That startling headline, coming as the only head of the American Gaming Association leaves the industry's DC lobbying arm, ran in a subscription-only publication called Gambling Compliance.
The piece, written by former Las Vegas Review-Journal reporter Tony Batt, describes as "striking" Fahrenkopf's comments about Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and ex-Sen. Jon Kyl.
The usuaally circumspect Fahrenkopf expressed frustration to Batt, saying, "I mean, we worked our tails off and to get to the point where nothing was even introduced that we could go out and try to sell. That was my biggest disappointment."
But was he really saying, as some industry members have said privately, that he is frustrated with The Great and Powerful Prince Harry for not getting this done?
Here's what Batt wrote:
Asked if he blames Reid and Kyl for not introducing an Internet gaming bill, Fahrenkopf said: "Well, my view is that we were going to follow the senators, and the senators couldn't do it. So if I had to blame anybody -- I mean I'm sure they did their best -- but that's where the failure is. Blame is probably not the right way to put it, but there was a failure because nothing was introduced."
Fahrenkopf tried to mitigate it at the end there, but still.....
Confronted with the comment, Reid's office provided its usual smashmouth response, via Kristen Orthman: "Senator Reid has been totally committed to thsi effort from day one. He has made it clear that he is willing and able to find several dozen Democrats who would support this effort. The only reason this bill did not move forward is because of a lack of Republican support. That was true in 2010, in 2012 and remains true today."
I wonder if Reid will attend the Fahrenkopf going-away bash today....
(You can get a trial subscription to Gambling Compliance, although I could not find the full text.)
UPDATE: Reid spokeswoman Orthman fired back at Fahrenkopf in a statement going beyond what he said in the original story: "The is revisionist history. Perhaps if Mr. Fahrenkopf had spent less time dealing with the presidential debates and more time actually doing his job as head of the gaming association we could have passed the bill.”
That startling headline, coming as the only head of the American Gaming Association leaves the industry's DC lobbying arm, ran in a subscription-only publication called Gambling Compliance.
The piece, written by former Las Vegas Review-Journal reporter Tony Batt, describes as "striking" Fahrenkopf's comments about Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and ex-Sen. Jon Kyl.
The usuaally circumspect Fahrenkopf expressed frustration to Batt, saying, "I mean, we worked our tails off and to get to the point where nothing was even introduced that we could go out and try to sell. That was my biggest disappointment."
But was he really saying, as some industry members have said privately, that he is frustrated with The Great and Powerful Prince Harry for not getting this done?
Here's what Batt wrote:
Asked if he blames Reid and Kyl for not introducing an Internet gaming bill, Fahrenkopf said: "Well, my view is that we were going to follow the senators, and the senators couldn't do it. So if I had to blame anybody -- I mean I'm sure they did their best -- but that's where the failure is. Blame is probably not the right way to put it, but there was a failure because nothing was introduced."
Fahrenkopf tried to mitigate it at the end there, but still.....
Confronted with the comment, Reid's office provided its usual smashmouth response, via Kristen Orthman: "Senator Reid has been totally committed to thsi effort from day one. He has made it clear that he is willing and able to find several dozen Democrats who would support this effort. The only reason this bill did not move forward is because of a lack of Republican support. That was true in 2010, in 2012 and remains true today."
I wonder if Reid will attend the Fahrenkopf going-away bash today....
(You can get a trial subscription to Gambling Compliance, although I could not find the full text.)
UPDATE: Reid spokeswoman Orthman fired back at Fahrenkopf in a statement going beyond what he said in the original story: "The is revisionist history. Perhaps if Mr. Fahrenkopf had spent less time dealing with the presidential debates and more time actually doing his job as head of the gaming association we could have passed the bill.”
Comments: