apartment is not the way to go, I dont think. I know I know, people do the same thing when they walk to the store but if think about it, the latter one involves some physical effort. Besides the embarrassment of being seen at the store spending crazy amounts of money on lotto is absent in online gambling. I'm jus saying.

konane's avatarkonane

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Jun 25, 2010

Hopefully, if successful, this can be a slight foot-in-the-door that may facilitate an easing of opposition to online lottery play across state lines.

As would be expected though, the wishes of most of the politicians are in direct conflict with those of the people.

I Agree!

dopey7719's avatardopey7719

Dangerous....dangerous...dangerous...

LckyLary

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Jun 25, 2010

Hopefully, if successful, this can be a slight foot-in-the-door that may facilitate an easing of opposition to online lottery play across state lines.

As would be expected though, the wishes of most of the politicians are in direct conflict with those of the people.

It would be nice for people in "computerized" States to be able to play in other States with non-computerized drawings. I support allowing playing other Lotteries across state lines. I don't like online CASINOS because they are by nature computerized and thus have the same issues as computerized Lottery drawings, but worse because those online casinos can track your win/loss ratio and make sure you're not being unfairly lucky.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

At the risk of being called out on politicizing a thread, I just wanted to marvel for a moment at the parallels with the political spectrum seen so clearly here.

It would appear a person on the right would support freedom and the option to play online if he/she so desired.

On the left, if a person doesn't want to play online, they don't want anybody to be allowed to play online.

No offense to anyone; I just find that incredibly interesting.

Even more interesting is that this polarization can be witnessed in almost any issue you can think of, from guns to what you eat.

It almost seems to be a genetic predisposition.

konane's avatarkonane

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Jun 27, 2010

At the risk of being called out on politicizing a thread, I just wanted to marvel for a moment at the parallels with the political spectrum seen so clearly here.

It would appear a person on the right would support freedom and the option to play online if he/she so desired.

On the left, if a person doesn't want to play online, they don't want anybody to be allowed to play online.

No offense to anyone; I just find that incredibly interesting.

Even more interesting is that this polarization can be witnessed in almost any issue you can think of, from guns to what you eat.

It almost seems to be a genetic predisposition.

At the same risk of being called out for politicizing I agree with you. 

However would add that any extreme view either far-right or far-left would fall into the mindset you so aptly described "if a person doesn't want to play online, they don't want anybody to be allowed to play online.

Seems both extremes exist as mirror images of each other in their same small world, and everyone else exists in the real world.  Just my opinion.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by konane on Jun 27, 2010

At the same risk of being called out for politicizing I agree with you. 

However would add that any extreme view either far-right or far-left would fall into the mindset you so aptly described "if a person doesn't want to play online, they don't want anybody to be allowed to play online.

Seems both extremes exist as mirror images of each other in their same small world, and everyone else exists in the real world.  Just my opinion.

I highly value and respect your opinion Konane but I'm hard-pressed to come up with issues the far-right seeks to deny everybody simply because they don't like them, save maybe flag-burning by some. There's also certain religious groups on the right that oppose anyone drinking alcohol here in the Bible Belt (and they are the bane of my existence). Outside of that, I can't think of anything comparable to the damper the left wants to put on seemingly every aspect of our lives. Laws, laws, laws.

I see the right as valuing personal responsibility and liberty while the left is always saying "Let's all do this and have penalties for those who won't".

konane's avatarkonane

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Jun 27, 2010

I highly value and respect your opinion Konane but I'm hard-pressed to come up with issues the far-right seeks to deny everybody simply because they don't like them, save maybe flag-burning by some. There's also certain religious groups on the right that oppose anyone drinking alcohol here in the Bible Belt (and they are the bane of my existence). Outside of that, I can't think of anything comparable to the damper the left wants to put on seemingly every aspect of our lives. Laws, laws, laws.

I see the right as valuing personal responsibility and liberty while the left is always saying "Let's all do this and have penalties for those who won't".

Think I was more aiming my comments at extremist religious groups which seem to be opposed to lots of stuff. 

But then again you're right that those are the ones which seem to like fewer laws both local and national .... less government interference in all aspects of our lives.  You're absolutely right, I stand corrected. Big Grin

tiggs95's avatartiggs95

I guess you guys never heard "I'm from the Goverment and I'm here to help you"..

End of comments
Subscribe to this news story