 Why does the author think the casino owners will actively support the gaming commission's recommendations for regulation?
This effort has largely succeeded, because Vegas is still the dominant image of American gambling, if not the dominant reality. Instead it will opt for small, targeted policies, concentrating on compulsive gambling. The commission may recommend that gaming taxes be used to underwrite treatment of pathological gamblers and that insurance companies be encouraged to cover gambling addiction. Similarly, the commission will try to reduce gamblers' access to cash by limiting the size of ATM advances and prodding casinos to remove the machines from their floors. It medicalizes the problem of compulsive gambling, blaming it on psychological abnormality rather than industry machination. In exchange for losing a few compulsive gamblers, the casinos will (falsely) appear more concerned with the health of their customers than with profits.
 They'll support the regulations because focusing on compulsive gamblers, makes the problem seem like a medical one.
 They'll support the regulations because focusing on compulsive gamblers, makes the problem seem like a medical one.  They'll support the regulations because it makes them look good in the eyes of the public.  They'll support the regulations so they don't lose their liquor licenses.  They'll support the regulations to pacify the Focus on the Family groups.