Jump to content


H. R. 5767


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#1 Jelly-Filled Ace

Jelly-Filled Ace

    my bankroll got hit by a bus

  • Members
  • 1,538 posts

Posted 25 June 2008 - 05:28 PM

Internet Gambling Bill Shot DownThe House Financial Services Committee rejected a bill Wednesday that would have prohibited the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve from proposing and implementing regulations to enforce the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act.Spearheaded by Congressmen Frank and Ron Paul, (H.R. 5767) would prohibit the Department of the Treasury and Federal Reserve System from proposing, prescribing or implementing any regulations related to the current ban on internet gambling. Frank's bill, however, must be passed in the House and the Senate before the end of this year. That may seem like plenty of time to the uninformed but for anyone inside Washington, it's common knowledge that the Congressional calendar varies greatly from everyone else's. In other words, six remaining months barely translate into two remaining Congressional months.H.R. 5767 essentially would serve to prohibit the Secretary of the Treasury and Federal Reserve System from implementing any regulations as they relate to the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act, which deems many forms of online gambling illegal.The defeat is a blow to both the online gambling industry, which has been looking for ways to repeal the UIGEA, and the banking industry, which wants no part in trying to regulate the online gaming industry."The PPA is surprised that the Financial Services Committee today failed to clarify what constitutes 'unlawful Internet gambling' under the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA)," Alfonse D'Amato, chairman of the Poker Players Alliance, told Casino City Wednesday. "The King Amendment would have required a separate formal rulemaking with an administrative law judge to determine the definition of unlawful Internet gambling."iMEGA.org -whose efforts are backed by a large contingency of Costa Rican online gambling sites - will continue to challenge the UIGEA in the Supreme Court. This is the only short term chance of having the Internet gambling prohibition overturned.----Christopher Costigan, Gambling911.com Publisher CCostigan@CostiganMedia.comOriginally published June 25, 2008 5:41 pm EST
"Gets down to what it's all about, doesn't it? Making the wrong play at the right time." - Lancey Howard

#2 Potomophobia

Potomophobia

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,942 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Jersey
  • Interests:Staying alive at this stage of the game.

Posted 25 June 2008 - 05:38 PM

When will the PPA understand how government in the US works?Send some lobbyists to DC with briefcases filled with cash and it is a done deal. Jeez..... I hate noobs.
Life is short. Enjoy it while you can

"It's ****ing great to be alive" - Frank Zappa

#3 Jelly-Filled Ace

Jelly-Filled Ace

    my bankroll got hit by a bus

  • Members
  • 1,538 posts

Posted 25 June 2008 - 05:39 PM

With discussions like this, what chance did we have ?? Online Gambling: "You Just Click Your Mouse and Lose Your House""Leach and one of his colleagues was so interested in banning gambling that they dragged the poor banks into it. Unfortunately in their zeal here they unduly burdened the financial system," said Barney Frank as he opened a hearing to vote on H.R. 5767. Spearheaded by Congressmen Frank and Ron Paul, (H.R. 5767) would prohibit the Department of the Treasury and Federal Reserve System from proposing, prescribing or implementing any regulations related to the current ban on internet gambling. Frank's bill, however, must be passed in the House and the Senate before the end of this year. That may seem like plenty of time to the uninformed but for anyone inside Washington, it's common knowledge that the Congressional calendar varies greatly from everyone else's. In other words, six remaining months barely translate into two remaining Congressional months.H.R. 5767 essentially would serve to prohibit the Secretary of the Treasury and Federal Reserve System from implementing any regulations as they relate to the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act, which deems many forms of online gambling illegal.Frank also pointed out the issue of horse racing being exempt and the banks "cannot get formal guidelines on horse racing". Puts a hold on the regulatory process which at this point is only confusing the banks and does nothing about Internet gambling.Representative Spencer Baccus of Alabama called "Internet gambling" the fastest growing addiction, more so than drugs and went on to explain that "problem gambling doubles within 10 miles of a gambling facility. The closer you get to a casino, the more problem gamblers you have. Well, the Internet puts the casino right in the home."Baccus also brought up concerns over youth gamblers. "You just click your mouse and you lose your house," said Baccus.One third of college students who gambled on the Internet ultimately tried to commit suicide, claimed Baccus.Congressman Pete King said that "this is not about gambling" but rather about the burden placed upon financial institutions. "This is a banking amendment, not a gambling amendment," urged King. "I hope this will be considered in a non-partisan way...not whether you are opposed to gambling or not. Let's take our time and have regulations that mean something."Frank responded to Baccus statement that when it comes to college students his understanding is that there is a "terrible addiction problem when it comes to video games"."What we are talking about today is the reqs. If there is ever a time not to burden the banks it is today. Why are we making the banks lives miserable for? We are putting the banks at risk. Giving banks the jobs of carrying out an unclear mandate when the banks are at such heavy stress doesn't make sense."The banks should be held liable for the banking industry and not made to police the public, Frank said.Congressman Ron Paul also spoke. "I believe individuals have the right to spend the money the way they want. If you can regulate the way people spend money on the Internet, you open up a whole new can of worms. Also there are special interests involved."The real issue of what the role of Government should be. When it comes to economic and moral behavior, this becomes a problem. Why can't individuals make up their own mind. We depend on our Government to make these delicate decisions, the Government messes up."The privacy of the Internet is worth protecting. The overall issue is what the role of Government should be. If it involves kids, the responsibility is with the parents," Paul said in regard to Baccus' comments. "There are many more dangers out there than with gambling."Congressman Melvin Watt "We kicked the ball over to the regulators. They don't know how to figure this out so they kicked it over to the banks. That is not responsible legislating on our part." At least this amendment gives the regulators the ability to review more concisely, Watt pointed out.Frank also questioned if Internet pornography laws hold the banks responsible, which they do not.A vote was slated for 4 pm EST."For those who would like to go home and put casinos in their child's bedroom may do so now," Frank said at 1:30 pm EST.The bill, which stood a rather impossible uphill battle to move through the House and Senate floor by year's end, failed to pass on Wednesday.----Christopher Costigan, Gambling911.com Publisher CCostigan@CostiganMedia.comOriginally published June 25, 2008 12:18 pm ESt
"Gets down to what it's all about, doesn't it? Making the wrong play at the right time." - Lancey Howard

#4 Jelly-Filled Ace

Jelly-Filled Ace

    my bankroll got hit by a bus

  • Members
  • 1,538 posts

Posted 25 June 2008 - 05:41 PM

Rep. Bachus Offers Misinformation in His Support of Ban on Internet Gambling(Washington, D.C. – June 25, 2008) – The American Banker published an editorial yesterday, “Viewpoint: Blocking Web Gambling Rules Would Be Mistake,” by Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.) that uses incorrect information to argue for the continued prohibition of Internet gambling. Rep. Bachus’ opinion piece comes as the House Committee on Financial Services is scheduled to vote today on a bill, the Payments System Protection Act (H.R. 5767), that would prohibit the Department of the Treasury and Federal Reserve System from proposing, prescribing or implementing any regulations related to the current ban on Internet gambling, as required by the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA).“It is unfortunate that Rep. Bachus is using scare tactics to argue for the continued prohibition of Internet gambling,” said Jeffrey Sandman, spokesman for the Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative. “The reality is that regulated Internet gambling, which is clearly working in the U.K. and other parts of the world, can utilize technology to offer strong consumer protections to combat underage and compulsive gambling in the U.S. Currently, prohibition leaves millions of Americans susceptible as they continue to gamble in an underground, uncontrolled marketplace without such guaranteed protections.”UIGEA Has Not Lead to a Decrease in Internet GamblingStatement: “Since the law was passed, gamblers and businesses engaged in Internet gambling have been deterred by the fear it would be enforced.”Fact: Publicly traded foreign online operators left the U.S. market – privately held companies did not. The Global Betting and Gaming Consultants, a U.K. based organization that provides economic research on worldwide gambling activities, found that there was a short-term dip in Internet gambling in North America right after the law was passed due to the consequences of the regulated companies pulling out, leaving the market to unregulated ones. Over the past year, online gambling has increased by 10 percent. Millions of Americans continue to gamble online, despite the attempt to prohibit Internet gambling.Leading Financial Institutions Do Not Support UIGEAStatement: “The law (UIGEA) passed with the support of a broad coalition that included…the American Bankers Association…”Fact: Representatives from the American Bankers Association, Financial Services Roundtable, Wells Fargo & Co. and Credit Union National Association unanimously opposed regulations proposed to implement UIGEA in testimony to the House Committee on Financial Service’s Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology on April 2, 2008. They all questioned the fundamental approach taken by Congress in enacting legislation to force financial institutions to police online gambling.“The UIGEA and the Proposed Rule do not provide a rational path towards halting unlawful Internet gambling,” said Wayne Abernathy, American Bankers Association’s executive vice president of financial institutions policy and regulatory affairs. “The path leads to an increased cost and administrative burden to the banks and an erosion in the performance of the payments system, but it will not result in stopping illegal Internet gambling transactions. Imposing this enormous unfunded law enforcement mandate on banks in place of the government’s law enforcement agencies is not likely to be a successful public policy.”Regulation Does Not Lead to Increase in Problem GamblingStatement: Internet gambling lure young people who “by the tens of thousands are becoming compulsive, addicted gamblers.”Fact: A report released in September 2007 by the U.K. Gambling Commission, which regulates Internet gambling in Britain, reveals that the prevalence of problem gambling has not increased over the last eight years despite the advent of Internet gambling. The British Gambling Prevalence Survey 2007 found that the rates of problem gambling were 0.6 percent and 0.5 percent of the gambling population, the same percentage of problem gamblers as reported in the last gambling participation survey conducted in 1999.Internet Gambling Can be Effectively Regulated to Protect ConsumersStatement: “The UIGEA was necessary because enforcement tools were so inadequate.”Fact: Top experts have testified before Congress that a regulatory framework for Internet gambling would protect consumers and ensure the integrity of Internet gambling financial transactions. Leaders in the fields of internet payment processing, identity identification and online safety described how existing systems and technology have proven successful in combating underage and compulsive gambling and protecting against money laundering, fraud and identity theft.Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) introduced the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act (H.R. 2046) last year, which establishes a regulatory and enforcement framework for licensed gambling operators to accept bets and wagers from individuals in the U.S. It would include a number of built-in consumer protections, including safeguards against compulsive and underage gambling, money laundering, fraud and identity theft. States would also have the right to control what, if any, level of Internet gambling is permissible within their borders and could apply additional taxes and restrictions.About Safe and Secure Internet Gambling InitiativeThe Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative promotes the freedom of individuals to gamble online with the proper safeguards to protect consumers and ensure the integrity of financial transactions. For more information on the Initiative, please visit www.safeandsecureig.org. The Web site provides a means by which individuals can register support for regulated Internet gambling with their elected representatives.
"Gets down to what it's all about, doesn't it? Making the wrong play at the right time." - Lancey Howard

#5 Suited_Up

Suited_Up

    Poker Forum God

  • Members
  • 25,723 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago
  • Interests:Poker and Sports

Posted 25 June 2008 - 05:42 PM

View PostJelly-Filled Ace, on Wednesday, June 25th, 2008, 8:39 PM, said:

One third of college students who gambled on the Internet ultimately tried to commit suicide, claimed Baccus.
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!
-Kurt

#6 AAsnake88

AAsnake88

    relax...this won't hurt a bit

  • Members
  • 4,252 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Central FL

Posted 25 June 2008 - 05:45 PM

View PostJelly-Filled Ace, on Wednesday, June 25th, 2008, 9:39 PM, said:

With discussions like this, what chance did we have ?? Online Gambling: "You Just Click Your Mouse and Lose Your House""Leach and one of his colleagues was so interested in banning gambling that they dragged the poor banks into it. Unfortunately in their zeal here they unduly burdened the financial system," said Barney Frank as he opened a hearing to vote on H.R. 5767. Spearheaded by Congressmen Frank and Ron Paul, (H.R. 5767) would prohibit the Department of the Treasury and Federal Reserve System from proposing, prescribing or implementing any regulations related to the current ban on internet gambling. Frank's bill, however, must be passed in the House and the Senate before the end of this year. That may seem like plenty of time to the uninformed but for anyone inside Washington, it's common knowledge that the Congressional calendar varies greatly from everyone else's. In other words, six remaining months barely translate into two remaining Congressional months.H.R. 5767 essentially would serve to prohibit the Secretary of the Treasury and Federal Reserve System from implementing any regulations as they relate to the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act, which deems many forms of online gambling illegal.Frank also pointed out the issue of horse racing being exempt and the banks "cannot get formal guidelines on horse racing". Puts a hold on the regulatory process which at this point is only confusing the banks and does nothing about Internet gambling.Representative Spencer Baccus of Alabama called "Internet gambling" the fastest growing addiction, more so than drugs and went on to explain that "problem gambling doubles within 10 miles of a gambling facility. The closer you get to a casino, the more problem gamblers you have. Well, the Internet puts the casino right in the home."Baccus also brought up concerns over youth gamblers. "You just click your mouse and you lose your house," said Baccus.One third of college students who gambled on the Internet ultimately tried to commit suicide, claimed Baccus.Congressman Pete King said that "this is not about gambling" but rather about the burden placed upon financial institutions. "This is a banking amendment, not a gambling amendment," urged King. "I hope this will be considered in a non-partisan way...not whether you are opposed to gambling or not. Let's take our time and have regulations that mean something."Frank responded to Baccus statement that when it comes to college students his understanding is that there is a "terrible addiction problem when it comes to video games"."What we are talking about today is the reqs. If there is ever a time not to burden the banks it is today. Why are we making the banks lives miserable for? We are putting the banks at risk. Giving banks the jobs of carrying out an unclear mandate when the banks are at such heavy stress doesn't make sense."The banks should be held liable for the banking industry and not made to police the public, Frank said.Congressman Ron Paul also spoke. "I believe individuals have the right to spend the money the way they want. If you can regulate the way people spend money on the Internet, you open up a whole new can of worms. Also there are special interests involved."The real issue of what the role of Government should be. When it comes to economic and moral behavior, this becomes a problem. Why can't individuals make up their own mind. We depend on our Government to make these delicate decisions, the Government messes up."The privacy of the Internet is worth protecting. The overall issue is what the role of Government should be. If it involves kids, the responsibility is with the parents," Paul said in regard to Baccus' comments. "There are many more dangers out there than with gambling."Congressman Melvin Watt "We kicked the ball over to the regulators. They don't know how to figure this out so they kicked it over to the banks. That is not responsible legislating on our part." At least this amendment gives the regulators the ability to review more concisely, Watt pointed out.Frank also questioned if Internet pornography laws hold the banks responsible, which they do not.A vote was slated for 4 pm EST."For those who would like to go home and put casinos in their child's bedroom may do so now," Frank said at 1:30 pm EST.The bill, which stood a rather impossible uphill battle to move through the House and Senate floor by year's end, failed to pass on Wednesday.----Christopher Costigan, Gambling911.com Publisher CCostigan@CostiganMedia.comOriginally published June 25, 2008 12:18 pm ESt
I didn't get thru all of it yet, but where did this idiot get the bolded information?Edit: Thanks for beating me to it Kurt.
QUOTE (Jordan @ Tuesday, December 23rd, 2008, 10:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
this month can suck my left nut. need to not play when so tilted and wanting to stab a pumpkin

#7 timwakefield

timwakefield

    I haven't got the time time

  • Members
  • 14,405 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boston
  • Favorite Poker Game:Boxmaha

Posted 25 June 2008 - 05:47 PM

gjklasfjgklasfhtyoawiuo;asi;bnl;adfkstuowiowj fucking stupid politicians, except for barney frank, who rules
Karl: She was a bit -- what's the word that you can use, cuz I don't wanna offend anyone?
Steve: Was she a homeless person?
Karl: Yeah but sort of mental homeless.

#8 timwakefield

timwakefield

    I haven't got the time time

  • Members
  • 14,405 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boston
  • Favorite Poker Game:Boxmaha

Posted 25 June 2008 - 05:52 PM

View PostAAsnake88, on Wednesday, June 25th, 2008, 9:45 PM, said:

I didn't get thru all of it yet, but where did this idiot get the bolded information?Edit: Thanks for beating me to it Kurt.
My guess is that he is intentionally mis-stating some statistics that he heard once. For example: he heard some statistic about how a lot of college students attempt suicide, and then an unrelated statistic about how 1/3 of all college students have played online poker. In other words, I hate him and I wish he was dead.

View PostJelly-Filled Ace, on Wednesday, June 25th, 2008, 9:41 PM, said:

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) introduced the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act (H.R. 2046) last year
More reasons why Massachusetts rules. Also, democrats.
Karl: She was a bit -- what's the word that you can use, cuz I don't wanna offend anyone?
Steve: Was she a homeless person?
Karl: Yeah but sort of mental homeless.

#9 bull62

bull62

    ^I've done this before^

  • Members
  • 4,881 posts
  • Location:Alabama

Posted 25 June 2008 - 05:54 PM

I am not originally from Alabama.
Monthly freerolls and a whole lot more at RaketheRake, please refer to member RTR22135
QUOTE (RDog @ Tuesday, January 29th, 2008, 7:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
He didn't get his 27/6 by mistake, he got it because he likes to use the call button.

QUOTE (chgocubs99 @ Saturday, December 27th, 2008, 8:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
After pissing though it's like 33% wash, 33% rinse, and 33% nothing. Sometimes I'll wash like three times in a row to balance my range though.

QUOTE
There is no such thing as failure, just useful feedback about what to do next.

#10 Suited_Up

Suited_Up

    Poker Forum God

  • Members
  • 25,723 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago
  • Interests:Poker and Sports

Posted 25 June 2008 - 05:55 PM

If I were a terrorist, you can be sure the House and Senate would be my first target. Meh, maybe all of washington actually.
-Kurt

#11 zimmer4141

zimmer4141

    GO BLUE

  • Members
  • 15,007 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ann Arbor, MI
  • Interests:Hockey, Golf

Posted 25 June 2008 - 06:02 PM

View PostSuited_Up, on Wednesday, June 25th, 2008, 5:55 PM, said:

If I were a terrorist, you can be sure the House and Senate would be my first target. Meh, maybe all of washington actually.
Why kill our dumbest citizens?
Hail To the Victors Valiant
Hail To the Conquering Heroes
Hail Hail To Michigan
The Leaders and Best

#12 AAsnake88

AAsnake88

    relax...this won't hurt a bit

  • Members
  • 4,252 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Central FL

Posted 25 June 2008 - 06:04 PM

View Postzimmer4141, on Wednesday, June 25th, 2008, 10:02 PM, said:

Why kill our dumbest citizens?
Cause they write the laws ldo.
QUOTE (Jordan @ Tuesday, December 23rd, 2008, 10:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
this month can suck my left nut. need to not play when so tilted and wanting to stab a pumpkin

#13 Suited_Up

Suited_Up

    Poker Forum God

  • Members
  • 25,723 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago
  • Interests:Poker and Sports

Posted 25 June 2008 - 06:06 PM

View Postzimmer4141, on Wednesday, June 25th, 2008, 9:02 PM, said:

Why kill our dumbest citizens?
Dumbest + Power = This nonsense you just read above.That's why.
-Kurt

#14 Suited_Up

Suited_Up

    Poker Forum God

  • Members
  • 25,723 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago
  • Interests:Poker and Sports

Posted 25 June 2008 - 06:06 PM

View PostAAsnake88, on Wednesday, June 25th, 2008, 9:04 PM, said:

Cause they write the laws ldo.

-Kurt

#15 Sheiky

Sheiky

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 4,734 posts
  • Location:Liverpool, England
  • Interests:Poker, sports, music
  • Favorite Poker Game:None, everyone hates poker

Posted 25 June 2008 - 06:06 PM

"You just click your mouse and you lose your house," said Baccus.I'm speachless

#16 Suited_Up

Suited_Up

    Poker Forum God

  • Members
  • 25,723 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago
  • Interests:Poker and Sports

Posted 25 June 2008 - 06:07 PM

View PostSheiky, on Wednesday, June 25th, 2008, 9:06 PM, said:

"You just click your mouse and you lose your house," said Baccus.I'm speachless
What's a speach? Like a Super Peach? If so, I'm speachless too, but I wish I weren't!
-Kurt

#17 timwakefield

timwakefield

    I haven't got the time time

  • Members
  • 14,405 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boston
  • Favorite Poker Game:Boxmaha

Posted 25 June 2008 - 06:16 PM

View PostSheiky, on Wednesday, June 25th, 2008, 10:06 PM, said:

"You just click your mouse and you lose your house," said Baccus.
IMHO somebody else should have stood up and said, YOU CLICK YOUR MOUSE AND YOU WIN A NEW HOUSE!!!! I mean, other than the rake it's a zero-sum game - poker at least.
Karl: She was a bit -- what's the word that you can use, cuz I don't wanna offend anyone?
Steve: Was she a homeless person?
Karl: Yeah but sort of mental homeless.

#18 bull62

bull62

    ^I've done this before^

  • Members
  • 4,881 posts
  • Location:Alabama

Posted 25 June 2008 - 06:18 PM

View PostSheiky, on Wednesday, June 25th, 2008, 9:06 PM, said:

"You just click your mouse and you lose your house," said Baccus.I'm speachless
I lost my house once. I'd had like 21 beers though. Luckily I found it the next day.
Monthly freerolls and a whole lot more at RaketheRake, please refer to member RTR22135
QUOTE (RDog @ Tuesday, January 29th, 2008, 7:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
He didn't get his 27/6 by mistake, he got it because he likes to use the call button.

QUOTE (chgocubs99 @ Saturday, December 27th, 2008, 8:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
After pissing though it's like 33% wash, 33% rinse, and 33% nothing. Sometimes I'll wash like three times in a row to balance my range though.

QUOTE
There is no such thing as failure, just useful feedback about what to do next.

#19 AcesOnFire

AcesOnFire

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,039 posts

Posted 25 June 2008 - 06:20 PM

View Posttimwakefield, on Thursday, June 26th, 2008, 3:16 AM, said:

IMHO somebody else should have stood up and said, YOU CLICK YOUR MOUSE AND YOU WIN A NEW HOUSE!!!! I mean, other than the rake it's a zero-sum game - poker at least.
This is why I love you.
I've known hexidecimal since before I was A.

#20 Kwan Li

Kwan Li

    Poker Forum Newbie

  • Members
  • 89 posts
  • Favorite Poker Game:Hold 'Em

Posted 25 June 2008 - 06:30 PM

Actually.He should have said "You click your mouse and lose a couple gallons of gas" because that's all you can deposit these days.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users