U.S. ACCUSED OF DOUBLE STANDARDS

(640) (9-October-2006)

When does 'preserving the fabric of society' become economic nationalism?

One of the many mainstream publications critical of the US political initiative to interfere with US financial channels used in online gambling this week was The Financial News, which asserted: "When a continental European country takes action to protect its industry from external competition, it is called economic nationalism. When the US does the same, we are meant to believe it is about preserving the fabric of society."

The FN says that such was the justification used by US lawmakers for proposing to make it illegal for banks and credit card firms to take payments and transfer funds to internet gambling sites.

The article goes on to suggest that investors in publicly quoted companies that suffered immediate and heavy losses as a result of the American political moves probably did not foresee the sector becoming a political victim of the forthcoming US congressional elections.

"For Republicans struggling to hold on to both houses, the gambling crackdown is an easy vote winner," the FN commented, adding that politically inspired legislation is hardly confined to the US, but the double standards on display [in the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act ] are rivalled only by the French government.

"The law's backers may rail about the pernicious effects of online gambling, but they seem happy with gambling itself," the FN points out."Groups such as Las Vegas Sands, Harrah's and MGM Mirage are world leaders. Yet there has been no bill proposed to congress calling for the demolition of Atlantic City or Las Vegas!"

The publication goes on to claim that the new law has nothing to do with morals or the destruction of the fabric of society claimed by its sponsors. "It is the latest example of US economic nationalism and, most damaging of all, the creep of extra-territorial legislation.

"This [law] scores easy points at home without any perceptible short-term economic impact on US companies or their employees. Think back to the shameful row over the US congress blocking the acquisition of some of its ports by a company that had the misfortune to be based in Dubai (an ally of the US). Or to the tentacles of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act stretching around the world.

"If it were a German firm blocking a US biotech company from selling genetically modified seeds in Europe, Washington would shout "protectionism". Indeed, last week, it did: the US urged the European Union to speed up its process for approving new GM products, blaming "unjustified and politically motivated delays".