Place your bets

Well,  now. Here's a sea change for you.

You know the 1992 law that bars state-authorized gambling on sporting events (except in Nevada, Montana, Oregon and Delaware)? The Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act?

The Supremes just struck it down.

This means states can now legally offer sports betting. According to some researchers, as many as 32 states may do so in the next five years.

This is seismic. This is, yes, a sea change. This is the Blob speaking with its tongue firmly sutured to its cheek.

That's because the Blob admits to violating the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act on numerous occasions, most them in March. March, of course, is home to March Madness. March Madness is home to the NCAA Tournament, on which scads of people bet every year ("scads" being a casual term for the more numerically accurate "lots and lots.")  Every single scad, unless they lived in the aforementioned four states, was technically violating the '92 statute.

And they all went to jail for doing so. Every single scad of them.

OK. So they didn't.

They didn't, because -- like Prohibition never stopped a soul who was so inclined from knocking back a few whiskey sours -- the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection never stopped a soul who was so inclined from betting on sports. The American Gaming Association, in fact, figures Americans illegally bet $150 billion on sports every year.

One hundred. Fifty. Billion. Every year.

Not only that, but the major professional and amateur sports don't seem to mind all this scofflawing.  Oh, they don't encourage it, and in fact wring their hands in a fine show of concern over the prospect of legalized betting corrupting their sports. But it's mostly just that, a fine show.

After all, to cite one example, the NFL mandates that each team must release an injury report to the public every week. What possible purpose does that serve except to facilitate gambling?

Now, it's true that making all this legal could lead to another Black Sox situation. It could lead to NFL zebras making even more bizarre calls than they already do. It could lead to another Tim Donaghy-style expose in the NBA.

On the other hand, it also could lead to what the lifting of Prohibition led to. Which is people drinking who had already been drinking during Prohibition.

Again: $150 billion every year. And the states couldn't put their mitts on a dime of it.

Now they will, which could be a good thing if they put this new revenue stream to good use (always problematical, admittedly.) Is it possible making sports gambling legal will mean even greater sums being wagered, and increase the possibility for corruption? Maybe. But also maybe not, because $150 billion a year suggests that people inclined to bet on sporting events are already betting on them. And people who are not so inclined aren't likely to change their minds just because it's legal now.

During Prohibition, drinkers still drank and teetotalers teetotaled, and that didn't change when Prohibition was lifted. I could be wrong, but I sense the same dynamic at work here.

Gamblers are gonna gamble. Non-gamblers won't. Same today as yesterday.