Chris Christie has plenty to say about gambling legalisation. But is he right?

In an interview with Covers about the state of legal gambling in the US last week, the former New Jersey governor revealed that he is out of touch. Though he and his administration spearheaded the lawsuit that resulted in legal sports betting across the US, Christie would be wise to speak of what he knows.

Or as gaming consultant Brendan Bussmann said, “Texas and California are beasts unto their own and have their own political dynamics, which make them their own markets. This isn’t waving pixie dust on everything and making sports betting happen like one former governor seems to think.”

Christie’s comments about California showed clear ignorance about the state of gambling expansion in the biggest state in the nation. And about how gambling politics work there. Not once did he mention California’s tribes, which have exclusivity for gaming. That omission prompted one source to reply to an e-mail about the story with “Christie who?”

That kind of ignorance, as history has shown us, can be enough to derail a legalisation attempt.

Just ask the seven commercial operators who spent more than $200 million to try to get a 2022 commercial sports betting initiative passed. Instead, Indian Country killed it. Those same commercial operators are now trying to make amends. (See: FanDuel apology tour).

Actually, Governor Newsom won’t drive gambling

So, to get to the comments in question. Asked about the status of wagering legalisation in California, Christie told Covers, “I don’t know about California. This really takes gubernatorial leadership, and Gavin Newsom has got to decide if this is one of the issues he wants to lead on.

“Without gubernatorial leadership, the legislature won’t do it because they’re pulled, like taffy, in too many directions by too many different interests. Without the governor pushing for it, I don’t think it’ll happen.”

If Christie had been paying attention, he’d know that gubernatorial leadership is definitely not critical for this issue in California. In fact, neither is the state legislature. Tribes have said they want to keep all lines of communication open and relationships healthy. But state lawmakers won’t be the final arbiters of a gambling expansion.

In California, tribes are in charge

That said, California Nations Indian Gaming Association chair James Siva isn’t messing around when he says (over and over and over again) that any road to a California gambling expansion goes through Indian Country.

“We will defend our sovereignty every day of the week,” Siva said during an October episode of the “New Normal” webinar. “The tribes are the operators in California. Any new entry of gaming in California begins and ends with tribes.

“You may not like it, but that is the way that it is. And you may not respect it right now, but you will eventually.”

Legal sports betting has never gained traction in the California legislature. The state’s gambling regulator has little say in how the tribes do business. And the attorney general’s office has historically kicked the can down the road on most things gambling.

“The politics of the situation today are not on Governor Newsom in California, they’re about the tribes,” Bussmann said.

How about Texas? Not if Dan Patrick can help it

Anyone remotely following the efforts at a gambling expansion in Texas would know this: Lt. Governor Dan Patrick is staunchly opposed to a gambling expansion. He’s also staunchly opposed to allowing the senate to consider — never mind pass — anything without a Republican majority.

To wit:

And more recently, from a WFAA podcast :

“They say, ‘Oh, we almost passed it last session.’ You know, they almost passed it with every Democrat voting for it and about one of four Republicans voting for it,” Patrick said. “We don’t do that in the senate… If I don’t have 15 or 16 Republicans out of my 19 or 20, then we’re not passing the bill out.

“The difference between the senate and the house is we don’t let the Democrats run the senate. We know how to work across the aisle without ceding power to the other side to let them run the senate like Dave lets Democrats run the house. We’re a Republican state.”

Despite that, Christie told Covers, “I think (legalisation will) happen in Texas in the next legislative session.”

Christie made himself irrelevant

Patrick also said that despite heavy lobbying by Las Vegas Sands, gambling is “not on anyone’s top 20 list.” He went on to say that lobbyists have “never worked the vote.”

Said Bussmann: “In Texas, this has been about the legislature in Texas and it has been for the last 20 years. So when there is either a change in regime or you can build a better mousetrap” is when it will get done.

As I read Christie’s quotes last week, I wondered to myself what he thinks he got out of the interview. Because from where I sit, he exposed himself as being irrelevant on the very issue that defined his governorship.