Stop Predatory Gambling

Stop Predatory Gambling
Name	Stop Predatory Gambling
Formation	1999
Type	Nonprofit advocacy group
Headquarters	United States
Focus	Anti-gambling advocacy
Methods	Grassroots organizing, litigation, public education, policy advocacy

Stop Predatory Gambling

Stop Predatory Gambling is an American advocacy organization that opposes the expansion of casino gambling, slot machines, online gambling, and related forms of wagering. The group engages with legislators, media outlets, community coalitions, and legal actors to challenge casino developers, tribal compact negotiations, and gambling industry proponents. Its activities intersect with municipal debates, state ballot measures, and national conversations about addiction, consumer protection, and economic development.

Overview

Stop Predatory Gambling positions itself within a network of advocacy organizations, think tanks, and faith-based groups concerned about the social impacts of casino proliferation. The organization frequently communicates with state legislatures such as the Nevada Legislature, the California State Legislature, the Florida Legislature, and the New York State Assembly to oppose casino expansions, and has engaged outside counsel in federal venues like the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. It collaborates with nonprofit partners including Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, Common Cause, American Civil Liberties Union, National Conference of State Legislatures, and various tribal advocacy organizations to amplify research and litigation. Media coverage has appeared in outlets such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, and The Wall Street Journal.

History and Origins

The organization traces its founding to debates over tribal casinos and commercial gaming at the end of the 20th century, a period marked by legal disputes like California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, federal statutes such as the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, and state ballot propositions including California's propositions in the 1990s. Founders and early allies drew on networks that included activists from campaigns associated with groups like Americans for Tax Reform, ACLU of Northern California, and faith-based coalitions that had worked on initiatives pertaining to Proposition 186 (California)],] Proposition 209 (California), and other high-profile measures. Stop Predatory Gambling's emergence coincided with national policy debates involving figures and entities such as Senator Orrin Hatch, Senator Harry Reid, President Bill Clinton, and regulatory agencies like the National Indian Gaming Commission and the Federal Trade Commission.

Campaigns and Advocacy Strategies

The group's strategies combine ballot measure campaigns similar to those run by MoveOn.org Political Action, litigation approaches reminiscent of Public Citizen lawsuits, and grassroots mobilization parallel to activities by Mothers Against Drunk Driving and Sierra Club. Stop Predatory Gambling has filed amicus briefs in cases before the United States Supreme Court, coordinated with municipal officials from cities like Las Vegas, Atlantic City, Reno, and Tulsa, and partnered with academic researchers at institutions such as Harvard University, Stanford University, University of Michigan, and University of California, Berkeley to produce policy white papers. It deploys public education campaigns that mirror techniques used by Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids and Truth Initiative, engaging journalists from NPR, The Atlantic, POLITICO, and Bloomberg News to increase scrutiny of casino financing structures involving investment entities like BlackRock, Goldman Sachs, and Blackstone Group.

Key Issues and Criticisms

Stop Predatory Gambling frames its objections around issues including problem gambling prevalence cited by the National Council on Problem Gambling, local economic displacement documented by municipal studies in Detroit and New Orleans, and the distributional effects of casino tax regimes analyzed by the Tax Policy Center. Critics accuse the organization of aligning with interests opposed to tribal sovereignty as articulated under the Indian Reorganization Act and criticized tactics used by opponents of tribal gaming compacts negotiated under statutes like the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Other critiques compare Stop Predatory Gambling's advocacy methods to those used by Corporate Accountability International and conservative advocacy groups such as Americans for Prosperity, alleging selective use of data and political financing that echoes controversies involving campaign finance debates tied to the McCain-Feingold Act and rulings like Citizens United v. FEC.

Organizational Structure and Funding

Stop Predatory Gambling's governance model includes an executive leadership team, a board of directors, and advisory panels with experts drawn from legal, medical, and policy fields. The organization has reported revenue sources including individual donations, philanthropic grants, and legal settlements; donors and partners have at times included foundations and think tanks like the Pew Charitable Trusts, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Searle Freedom Trust, and the MacArthur Foundation. Stop Predatory Gambling has engaged law firms with histories of public-interest litigation such as Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, and boutique firms known for regulatory work in venues like Washington, D.C. and Sacramento, California. Financial transparency debates around the group echo broader nonprofit scrutiny applied to organizations including Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Greenpeace USA, and Heritage Foundation.

Impact and Policy Outcomes

The organization has influenced legislative outcomes in several states, contributing to ballot defeats of casino proposals in contexts comparable to campaigns in Massachusetts, Ohio, and Arizona. Stop Predatory Gambling's legal interventions have shaped case law and administrative practice involving gaming compacts, with ripple effects in tribal-state negotiations involving entities such as the Cherokee Nation, the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe, and the Mohegan Tribe. Policy analyses citing the group have been used by municipal planning commissions in Philadelphia, Cleveland, and Milwaukee to reassess projected fiscal benefits from casinos. Opponents point to instances where casino developments proceeded despite the group's efforts, such as large-scale projects backed by companies like MGM Resorts International, Caesars Entertainment, Las Vegas Sands Corporation, and Wynn Resorts, underscoring the contested nature of gambling policy debates.

Category:Non-profit organizations based in the United States