| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 1:34 pm Post subject: UIIGEA, 2006 (Prohibition 2.0) - REPEAL? |
 |
|
| Quote: | WELCOME!
UIGEA, 2006 - Prohibition 2.0 - Repeal? |
Deja vu:
Prohibition 2.0 another 'instant failure,' creating a new generation of 'furtive deserters and small disobediences'
| Quote: | Sermons and Soda-Water
Three-Volume Set
Hardcover
By John O'Hara
| Quote: | | ... We had come to our maturity and our knowledgeability during the long decade of cynicism that was usually dismissed as "a cynical disregard of the law of the land," but that was something else, something deeper. The law had been passed with a "noble" but nevertheless cynical disregard of men's right to drink. It was a law that had been imposed on some who took pleasure in drinking by some who did not. And when the law was an instant failure, it was not admitted to be a failure by those who had imposed it. They fought to retain the law in spite of its immediate failure and its proliferating corruption, and they fought as hard as they would have for a law that had been an immediate success. They gained no recruits to their own way; they had only deserters, who were not brave deserters but furtive ones; there was no honest mutiny but only grumbling and small disobediences. And we grew up listening to the grumbling, watching the small disobediences; laughing along when the grumbling was intentionally funny, imitating the small disobediences in other ways besides the customs of drinking. It was not only a cynical disregard for a law of the land; the law was eventually changed. Prohibition, the zealots' attempt to force total abstinence on a temperate nation, made liars of a hundred million men and cheats of their children; the West Point cadets who cheated in examinations, the basketball players who connived with gamblers, the thousands of uncaught cheats in the high schools and colleges. We had grown up and away from our earlier esteem of God and country and valor, and had matured at a moment when riches were vanishing for reasons that we could not understand. We were the losing, not the lost, generation. (From Imagine Kissing Pete at pgs. 28-29) |
|
Ithaca Journal
New anti-Internet gaming law shakes up industry
By Diana Marrero,
Gannett News Service
Dec. 12/06
| Quote: | A new law (beginning at p. 213) aimed at curtailing online gambling in the United States has rattled major publicly traded Internet gambling companies but has done little to keep Americans from wagering online, industry experts say. The changes have been a boon to smaller, privately held companies that may not adhere to the same level of standards public companies must meet, the experts say. And while the rules may be keeping some casual gamblers from placing bets, those who really want to wager online have found ways to do so. ... The new law effectively bars online betting in the United States by making it illegal for U.S. banks and credit card companies to process payments to gambling Web sites. But gamblers can still place wagers by going through third-party sites such as Netteller.com that facilitate transactions. (emphasis added)
The online gambling industry generated about $7 billion to $10 billion worldwide in 2004, with Americans making up at least half the market, according to the American Gaming Association. It's unclear how dramatically those figures have changed since the new law has been in effect. But industry watchers say traffic to the publicly-traded companies, which are no longer accepting U.S. customers, has slumped while traffic to privately held companies, which continue to cater to Americans, have gotten a boost. PartyGaming, for example, has seen its share of daily players drop from about 16,000 before Congress approved the ban to about 6,200 the day after Bush signed it into law, according to Casino City, a magazine and Web site that follows the gaming industry. On the other hand, the privately held Full Tilt Poker, has increased its number of daily players to more than 5,000 in late October from just more than 3,000 in late September.
“The largest, most financially transparent sites have left the market,” said Michael Bolcerek, president of the Poker Players Alliance, which lobbied heavily against the legislation. “You still have some private companies that are well known. But you're seeing new sites pop up who don't have the public interest at heart. They're in unregulated areas.” Bolcerek argues the measure infringes on Americans' personal freedoms by requiring banks and credit card companies to monitor their customers' online transactions. He and others who support online gaming hope that the new Democratic majority in Congress may be more open to overturning the new law.
... The law's full impact likely won't be felt until next summer when the new regulations actually go into effect. So it's still too early to tell whether the new law has been successful at curbing online gaming, said Greg Wierzynski, a spokesman for Rep. Jim Leach, who sponsored the bill in the House. Leach, R-Iowa, was voted out of office in November. |
The prevailing view:
The Poker Player's Bible
Paperback
By Lou Krieger
| Quote: | | ... No matter what happens, Americans who want to bet online will find new ways to place their wagers on the Internet, said Lou Krieger, who has written several books on poker and gambling. “Every time a new threshold is created, the least dedicated players will say it's not worth it for them,” he said. “But there are a million ways to do this.” (emphasis added) |
The Wodehouse wisdom:
A Few Quick Ones
Paperback
By the great British humorist, P.G. Wodehouse
| Quote: | Bingo, always on the lookout for omens and portents, leaped in his seat. Any lingering doubts he may have entertained as to the advisability of arranging that loan with Algernon Aubrey vanished. Obviously this was going to be his lucky night, and he would be vastly surprised if on the morrow he would not be able to pay twenty or thirty pounds into the other's wee little deposit account.
...The police raid on Number Forty-Three Magnolia Road took place, oddly enough, just as Bingo was preparing to leave. He had lost the last of his borrowed capital at the roulette board owing to a mistaken supposition that Red was going to turn up, and was standing at an open window, trying by means of some breaths of fresh air to alleviate that Death-where-is-thy-sting feeling that comes to gamesters at such times, when suddenly bells began to ring all over the place and a number of those present, jostling him to one side, proceeded to pour out of the window in a foraming stream.
..."This is the fourth or fifth time this has happened to me," she said peevishly, as she slid into the barrel's interior. "Why can't these rozzers have a heart on and not be forever interfering with private enterprise? (emphasis added) Do you know what? I had a quid on sixteen, and sixteen came up, but before I could collect the bells began to ring and it was Ho for the open spaces. Thirty-seven pounds sterling gone with the wind. Shift over a bit, will you."
Bingo shifted over a bit. (From The Word in Season at pgs. 99-101) |
According to a certain eminent scientific journal:
Scientific American
Magazine Subscription
Lady Luck
More Americans cannot resist rolling the dice
By Roger Doyle
April, 2006
| Quote: | The social cost, including that for treatment of gambling addiction, bankruptcy, divorce and crime, is significant; however, it has not been adequately measured, because addicted gamblers tend to have other problem behaviors, such as substance abuse, antisocial personality disorder and depression. Such behaviors are difficult to separate from gambling addiction.
Despite the social ills, substantial arguments can be made in favor of legal gambling. For most people, it is a pleasant diversion. For older people, it is a social pastime that may enhance memory, problem solving, concentration and coordination. Furthermore, legalization may help limit the participation of organized crime. (-- p. 30) |
Link to this entry
http://www.pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=283#283
Last edited by legal on Sun Oct 25, 2009 12:44 pm; edited 35 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
New regulations may shut down the U.S. horseracing industry:
Daily Racing Form
Symposium: Mobile betting a top goal
By Matt Hegarty
Dec. 6/06
| Quote: | Bet-processing companies are increasingly looking to develop ways to allow bettors to use their own devices to hook into the racing industry's wagering network, officials of totalizator companies said Wednesday at the University of Arizona's Symposium on Racing and Gaming in Tucson.
The developments seek to capitalize on the increasing sophistication of cell phones and personal digital assistants, which are becoming more and more ubiquitous. The goal, the officials said, is to allow a horseplayer to use the devices to make wagers and get handicapping information while hooked into the bet-processing network through a secure connection.
... Earlier this year, the U.S. Senate passed a bill seeking to outlaw Internet gambling, which the racing industry lauded because the bill granted racing an exception to the prohibition. While racing is protected, gambling experts and racing lobbyists said at a separate panel on Tuesday afternoon that the sport is not out of the woods yet. According to the bill - which was passed in the early-morning hours on the last day that Congress was in session, Sept. 30 - the Department of Treasury has 270 days to write the regulations that will prohibit banks from allowing people to fund gambling accounts, and those rules might have hidden consequences for the racing industry.
"We've got to be careful when they write these regulations to see what they say to make sure that they don't make account wagering more difficult," said Jay Hickey, the president of the American Horse Council, a lobbying group representing all horse breeds in the United States.
In addition, the legislation did not clear up a lingering dispute between the racing industry and the Department of Justice about the legality of interstate wagering. The Department of Justice maintains that racing is violating the federal Wire Act - passed in 1961 - by taking bets across state lines, and racing will have to continue to lobby its case to keep the department from shutting down simulcasting altogether, gambling officials said.
Also, the U.S. government is in a dispute with the World Trade Organization over its gambling law, arising out of a suit filed by Antigua. The WTO ruled that the U.S. cannot stop Antigua from accepting bets from U.S. residents because of racing's exception to Internet gambling, and the U.S. may be forced to adopt a wide array of policies to resolve the dispute. That could include pressure to rescind the exemption, the officials said, which would put a stop to the only segment of the horse racing wagering market to see substantial growth in a decade. (emphasis added) |
Interactive Gaming News
Earnest Gambling News Source
US Rep. Wexler Blasts DOJ at Enforcement Hearing
By Emily Swoboda
Nov. 14/07
| Quote: | Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Fl., questioned why the DOJ has taken to practising selective prosecution when it comes to Internet gambling.
"As I understand it, we don't prohibit horse wagering on the Internet, yet you testify that it's the Department of Justice's position that all forms of Internet gambling are prohibited," Wexler asked (U.S. Attorney Catherine) Hanaway. If that's the case, why aren't we prosecuting every lottery director in America? Why aren't we prosecuting everybody who shows up at every off track horse betting establishment in America? Why aren't we prosecuting every fantasy sports outlet in America? Where am I getting this wrong?" (emphasis added)
Hanaway said that the DoJ does take the position that online horse wagering is illegal and has prosecuted cases under the Wire Act.
"Has the Department of Justice shut down a single e-lottery system in the United States, and if you haven't, why not?" Wexler asked Hanaway.
Hanaway did not know the answer to Wexler's question, but offered to find out and submit it in writing.
"The beauty of the Department of Justice's position as you enunciate it, which is 'all forms of Internet gambling are prohibited,' means there's no grey area: shut it all down," Wexler said. "So, when we see selective enforcement that's what suggests a very untoward result in some of our minds." (emphasis added) |
News.Bloodhorse.com
Internet Gambling Debate Lingers
By Tom LaMarra
Dec. 6/07
| Quote: | ... Joe Baressi, financial services project leader for the U.S. Federal Reserve Board of Governors, said (during a Dec. 5 presentation at the University of Arizona Symposium on Racing & Gaming in Tucson), the board and the U.S. Department of Treasury will accept comments on the proposed regulations through Dec. 12. The regulations could be finalized by July 2008, about a year late, he said.
Some of the comments received thus far, Baressi said, criticize the Internet gambling ban. The objective, however, is to devise regulations, not slam the law. “Basically, Congress is God to an agency,” Baressi said. “The regulations cannot say anything inconsistent with what the act says. We have to make sure the thoughts go to the regulations as opposed to what Congress did. This topic is not done.”
The horseracing industry, through the National Thoroughbred Racing Association and the American Horse Council, has weighed in on the regulations. Officials have indicated they’ve seen nothing that would hinder account wagering, which relies on use of credit and is widely viewed as racing’s growth mechanism.
Bruce Zagaris, an attorney for Berlinger Corcoran & Rowe who has worked with international gaming companies and small governments involved with international trade, said there could be ramifications for pari-mutuel horse racing[/color] in the battle that began with the small country of Antigua and has spread to countries in the European Union.
Zagaris, who also spoke during the symposium panel, said the U.S., by admitting it was an oversight to leave gambling on the trade table, allowed other countries to demand compensation. The EU alone, he said, has assessed damages at about $100 billion a year. Zagaris said if the foreign countries see the Internet gambling law language that protects horse racing - the IHA provision - as a problem, they could target the industry. “I think that is a good possibly,” Zagaris said. “I would think a potential option that would do less harm is if the U.S. does legalize (Internet gambling) and gains revenue. (The racing industry) would have competition, but more opportunities to do new products and services.”
The horseracing industry at large doesn’t agree. It has touted the fact horserace betting is the only legal form of Internet wagering in the U.S., and hopes to use that to its advantage as it seeks out new markets. On Dec. 5, Peggy Hendershot, senior vice president of legislative and corporate planning for the NTRA, said the organization’s attorneys haven’t mentioned foreign retaliation against racing as a threat. She said the trade issue is between the U.S. and other countries, not the racing industry and other countries. |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=286#286
Last edited by legal on Wed Feb 04, 2009 3:28 pm; edited 20 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2007 2:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Reuters
US Rep. Frank: Details soon on online gambling
March 15/07
Bootleg Series
Volume I
CD Audio
Featuring Paths of Victory by Bob Dylan
Sing along with Barney and Bob at YouTube.com.
| Quote: | Paths of Victory
Trails of troubles,
Roads of battles,
Paths of victory,
I shall walk. |
How reliable is Frank's goal to repeal UIGEA, 2006?
| Quote: | ... In 1972, Frank was elected to the Massachusetts Legislature, where he served for eight years. During that time, he entered Harvard Law School and graduated in 1977. Furthermore, he turned down the Harvard Law Review. While in state and local government, Frank taught part time at the University of Massachusetts Boston, the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard and at Boston University. He published numerous articles on politics and public affairs, and in 1992 he published Speaking Frankly, an essay on the role the Democratic Party should play in the 1990s.
... Frank is a prominent figure in the liberal wing of the Democratic Party and has been outspoken on many civil rights issues, including gay rights. In 1987, he spoke publicly about his homosexuality for the first time. He said in a 1996 interview:
"I'm used to being in the minority. I'm a left-handed gay Jew. I've never felt, automatically, a member of any majority." (emphasis added)
... In 1998, he founded the National Stonewall Democrats, the national gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Democratic organization. In 2004 and again in 2006, a survey of Capitol Hill staffers published in Washingtonian magazine gave Frank the title of the "brainiest," "funniest," and "most eloquent" member of the House.
In Congress, Frank is an ardent supporter of medical marijuana. He was the author of the States' Rights to Medical Marijuana Act (H.R. 2592), an attempt to stop the federal government from intervening in state medical marijuana laws. Frank consistently voted for the Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment, annually proposed by Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) and Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), that would prohibit the Department of Justice from prosecuting medical marijuana patients. (From Wikipedia) |
Link to this entry
http://www.pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=335#335
Last edited by legal on Mon Feb 02, 2009 2:13 pm; edited 16 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Barney's bill a disappointing, protectionist first effort to some:
Bloomberg.com
Frank Proposes Allowing Online Gambling in the U.S.
By William Roberts and Brian Faler
April 26/07
| Quote: | Representative Barney Frank, the Democratic chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, introduced legislation that would allow online gambling in the U.S., loosening a ban enacted last year. The measure would allow Americans to bet online with licensed Internet operators that have safeguards against underage and compulsive gambling and agree to be subject to U.S. jurisdiction and taxes, Frank said at a press conference in Washington.
...The proposed legislation would let the U.S. Treasury Department set protections against money laundering and fraud. It bars betting on college and professional sports whose governing bodies such as the National Collegiate Athletic Association and National Football League don't sanction gambling.
...Analysts said the legislation to create exemptions for licence holders * may favor U.S. gambling companies. "Wouldn't you expect licensing in the U.S. to benefit U.S. companies and U.S. shareholders?'' said Ivor Jones, an analyst at Panmure Gordon & Co. in London. Shares of PartyGaming dropped 7.5 pence, or 13 percent, to 51 pence in London, the steepest slide since Oct. 16, which was the first trading day after the company ceased U.S. operations. After slumping 76 percent in 2006, the stock had almost doubled this year before Frank's remarks today. Shares of London-based Sportingbet Plc and Gibraltar-based 888 Holdings Plc also fell in London trading today.
Frank introduced the bill with Representative Peter King, a New York Republican, and 10 other co-sponsors. Frank and King said they expect many other members will come forward to support the legislation.
The government of Antigua, which is home to 32 registered online gambling operations, praised Frank's initiative in a written statement.
Representative Shelley Berkley, a Nevada Democrat, plans to introduce a measure next week calling for a one-year federal study of online gambling, said her spokesman, David Cherry. Directors of the American Gaming Association, whose members include Harrah's and MGM Mirage, will meet in Las Vegas tomorrow and will discuss Frank's proposal, spokeswoman Holly Thomsen said in Washington. Harrah's Entertainment Inc. and MGM Mirage, the world's largest and second-largest casino operators, have urged Congress to let U.S. companies enter the online gambling business. Other members of the U.S. casino industry view online gambling as unwelcome competition. (emphasis added) ...
The gaming association projected last year, before the U.S. ban was enacted, that online betting would double from an estimated $12 billion to about $24 billion a year in global revenue by 2010. About half of the online industry's revenue came from U.S. bettors. |
MajorWager.com
Barney Frank's Proposal is A Big Letdown
By Hartley Henderson
April 26/07
| Quote: | The new proposed bill titled, The Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, keeps the UIGEA and Wire Act in place but allows for a legal offshore climate should it meet certain criteria. The devil is in the details of those criteria. ...
Frank's bill institutes a new regulatory authority that has exclusive rights to hand out licences pending a criminal check. That's fine, but he should have laid out criteria of what disqualifies an operator. Clearly, the new authority could be wide open to corruption and may issue licenses based on kickbacks. But more importantly it could deny licences to legitimate operators for unfounded reasons. If the reason for disqualification is related to crimes such as embezzlement or fraud, which clearly are relevant to running an Internet-based business, then there would be no complaints. But if an operator could be disqualified for, say, drunk-driving convictions in the past, then it becomes a joke...Clearly, if an Antiguan based business is going to be licensed by the U.S. as legal, then Antigua should be involved. (emphasis added)
Second, ... the company must set up a U.S. office and pay taxes and fees to the United States on its income. Why? If the company is located offshore and doing all its business offshore, then why should it pay the U.S. government a red penny? If the United States expects taxes on gambling revenues, would it not make more sense to set up online gambling operations in the U.S. and treat them similar to land-based casinos and sportsbooks? ...There would be no problem with the U.S. stating it expects a percentage of any fee that the hosting country charges its operators for costs incurred in enforcing the regulation, but to charge taxes to a non-U.S.-based company for operating outside the U.S. is ludicrous.
Lastly, Frank has stated his law is gambling neutral, but it allows sports leagues to opt out if they don't want offshore betting on their sport. What a crock! |
Applause!
EyeOnGambling.com
Antigua applauds Barney Frank repeal of Internet gambling ban
April 26/07
| Quote: | Mark Mendel, Antigua’s lead counsel on the Internet gambling case, said in reaction to the news “This is great news. Hopefully there is something for us in the bill, and if not, we will do our best to see that something is included.”
Mr Mendel added that Antigua would be engaging with Rep. Frank’s office after Antigua has had a chance to review the legislation. “Whatever the bill might specifically say,” added Mr Mendel, “this is an excellent development. It is about time that the United States gave this issue the thoughtful consideration it deserves rather than simply trying to prohibit it. Antigua has been successfully regulating this industry for a decade now. It can be done.” |
From the PokerPulse Gambler's Guide to Campaigns for Remote Gambling in the U.S.:
| Quote: | Gambling 911.com
Barney Frank reaches out to Congress concerning online gambling legislation
Representative Frank sends a letter urging Congress to support Internet gambling legislation
Sept. 18/07
| Quote: | | Earlier this month, U.S. Representative Barney Frank (D-MA) circulated a letter to all members of Congress encouraging support for the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act. The Act establishes a framework to regulate Internet gambling in the U.S. and offer consumer protections without restricting their freedom. Frank also argues that the legislation would resolve a World Trade Organization (WTO) trade agreement violation related to Internet gambling that could otherwise cost the U.S. billions in trade compensation. The letter included a Newsday editorial, Time to Regulate Internet Gambling, that endorses the regulation of Internet gambling and encourages Congress to review and debate the bill. |
|
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=350#350
Last edited by legal on Sat Feb 28, 2009 1:33 pm; edited 18 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poker News
House Committee to Consider Regulation of Online Gambling in U.S.
By Martin Harris
June 5/07
| Quote: | The U.S. House Committee on Financial Services will conduct a hearing on Friday, June 8th at 10 a.m. to discuss the feasibility of regulating online gambling in the United States. The hearing,
'Can Internet Gambling Be Effectively Regulated to Protect Consumers and the Payment System?'
will take place at the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill.
The list of witnesses initially invited to testify ...includes pro player Howard Lederer; Radley Balko, the senior editor of Reason Magazine; Jon Prideaux, Chief Executive of Asterion Payments; Gerald Kitchen, CEO of SecureTrading, Ltd., and Pastor Greg Hogan. Hogan is the father of Greg Hogan, Jr., the Lehigh University student who robbed a bank in December of 2005 and claimed that it was his online-poker debts that forced him to do so. ...
Such a hearing marks an initial step in the committee's deliberations regarding the IGREA - a crucial stage in the legislative process out of which most bills never pass. With 70 members, the House Committee on Financial Services is one of the largest in Congress. Party representation on the committee follows that of the entire House, with Democrats holding a slight majority. Since introducing the bill, (chair Rep. Barney) Frank has spoken of the IGREA receiving bipartisan backing from committee members, and has in particular cited committee members Ron Paul (R-TX) and Peter King (R-NY) as having already indicated their support of the bill as co-sponsors.
One way to forecast how the IGREA might fare in committee is to consider how its members voted on the Internet Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act (H.R. 4411) on July 11, 2006. Unlike what occurred in October of last year, when Congress voted on the UIGEA as an amendment to the Safe Port Act, the House was able to consider the issue separately last summer when its members voted in favor of H.R. 4411 by a 3-to-1 margin. Of the 70 current members on the committee, 55 voted... 46 of those 55 votes supporting the bill. Eight of the nine against the Internet Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act were Democrats (including Frank), with Congressman Paul the lone Republican to have opposed the bill.
Congressman King's example shows that not everyone who supported H.R. 4411 necessarily will oppose the IGREA. The bill nevertheless likely faces an uphill battle, even in committee. As of today, a total of 19 of Frank's 69 committee colleagues (including Paul and King) have listed themselves as co-sponsors.
Friday's hearing should also have some influence on the fate of the recently-proposed bill to provide for a study of internet gambling by the National Academy of Sciences (H.R. 2140), proposed by Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-NV). Berkley's bill currently awaits deliberation by the House Ways and Means Committee. |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=384#384
Last edited by legal on Thu Jan 29, 2009 3:33 pm; edited 7 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
MGM, Sony, Apple, even Disney among U.S. giants likely to enter online gaming:
San Francisco Chronicle
GAMBLING ... GOLD RUSH?
A congressional push last year stopped many Americans from playing the games online, but the law may be changed.
By Tom Somach
July 2/07
| Quote: | A bill before Congress that would legalize Internet gambling in the United States has American companies poised on the sidelines, waiting to capitalize on a potentially humongous new market. ...
The stakes in this political showdown are huge. Frank's bill would set up a framework for the government to legalize, license, regulate and tax Internet gambling. The bill would also set up safeguards to prevent underage and compulsive gambling, as well as money laundering and fraud. ...
Now, with Democrats in control of Congress, Frank wants to repeal that law (Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act) and legalize online gambling. Frank calls last year's bill "one of the stupidest things I ever saw. "I want to get it undone," Frank said. "If an adult in this country, with his or her own money, wants to engage in an activity that harms no one, how dare we prohibit it? Adults are entitled to do with their own money what they want."
Under the bill that prohibits Internet gambling, banks and credit card companies have become Internet pseudo-cops, forced to determine which e-transactions involve online gambling and then block them. Frank is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, which oversees the activities of banks and credit card companies, which have made it clear they don't want to be the Net's gambling police. Those banks and credit card companies have made numerous campaign contributions to Frank over the course of his 14 terms in Congress. If Internet gambling is legalized, not only will banks and credit card companies no longer have to block online gambling transactions, they'll be able to process them and profit from them.
Under the proposal, American companies for the first time could legally set up Internet casinos, run them from the United States and accept U.S. customers. Corporations that currently run land-based casinos in Las Vegas and elsewhere will likely be among the first to jump into the new industry, casino officials said, but they won't be the only ones. "We would do so as quickly as we could," said MGM Mirage Senior Vice President Alan Feldman. "We would have it up and running within a year. And I have to believe that just about everyone will get involved at some level. All the major players." The major players in gambling? "Yes," he said. "But not just them. All the major entertainment companies will get involved, too. Sony, Apple, Universal, Columbia, Time Warner. It just seems logical that at some point they would find their way into the industry."
Even a company as family-oriented as Disney could get involved in opening an Internet casino, Feldman said. "I know Disney has certain beliefs about its core brand structure that could prevent it," he said. "But they could always create a sub-brand, as they do with their movie company Touchstone Pictures (which produces R-rated movies)." (emphasis added)
MGM Mirage owns and operates about a dozen major Las Vegas casinos, including MGM Grand, Mirage, Monte Carlo, Bellagio, Mandalay Bay, Luxor and Treasure Island. MGM Mirage previously operated an Internet casino from the Isle of Man in the British Isles, from 2001 to 2003, that was open to people in every country but the United States. The casino failed, Feldman said, because of that ban. "About 70 percent of the global online wagering market is from the U.S.," he said. "So we were competing, with only 30 percent of the market. It wasn't enough to be profitable." But with the U.S. market, under Frank's proposal, it would be profitable, he predicted. -- p. C - 1) |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=386#386.
Last edited by legal on Mon Feb 02, 2009 6:22 pm; edited 12 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
New USTR envoy said to be pro-trade:
Fortune
Magazine Subscription
Susan Schwab
AHOY! Can this woman save free trade?
With protectionism on the rise and the President a lame duck, the movement toward open markets may seem stalled. But the U.S. trade rep has channelled a personal tragedy into a nonstop crusade to keep globalization alive. Will she succeed?
By Nina Easton
Oct. 1/07
| Quote: | ... She said yes to an offer to become deputy U.S. trade representative in 2005, then was promoted in 2006 to trade ambassador, on the eve of the breakdown of the latest round of World Trade Organization talks in Geneva. Determined to salvage the talks, Schwab traveled 87,000 miles in three months to try to piece the negotiations back together. "I'm enough of an economist that I really felt I was creating wealth, helping people, creating U.S. exports (emphasis added) - all the things I believe in," she says. Whether negotiating over trade in autos or darkmeat chicken parts, Schwab played well in the nuances of trade disputes. "These specific line items mean someone does or does not make a sale," she says.
... Inside her office next door to the White House, a stunned and angry Schwab began crafting a three-page letter to (House Speaker Nancy) Pelosi, objecting to the "unprecedented new preconditions on our trading partners" Peru and Panama. The letter ended with a passionate defense of free trade.
"American workers, farmers, consumers, and businesses cannot afford for Congress to hang up a CLOSED FOR BUSINESS sign," she wrote. The letter, Schwab told me a month later, was cathartic. It also forced her to examine the Democrats' press release, which appeared carefully nuanced to keep labor satisfied while moving free trade forward. "They appear to be moving the goal posts," she says. "But they are saying the right things [privately]. Let's see if they deliver." (emphasis added)
It is early August, and we are talking over coffee at the Hay-Adams Hotel, across the street from the White House. A relentlessly upbeat Schwab insists on blending realism with optimism on the WTO talks, too, which have had their own set of twists and turns. This fall could be "the end of the road," she says of the six-year WTO session to lower trade barriers. "If it doesn't work this time around, we're probably done for now." And then there's the most controversial trade issue of all -- "fast-track" authority for the President, which gives foreign nations the reassurance that their trade deals with the President won't be picked apart by Congress and special interests. (Under fast-track, which expired in June, Congress can only vote up or down, not amend.) Labor leaders and their Democratic allies are reluctant to renew fast-track authority for Bush, though (Charlie) Rangel appears willing to reconsider if there's a WTO deal. (-- p. 178) |
Former USTR planning director blasts the U.S. over its handling of the trade dispute with Antigua:
| Quote: | Associated Press
US fights WTO over Internet gambling
By Jim Abrams
Nov. 20/07
| Quote: | ... Eight House Democrats, including Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers and Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank, on Monday wrote U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab expressing surprise that the USTR had moved on the issue without consulting with Congress on possible solutions. The lawmakers said they viewed the administration action "as a drastic step which could have significant consequences for the entire WTO system." ...
Specifically, former USTR director of policy planning Naotaka Matsukata told the same committee, China and Russia would welcome a means of reducing its commitments required as part of accession to the WTO.
"A global trading order doesn't fall all at once, but one rule at a time," he said. ... The issue, Matsukata said in an interview, is not one of legality but of discrimination against foreign providers such as Antigua and, to a far larger scale, the EU. He noted that negotiations are now under way, with the WTO set to make a decision on the Antigua case at the end of this month and a mid-December deadline for others. While Antigua is asking for $3.4 billion in compensation, the United States has offered about $500,000, he said. (emphasis added)
USTR press secretary Stephen Norton said in a statement that the administration would review the letter from the lawmakers and "work with Congress and our trading partners to address this matter."
... Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Fla., is promoting a more narrow bill to make betting on skill games such as poker and chess legal. |
|
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=436#436
Last edited by legal on Mon Feb 02, 2009 1:34 pm; edited 13 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Enforcing Prohibition 2.0
The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA), 2006 - Regulations:
What can you tell me about the new UIGEA implementation rules?
How do the regulations define an unlawful Internet gambling transaction?
| Quote: | | The proposed rule does not specify which gambling activities or transactions are legal or illegal [i](emphasis added) because the Act itself defers to underlying State and Federal gambling laws in that regard and determinations under those laws may depend on the fact of specific activities or transactions (such as the location of the parties). (From Summary, p. 1) |
| Quote: | The Department of Justice has consistently taken the position that the interstate transmission of bets and wagers, including bets and wagers on horse races, violates Federal law and that the Interstate Horseracing Act (the "IHA") did not alter or amend the Federal criminal statutes prohibiting such transmission of bets and wagers. The horse racing industry disagrees with this position. While the Act provides that the definition of "unlawful Internet gambling" does not include "activity that is allowed under the IHA of 1978", 31 U.S.C. 5362 (10)(D)(i), Congress expressly recognized the disagreement over the interplay between the IHA and the Federal criminal laws relating to gambling and determined that the Act would not take a position on this issue. Rather, the Sense of Congress provision, codified at 31 U.S.C. 5362 (10)(D)(iii), states as follows:
| Quote: | | It is the sense of Congress this this subchapter shall not change which activities related to horse racing may or may not be allowed under Federal law. This subparagraph is intended to address concerns that this subchapter could have the effect of changing the existing relationship between the Interstate Horseracing Act and other Federal statutes in effect on the date of enactment of this subchapter. This subchapter is not intended to resolve any existing disagreements over how to interpret the relationship between the Interstate Horseracing Act and other Federal statutes. (emphasis added) (Footnote 1, p. 4) (From DoJ testimony before the House April 5/06) |
|
Didn't the U.S. have to answer the WTO recently about this inconsistency?
| Quote: | ... Even if a state law would appear to authorize account wagering by telephone or other electronic means, they cannot override the Wire Act to the extent that they authorize transmission of wagers by means of a wire communication facility in interstate or foreign commerce. Account wagering, itself, is not a violation of the Wire Act or other federal law to the extent that the state does not authorize the transmission by means of a wire communication facility in interstate or foreign commerce of bets or wagers.
If a business is accepting bets or wagers by means of a wire communication in interstate or foreign commerce, the business is violating the Wire Act. (emphasis added)
... So far as we can determine, Antiguan gambling operators, or gambling operators from any other country, would be legally able to enter into the relevant agreements specified in the IHA in the United States so that they could accept wagers on those horse races without fear of being held civilly liable for the payment of damages to the host racing association and others under the provisions of the IHA. However, both domestic and foreign gambling operators would be subject to prosecution for violating the Wire Act if they, being in the business of betting or wagering, knowingly used a wire communication facility in interstate or foreign commerce for the transmission of bets or wagers. (emphasis added) (From Answers by the United States to Questions from the Panel, Dec. 8/06, pgs. 25-26 of 30) |
How does the U.S. propose to enforce such inconsistency?
| Quote: | Q34. USA Has the U.S. ever prosecuted under the Wire Act wagering on horseracing conducted in accordance with the IHA? If not, why not?
90. None of the federal indictments concerning Internet gambling of which we are aware concern wagering on horseracing that was conducted in accordance with the IHA. There is no reporting requirement for gambling indictments and the statistics maintained by the Executive Office for United States Attorneys only track the number of prosecutions brought under the statute but do not specify the types of bets or wagers. The decision of whether to bring charges in any particular case rests on a variety of factors within the discretion of the prosecutor, such as the availability of resources, and prosecutorial priorities. (emphasis added) |
Is there any constitutional protection against this type of inconsistency?
Any penalties for failing to block transactions that breach the Wire Act?
| Quote: | (a) All non-exempt participants in designated payment systems shall establish and implement written policies and procedures reasonably designed to identify and block or otherwise prevent or prohibit restricted transactions.
(b) A non-exempt financial transaction provider participant in a designated payment system shall be considered to be in compliance with the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section if it –
(1) Relies on and complies with the written policies and procedures of the designated payment system that are reasonably designed to –
(i) Identify and block restricted transactions; or
(ii) Otherwise prevent or prohibit the acceptance of the products or services of the designated payment system or participant in connection with restricted transactions; and
(2) Such policies and procedures of the designated payment system comply with the requirements of this part. (From the regulations, Processing Restricted Transactions Prohibited, p. 43) |
How do 'financial transaction providers' feel about this new burden?
| Quote: | CasinoGamblingWeb.com
Visa, MasterCard, lobbying hard for Internet gambling regulations
By Terry Goodwin
Staff Editor
Sept. 22/07
| Quote: | | According to our research department at Casino Gambling Web, MasterCard has spent $880,000 in the first six months of this year to lobby the federal government ... on legislation related to the regulation and enforcement of Internet gambling and online purchases of prescription drugs, among other areas that might help its bottom line. MasterCard, through its paid lobbyists has contacted Congress, the Treasury, and the Justice Departments... While it is not official what (MC's) position is on Internet gambling, certainly MC is concerned that any regulations stemming from the passage of the UIGEA will place a serious financial burden on them. Visa USA has in the first six months of this year given $200,000 to one lobbying company for various different legislation, one of which was Internet gambling. |
|
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=446#446
Last edited by legal on Mon Feb 02, 2009 2:23 pm; edited 34 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 1:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bring on the Girls!
Poker Player Alliance puts up its Duke - and she packs a wallop
| Quote: | How I Raised, Folded, Bluffed, Flirted, Cursed,
and Won Millions at The World Series of Poker
Paperback
By Annie Duke
|
Poker Listings
Judiciary Committee hears net gambling testimony
By Sarah Polson
Nov. 15/07
| Quote: | The House Judiciary Committee heard testimony from various witnesses today, including Annie Duke, to discuss establishing consistent enforcement policies in the context of online wagers. The first panel of speakers included Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.), who has introduced legislation to conduct a study of Internet gambling, and Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), who helped push through the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act.
Berkley ... has an important and unique perspective on the issue on online gambling. That perspective has been formed by growing up in Las Vegas where a person is practically surrounded by gambling wherever they go. ... that despite being immersed in a gambling environment while growing up, she isn't a gambling addict and doesn't gamble very often. Along with that she said that the current laws have done nothing but create a confusing environment for U.S. citizens who want to wager online. The UIGEA made it worse by targeting the financial sector rather than the gamblers committing the illegal act. "Although some Internet gaming executives have been arrested and some of the more reputable operators have stopped doing business in the U.S., an estimated 10 million Americans are still wagering online on poker alone, and they are doing so without the benefit of the protections afforded by effective regulatory oversight," Berkley said.
She also discussed the World Trade Organization decision that the United States' online gambling laws violate international trade agreements. Berkley pointed out that choosing to withdraw from our trade agreements rather than comply with them is the wrong route to take. "This is the trade equivalent of taking our ball and going home, and sets a dangerous precedent for other nations," she said in her prepared statement. "You can be sure that if China one day decides that it shouldn't have to comply with its WTO obligations, we will be the first to object." ...
... Deputy Assistant Secretary Valerie Abend, U.S. Treasury Department, and U.S. Attorney Catherine Hanaway both spoke about the gambling laws that are contested by the WTO. ... Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) asked Hanaway during the question period if the current laws make it illegal to gamble online. Her response was that it isn't illegal for a person to gamble online. What is illegal is to provide online gambling services to American residents. Foreign companies must use cables and wires located within the U.S. to offer their services to Americans, thereby leaving themselves open to prosecution by the federal government. (emphasis added)
... He (Goodlatte) said that the bills introduced by Rep. Barney Frank and Rep. Robert Wexler to legalize and regulate online gambling and provide an exemption for poker in the current bill will open up a Pandora's box of consequences. "Adoption of these bills will lead to anonymous corruption, the dissolution of families and the disruption of today's delicate negotiations between the United States and other countries, notably the United Kingdom and Antigua." ...
Annie Duke, representing the Poker Players Alliance and speaking as a concerned citizen, ... pointed out that online gambling is a matter of personal freedom, and as such shouldn't be banned by the government. "Having the right to continue to pursue my profession, wherever I might choose to pursue it, is very important to me from both a financial standpoint, but also from the broader perspective of freedom, personal responsibility and civil liberties," she said. She also stated that although there are many who believe that gambling is immoral or unproductive, even though she doesn't share those beliefs, she does respect them. "What is harder to respect is the idea that just because someone disapproves of a particular activity, that they should seek to have the government prevent others from engaging in it," she said. She compared online gambling and its downfalls to online shopping or day trading or even drinking water, which can all become addictive, harmful behaviors as well. The government will have to ban a lot more activities if they want to continue to protect people from themselves, she argued.
... regulation will provide more effective protection to keep minors from gambling than a ban does. As well, she addressed the issue of distinguishing between skill games and games of pure luck in the context of the UIGEA. She was able to demonstrate the skill factor in poker when one of the panel members asked her an odds question, and she told him the percentage of times a person could make an inside straight flush on a hand of poker. It spoke to Duke's own skill that she knows those odds and can use them in her favor to come out a winning player in the game, unlike in other casino games where outcomes hinge entirely on luck. (emphasis added).
The final witness for the panel was Michael Colopy of Aristotle Inc., a company that provides online verification systems for businesses. ... Colopy's argument was that there are efficient, effective and reliable systems out there already that will help keep minors from gambling online and provide a way for problem gamblers to exclude themselves from online gambling. |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=472#472
Last edited by legal on Thu Jan 29, 2009 3:28 pm; edited 16 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 11:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pressure mounts worldwide to re-think Prohibition 2.0 gambling ban:
| Quote: | Bloomberg.com
Making Bets on Internet Gambling Rule Is Risky: Cindy Skrzycki
By Cindy Skrzycki
March 4/08
| Quote: | It's not easy making rules for a U.S. law intended to deter illegal Internet gambling by choking off the flow of funds to offshore sites. That's because no one seems to agree on what the law covers. Officials at the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve Board found that out sifting through more than 200 comments from banks, gamblers, church groups and members of Congress on recommendations for the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006.
The basic sentiment was that their Oct. 4 proposal, which depends on financial institution enforcement, won't work. ... The law bars financial institutions from processing payments involving Internet gambling -- with the notable exceptions of Indian gaming, state gaming and horse racing.
``If the federal agencies themselves cannot agree on the law, what hope is there that banks can resolve these confounding legal issues,'' the American Bankers Association said in commenting on a conflict between the Treasury and Justice departments on the legality of betting on horses. The Washington trade group said the suggested rules are more likely to catch its members in a compliance trap than stop profits from illegal gambling from escaping offshore.
The proposal says generally that it covers the making of bets on the Internet that already are illegal under state or federal law. It just doesn't spell out those games of chance.
Banks and other financial institutions would have to make a reasonable effort to stop payments to Internet gambling sites through credit cards, checks or electronic funds transfer.
There are a variety of complaints. Gamblers pointed to what they see as hypocrisy in the proposal. Why hamper Internet gambling, they argued, when states enthusiastically license casinos, and taking long odds on a state lottery ticket is perfectly legal?
... The legal issue is crucial because of conflicting court decisions, differing state laws and applications of older federal laws. Prosecutors and the horse-racing industry have disagreed since 1978 on whether it's legal to bet on horses across state lines. The law said it ``is not intended to resolve any existing disagreements over the horseracing law.''
... The online-gambling industry and its suppliers fear that the proposal to place the burden on legitimate payment operators will encourage gambling operators to set up fictitious accounts, a way around any rule. ...
|
|
aba.com
News Release
ABA provides testimony voicing concern over Internet gambling laws
Statute as enacted and regulations as proposed are unworkable
April 2/08
| Quote: | The American Bankers Association voiced concern to Congress today over the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA) and the Prohibition on Funding of Unlawful Internet Gambling (Proposed Rule) issued recently by the Federal Reserve Board and the Department of the Treasury. The statute as enacted and the regulations as proposed are burdensome and unworkable while having little chance of actually stopping illegal Internet gambling.
Testifying before the House Committee on Financial Services, Wayne Abernathy noted that the UIGEA takes banks beyond the role of simply reporting potentially or allegedly illegitimate financial activity, into the role of policing, prosecuting and judging in the place of real enforcement officers.
"Putting the enforcement obligation on the banking industry and the other participants in the U.S. payment system is an unprecedented delegation of governmental responsibility with no prospect of practical success in exchange for the burden it imposes," said Abernathy, who is ABA executive vice president, financial institutions policy and regulatory affairs. (emphasis added)
Abernathy explained that ABA members want to do their part to help fight financial crime. However, there are realistic limits to how the payments system can be used effectively to solve these problems. "The Federal Reserve's most recent Payment Study reported that more that 93 billion payments were processed by financial institutions in 2006. Additionally the system does not even take the names of account owners into consideration when moving funds in the automated programs," said Abernathy. Abernathy drew attention to the fundamental challenge of ensuring that Internet gambling businesses are identified as such and are assigned the correct merchant and transaction codes. "The proposed rule relies primarily on Internet gambling businesses to commit to an honor system whereby they would voluntarily identify themselves to credit card networks to deny themselves payments. This is hardly a realistic expectation," said Abernathy.
Abernathy further noted that the ability to properly categorize customers operating Internet gambling businesses as unlawful gambling enterprises is severely complicated by the need to define which gambling businesses or activities are unlawful. "The ABA believes that the flaws in the definition of unlawful Internet gambling are fatal to this proposal as a legal, policy and practical matter. Without a workable definition of unlawful Internet gambling, it is impossible to determine what constitutes an unlawful Internet gambling business for purposes of determining the customer relationship," said Abernathy.
Finally, Abernathy stated that the agencies' efforts at cross-border implementation by requiring U.S. participants to engage foreign correspondent banks in identifying and blocking unlawful Internet gambling-related transactions raises more problems than it solves.
"There is little basis upon which a U.S. and a foreign correspondent could practically agree to implement effective controls to block unlawful cross-border gambling transactions. Not only is there currently an absence of international control standards for Internet gambling transactions, there is also broad international resistance to create such controls," he said.
The American Bankers Association, on behalf of the more than two million men and women who work in the nation's banks, brings together all categories of banking institutions to best represent the interests of this rapidly changing industry. Its membership-which includes community, regional and money center banks and holding companies, as well as savings associations, trust companies and savings banks-makes ABA the largest banking trade association in the country. |
Link to this entry
http://www.pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=548#548
Last edited by legal on Mon Feb 02, 2009 2:32 pm; edited 8 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
New deadline Oct. 1/08 set in the online gaming dispute with Antigua:
The Antigua Sun
New deadline again in gaming dispute
By Aarati Jagdeo
Aug. 708
| Quote: | A new deadline has been put in effect for Antigua and the U.S. to reach an agreement concerning the ongoing online gaming dispute. The date of 1 Oct., has been set as the time the two countries will have yet another opportunity to reach a resolution to the issue, which has gone on for years.
... Mark Mendel, Antigua’s attorney at the World Trade Organisation (WTO), stated he hoped that a resolution would be achieved, but he refrained from offering any prediction as to the possible results. ... He maintained in his opinion that both parties are trying to work things out.
When asked if there were any meetings scheduled between now and 1 Oct., Mendel said he was not sure but noted this is a time when “traditionally, the WTO people take their holiday… so I wouldn’t expect a whole lot to happen in the immediate future.” Mendel said as far as he is concerned Antigua is “still holding all the cards” but is prepared for anything. |
Meanwhile, Europe awaits the GO on its own Antigua-style challenge:
| Quote: | The RGA, representing "the world's largest licensed, and stock market-listed remote gambling companies," declares support for the U.S. UIGEA Clarification Act (HR 6663), sponsored by Representative Pete Sessions (R-Tex). The "fundamental purpose is to clarify that online gambling operators who did not offer sports betting and who withdrew completely from the United States market upon passage of UIGEA should no longer be threatened with federal prosecution in the United States.
Since March 2008, the EU has been formally investigating the US prosecution of EU online gambling operators that voluntarily withdrew from the US market, at huge cost, following the passage of UIGEA. Exacerbating this injustice and trade violation by the US is the fact that US companies active today continue to operate with impunity. The EU investigation is based on the Trade Barriers Regulation and a complaint lodged with the EU by the RGA in December 2007 on the grounds that US prosecutorial policy in relation to EU licensed online gaming operations is both discriminatory and an ongoing breach of the US GATS commitments with respect to gambling services. These are the same commitments that the WTO has already ruled the US to have violated. The EU Commission is expected to conclude its TBR investigation and reach a decision before the end of this year. The decision will determine whether the case will be sent to the WTO for determination, followed by sanctions awarded against the US if the EU wins. However, if HR 6663 becomes law it will go a very long way to meeting the concerns of the RGA and the EU." ... (From the RGA press release Aug. 8/08) |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=564#564
Last edited by legal on Thu Jan 29, 2009 5:06 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
UIGEA, 2006 implementation fallout - even in the U.S.:
In New Hampshire:
| Quote: | PokerPages.com
Gambling News Source
Irony: New Hampshire lottery is casualty of UIGEA over-regulation
Jan. 23/09
| Quote: | ... The US crackdown on Internet gambling has indeed had an unintended effect on the nation's oldest state lottery. The New Hampshire Union Leader reports that the problem is isolated to credit and debit card purchases of the popular Powerball and Tri-State Megabucks lottery game subscriptions, which players can buy through the state's Web site: NHLottery.com. The New Hampshire State Lottery Executive Director Rick Wisler said in an interview, "We could end up losing some significant revenue from this. It can amount to a million dollars a year or more to the Lottery if credit cards are not allowed."
During his interview he said the New Hampshire state lottery is "caught in the cross-hairs of over-regulation". ...
Banks began implementing UIGEA on January 19, 2009. Erring on the cautious side, many banks have chosen to block all online companies' transactions which are coded as gambling. State lotteries were carved out of the UIGEA, making them exempt. But apparently that didn't happen. In a final twist, those lottery customers whose purchases did make it through the credit card filters were not too happy. They are complaining that their banks charged them a service fee for handling their lottery transactions. |
|
In Pennsylvania:
| Quote: | Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Walter Watkins
Decision by by Thomas James Jr.., J. in Columbia County Court
Jan. 14/09
| Quote: | Both the state and the defense attorneys agreed ... that the "controlling issue" was whether Texas hold 'em is illegal gambling under the state's criminal code. In his opinion, Judge Thomas A. James Jr. determined that the question was if Texas hold 'em is a "game of skill or a game of chance ... if chance predominates, Texas hold 'em is gambling. If skill predominates, it is not gambling."
In evaluating the case, Judge James explained the "dominant factor test" that most jurisdictions use in cases dealing with what is and is not gambling. The Dominant Factor Test relies upon four criteria:
1. Participants must have a distinct possibility of exercising skill and must have sufficient data upon which to calculate an informed judgment.
2. Participants must have the opportunity to exercise the skill, and the general class of participants must posses the skill.
3. Skill or the competitors efforts must sufficiently govern the results.
4. The standard of skill must be known to the participants, and this standard must govern the results.
In reaching his conclusion, the Judge pointed out that there are over 600 books on the subject of poker strategy and that all agree that poker is a game of skill. He quoted Mike Caro's book Secrets of Winning Poker - "money flows from the bad players to the good players." He also cited "a number of mathematical studies that link 'poker and economics.'" One study in particular showed that "Beginning poker players rely on big hands and lucky draws. Expert poker players use their skill to minimize their losses on their bad hands and maximize their profits on their big hands."
James cited a 2005 study In Poker: Public Policy, Law, Mathematics, and the Future of American Tradition. The study compared the results of black jack, roulette, poker, and other forms of gambling. "If you ask who are the top five poker players in the world, you will receive a meaningful response because skill is a determining factor. But if you ask who are the top five roulette players in the world, the response is utterly meaningless: roulette is purely a game of chance... The collective expert opinion is unequivocal: poker is a game of skill, and in the long run, a skilled player will beat an unskilled player... Poker is the one and only [card] game where a skilled player may hold bad cards for hours and still win the money."
Poker Player Alliance Executive Director John Pappas hails the decision as a key victory in legalizing online poker. Since the ruling, speculation has emerged on the Web that online poker sites might take the US to court to overturn the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act prohibition against online poker. The United States has, however, in previous litigation shown a preference to pay fines when countries sue it for trade restrictions than reverse the UIGEA. (footnotes omitted) (emphasis added) (From Wikipedia) |
|
In Kentucky:
| Quote: | Poker News Daily
Gambling News Source
Colorado poker league organizer found not guilty
Jan. 26/09
| Quote: | | Last week, a three-judge Court of Appeals panel in the Commonwealth of Kentucky ruled that Gov. Steve Beshear (see press release Sept. 22/09 ) did not have jurisdiction to order the seizure of 141 Internet gambling domain names, including those belonging to mammoth online poker rooms such as PokerStars, Ultimate Bet, and Full Tilt Poker. Twenty-four hours after the successful Court of Appeals ruling, the Commonwealth announced that it would appeal the case to the Kentucky Supreme Court. The domain names were seized under the grounds that they were “gambling devices,” similar to tangible items found in an illegal underground casino such as slot machines, roulette wheels, and dice. No timeline has been given as to when the Kentucky Supreme Court will announce whether it will take the case. The Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, headed by (former District Court Judge) J. Michael Brown, is anchoring the case for the Commonwealth. |
From iMEGA v. Judge Thomas D. Wingate:
| Quote: | "It stretches credulity to conclude that a series of numbers, or Internet address, can be said to constitute a 'machine or any mechanical or other device ... designed and manufactured primarily for use in connection with gambling,' " Judge Michelle Keller wrote in the majority opinion.
In addition, under existing Kentucky statutes, domain names are not included under the state's definition of gambling devices, Keller noted. Neither the appeals court nor Kentucky's Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, which sought to shut the sites down, "were free to add to that statutory definition." |
|
In Utah:
| Quote: | Poker News.com
Utah state rep. introduces bill asserting state's rights over gambling legislation
By Martin Harris
Dec. 30/08
| Quote: | Republican Utah state representative Sheryl Allen has introduced a resolution in the Utah state House calling for any legislation related to gambling -- including online gambling -- to be left to the state rather than be made subject to federal legislation. The bill being proposed (House Joint Resolution 1) comes in anticipation of negotiations between the United States and the World Trade Organization next year which some observers believe could affect federal online gambling legislation.
Utah is currently one of only two states (along with Hawaii) that ban all forms of gambling. Thus would the passage of HJR1 assure that no matter what comes from future negotiations between the U.S. and WTO countries, online gambling would remain illegal in Utah. "It's very important that states give input and get involved before agreements get signed by 153 countries," said Allen, referring to the upcoming negotiations. Allen also heads the state's Utah International Trade Commission, which drafted HJR1. "Many see gambling as a moral issue," said Allen said. "But I'm looking at it as a states' rights issue." Allen's comments echo those of Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, who, when addressing the issue back in 2005, argued that "Antigua has no business trying to write Utah's gambling laws." ...
Whatever comes of future negotiations between the U.S. and other WTO countries in the coming year, online gambling is sure to be a focus, and Allen's proposed bill certainly highlights the issue of states' rights amid the ever-complicated web of federal laws and international trade agreements concerning online gambling. |
|
Remember North Dakota?
View the results of the settlement reached between DoJ Missouri, Microsoft and the search engines in December, '07.
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=604#604
Last edited by legal on Wed Aug 26, 2009 9:19 am; edited 9 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 29, 2009 10:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Int'l trade 'a palpable threat to state authority and sovereignty': Sheryl Allen (R-Utah)
| Quote: | Despite USTR's efforts, this case highlights the continuing problem of inadequate consultation with state governments during the trade negotiation process. The legislative and regulatory authority over gambling varies extensively at the sub-federal level but is solidly rooted in the constitutional jurisdiction of state governments. Accordingly, to comply with the WTO panel decision, if the anticipated appellate decision does not favor the United States, the U.S. federal government would not only have to change its own laws but would have to override state authority to regulate gambling. The threat of preemption is very real in this case and state governments should have been consulted before specific commitments to “gambling and betting services” were originally made.
State legislatures have grappled with the challenges of balancing the economic development, tourism, and tax revenue prospects of gambling industries against community welfare and public morals concerns for years. This is an ongoing debate and states have chosen different solutions, the sheer variety of which is the very basis for the Antigua complaint. NCSL and the Economic Development, Trade & Cultural Affairs Committee regularly publish articles and issue briefs on the gaming issue and hold hearings to examine the latest approaches in the states. USTR would do well to ensure that this expertise and these varied authoritative perspectives are considered as gaming and gambling issues are negotiated in Geneva.
USTR has indicated that if the United States loses the gambling case on appeal, we are unlikely to comply with the decision, choosing instead to alter our GATS schedule so as to deny countries like Antigua the ability to provide Internet gambling services to U.S. consumers. Such a negotiation process under the Article XXI authority of GATS will not be easy, however, as the value of the Internet gambling industry (estimated at $7.5 billion in 2004) might well require sizable trade concessions in other service areas.
It is also worth noting that USTR’s proposed solution of eliminating U.S. commitments to Internet gambling does not address the potential for similar WTO challenges to the bricks-and-mortar casino industry within the United States.
Additionally, the threat would remain that individual gambling companies located in foreign jurisdictions could challenge U.S. restrictions via the investor-state provisions contained in NAFTA, CAFTA and other trade agreements. (emphasis added)
The WTO Appellate Body is expected to reach a decision in the gambling case no later than April 7, 2005. Although the Appellate Body technically has the power to completely reverse the lower panel’s holding, such an occurrence has come about in less than five percent of all WTO appeals. More likely than not, the threat of international challenges to U.S. gambling restrictions will remain following the release of the Appellate Body’s decision. NCSL seeks a commitment from USTR for meaningful consultation with state legislatures both in the resolution of the gambling dispute and in future negotiations pertaining to international trade agreements. Such a written commitment would go a long way to assuaging the growing concern among state legislators that trade agreements do indeed pose a viable and palpable threat to state authority and sovereignty as is so vividly evidenced in this Antigua gambling case. (emphasis added) |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=608#608
Last edited by legal on Wed Aug 26, 2009 9:08 am; edited 15 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 29, 2009 10:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
From the PokerPulse Bookstore: A Gambler's Guide to Antingua's Internet Gambling Win at the World Trade Organization (WTO) and International Trade
The Post-American World
Hardcover
By Fareed Zakaria
| Quote: | We are now living through the third great power shift of the modern era. It could be called "the rise of the rest." Over the past few decades, countries all over the world have been experiencing rates of economic growth that were once unthinkable. While they have had booms and busts, the overall trend has been unambiguously upward. This growth has been most visible in Asia but is no longer confined to it. That is why to call this shift "the rise of Asia" does not describe it accurately. In 2006 and 2007, 124 countries grew at a rate of 4 percent or more. That includes more than 30 countries in Africa, two-thirds of the continent. Antoine van Agtmael, the fund manager who coined the term "emerging markets," has identified the 25 companies most likely to be the world's next great multinationals. His list includes four companies each from Briazil, Mexico, South Korea, and Taiwan; three from India; two from China; and one each from Argentina, Chile, Malaysia, and South Africa.
Look around. The tallest building in the world is now in Taipei, and it will soon be overtaken by one being built im Dubai. The world's richest man is Mexican, and its largest publicly traded corporation is Chinese. The world's biggest plane is built in Russia and Ukraine, its leading refinery is under construction in India, and its largest factories are all in China. By many measures, London is becoming the leading financial center, and the United Arab Emirates is home to the most richly endowed investment fund. Once quintessentially American icons have been appropriated by foreigners. The world's largest Ferris wheel is in Singapore. Its number one casino is not in Las Vegas but in Macao, which has also overtaken Vegas in annual gambling revenues. The biggest movie industry, in terms of both movies made and tickets sold, is Bollywood, not Hollywood. Even shopping, America's greatest sporting activity, has gone global. Of the top ten malls in the world, only one is in the United States; the world's biggest is in Beijing. Such lists are arbitrary, but it is striking that only ten years ago, America was at the top in many, if not most, of these categories.
... in fact, the share of people living on a dollar a day or less plummeted from 40 percent in 1981 to 18 percent in 2004, and is estimated to fall to 12 percent by 2015. China's growth alone has lifted more than 400 million people out of poverty. Poverty is falling countries housing 80 percent of the world's population. ... In .... China, India, Brazil, Russia, Indonesia, Turkey, Kenya, and South Africa - the poor are slowly being absorbed into productive and growing economies. For the first time ever, we are witnessing genuinely global growth. ... It is the birth of a new global order.
A related aspect of this new era is the diffusion of power from states to other actors. The "rest" that is rising includes many nonstate actors. Groups and individuals have been empowered, and hierarchy, centralization, and control are being undermined. Functions that were once controlled by governments are now shared with international bodies like the World Trade Organization and the European Union. Non-governmental groups are mushrooming every day on every issue in every country. Corporations and capital are moving from place to place, finding the best location in which to do business, rewarding some governments while punishing others. Terrorists like Al Qaeda, drug cartels, insurgents, and militias of all kinds are finding space to operate within the nooks and crannies of the international system. Power is shifting away from nation-states, up, down, and sideways. In such an atmosphere, the traditional applications of national power, both economic and military, have become less effective. (emphasis added)
The emerging international system is likely to be quite different from those that have preceded it. One hundred years ago, there was a multipolar order run by a collection of European governments, with constantly shifting alliances, rivalries, miscalculations, and wars. Then came the bipolar duopoly of the Cold War, more stable in many ways, but with the superpowers reacting and overreacting to each other's every move. Since 1991, we have lived under an American imperium, a unique unipolar world in which the the open global economy has expanded and accelerated dramatically. This expansion is now driving the next change in the nature of the international order. ((From the chapter entitled, The Rise of the Rest, pgs. 2-4) |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=609#609 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
FT.com
Democrat aims to free up online gaming
By Roger Blitz
Feb. 3/09
| Quote: | A top US Democrat is launching an offensive to roll back legislation against online gambling passed under the Bush administration, saying the climate is ripe for Congress to unlock restraints that are “impinging” on the freedom of Americans. Barney Frank, chairman of the House financial services committee, told the Financial Times he would reintroduce a bill in the next few weeks to establish a licensing and regulatory framework for online gambling operators.
Mr Frank said he also expected anti-gambling regulations, rushed through in the dying weeks of the Bush administration, to be included among the measures Congress will look to rescind. A Democrat-led Congress and a more liberal political climate is persuading the Massachusetts congressman to make his twin-pronged assault on an issue that he said bore similarities to prohibition in the 1920s and 30s.
Congress passed the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act in 2006, which tightened the laws against online gambling, forcing the exodus of listed companies operating in the US. At the same time, the Department of Justice began to arrest executives of some of these companies at airports and put them in court. Mr Frank said: “I expect an Obama DoJ to be less zealous about locking people up. These outrageous arrests in transit – they should be stopping that stuff.”
The UIGEA regulations, which make it illegal for financial institutions to process online gambling transactions, became final on January 19, but do not need to be implemented until December. Mr Frank said the prospects for his bill, which was discussed in the last session of Congress but never voted on, were greater because public opinion was demanding the right to gamble online |
.
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=628#628
Last edited by legal on Sat Feb 28, 2009 1:31 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Memberlist 
Usergroups
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
