As promised, here’s the link to the panel discussion on online poker law. (It’s actually a link to the Cardrunners page from which you can listen or download it, for all you poker playing lawyers on the go.) I’m not putting it up there with season one of Mad Men just yet, but it is quite interesting and controversial (at least to many Congresspeople).
Tag: ppa
Updating the major UIGEA story of this week, the House Committee vote on H.R. 2267 has been adjourned until today. It originally was scheduled for yesterday. Stay tuned for the results.
The House Financial Services Committee will vote tomorrow on Rep. Frank’s bill, H.R. 2267. If it becomes law, online poker will be legal (and regulated). Poker organizations are doing much to helps this cause. For example, the following is text from an email Greg Raymer (on behalf of the PPA) sent to many people today:
“On Tuesday July 27th, the House Financial Services Committee will vote on H.R. 2267, the Internet Gambling, Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act. This bill will secure your right to play online poker in the United States. Passage of this bill is the first step to undo the ill-conceived Unlawful Internet Gambling and Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA).
Your member of Congress serves on this committee and will vote on this bill, and we need your help.
Please join us and the Poker Players Alliance by going to http://www.pokerstars.standupforpoker.com. This website provides you three simple – and quick – ways to contact your Representative and urge their support for H.R. 2267.
On the site, you can either email, tweet or call your member of Congress. It’s simple and won’t take much of your time. Simply visit http://www.pokerstars.standupforpoker.com and follow the directions.
Thank you in advance for your help on this issue of such great importance to your freedom to play poker on the internet.
Regards,
Greg Raymer
Team PokerStars Pro
PPA Board of Directors”
If legalizing poker is a cause you support, consider voicing your opinion to your Congressional representative, especially if s/he is on the House Committee.
Mark down July 21 in your poker calendars. (How many poker players actually keep calendars?) That’s the day the House Financial Services Committee will hear testimony on Barney Frank’s (Rep.-MA) bill that would legalize and regulate online poker. Needless to say, it’s big day. So if you’re in DC, stop by Room 2128 of the Rayburn House Office Building at 1 pm. For more information on the hearing/bill, check this article out.
Full Tilt Poker became the first major U.S. site to officially and publicly push for legaliztion of online poker in the U.S. Just recently, the site began to encourage its players to petition their Congresspeople to vote for legislation which would legalize online poker. The site’s effort comes just ahead of what is supposed to be the week in which the House Financial Services Committee hears Rep. Barney Frank’s (D-MA) bill.
Not long ago legislation was contemplated in California that would legalize on-line poker by creating an intrastate site. Legislation that would make this concept reality was introduced recently by State Senator Roderick Wright, of Los Angeles suburb Ingelwood. What makes California a particularly interesting test ground is that it is the most populated state in the country, for years has had legalized brick-and-mortar poker, and is facing a critical, and growing, budget deficit.
The current bill has received mixed reviews, however, both in terms of concept and execution. Conceptually, even the California Indian tribes, many of which have brick-and-mortar casinos, are split. One faction of Indian tribes opposes the bill because it would violate the tribes’ exclusive right to control gambling in California (i.e., losing money) and out of fear that legalization would introduce children to gambling. Other tribes, such as the Morongo, support the bill because it will bring revenue to the state. (Each tribe’s annual license is approximately $365 million.) Regarding execution, experts, such as esteemed Professor Joseph Kelly, though he generally favors of many aspects of the bill, take issue with the provision of the bill that would make it a crime to play on a non-intrastate site.
My take is somewhat different, and perhaps controversial (especially to California-based poker players). Online poker should be legal and regulated. So, yes, generally, I favor legalization of online poker. BUT, I am against a piecemeal approach that would harm the federal effort to legalize poker across ALL states. California represents approximately 25% of the online player pool. Creation of a California intrastate site — and criminalizing play on other sites — would chop a leg out of the effort to legalize poker nationally. And this comes from someone that lives in another “major” state who would personally benefit from an intrastate site. Poker players should keep their eyes on the larger picture, and not settle for Pyrrhic wins that merely appease.
As you probably know, a while back the great state of Washington made it a crime to play online poker. (Aren’t you glad you didn’t follow your heart and move to Seattle after watching Singles and listening to Ten for the fortieth time? Did I date myself with those references?) Anyway, at a recent hearing before the state’s high court, Sen. D’Amato, now chairman of the PPA, made a statement noting, in part, that the law is to protect tribal and casino interests. And not to protect Washington citizen’s interests — in fact, 80% of Washingtonians oppose the law. Check out the PPA’s statement.
I pass along this excellent article. Excellent in that it is well written and is some top level coverage by a major news source (ABC). Less excellent in that it discusses, in part, an interview Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Alabama) gives in which he vows to fight against the legalization on online gambling, including poker specifically. The PPA is afforded an opportunity to lobby its position, and other Congressional items are discussed (Frank, etc.). But, at least for me, Bachus’ comments make this article a must read. And scary. Enjoy!
Cardrunners has secured an exclusive interview with Professor Joe Kelly, an expert in gambling and poker laws. The interview is geared toward what the recent legal developments mean toward you, the player. So if you have any concerns about whether June 1 is D-Day, this interview is a must listen.
Check out the interview here.
The thinking on Capitol Hill, or at least within the PPA lobby, is that Rep. Barney Frank may no longer fight to prevent implementation of the UIGEA after Sen. Kyl and Treasury Secretary Geithner reached a pact in which Sen. Kyl would not hold up Treasury Department appointments and Geithner would not block the UIGEA’s implementation. Rep. Frank now states that implementation may create more animus toward the legislation, and ultimately result in a quicker repeal. (That’s what he’s saying at least…)
Here’s a thought. Congress recently announced that with health care behind it (in theory at least), it will now turn to revamping the U.S. financial system. Couldn’t Congress make repealing the UIGEA part of this overhaul? Decreasing burdens on the banks and alleviating costs has to be high on their agenda, no? If Sen. Kyl could tie the UIGEA to a completely unrelated bill, Rep. Frank should at least try to tie repeal of the UIGEA to related legislation.
