82 replies to this topic

[FCP Bob]

It's looks like Harry Reid is trying to pass Federal Legislation for Internet Poker. In order for it to pass it would have to be attatched to some other legislation that has to be passed since it wouldn't pass as a stand alone Bill. That's how the UIGEA was passed when it was attatched to the Safe Ports Act.http://online.wsj.co.....eTabs=article

Quote

According to the draft of the bill reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Reid's office is considering language that would allow only existing casinos, horse tracks and slot-machine makers to operate online poker websites for the first two years after the bill passes, which could limit the ability of other companies to enter the market.The bill would also outsource oversight to state regulators, another move supported by existing casinos that don't want to see the federal government become overly involved in regulating their industry.The bill as drafted would send taxes on wagers to both federal and state governments.

This appears to be a bill designed to keep casino companies like Harrahs who are large supporters of Reid happy. Here's a letter from some Republican Leaders who don't want this to pass.http://www.egrmagazi.../...l re IG.pdfhttp://www.egrmagazi...esistance.thtml

[KingJames]

This might be time to use our 'one time'!Write your legislators! http://capwiz.com/po...salliance/home/

[TrueAce13]

ONE TIMEEEEEE

[BellaireDrew]

KingJames, on Friday, December 3rd, 2010, 8:34 AM, said:

This might be time to use our 'one time'!Write your legislators! http://capwiz.com/po...salliance/home/

i sent both letter i encourage everyone to do the same

[dapokerbum]

So this bill would give monopoly like influence to the already big players in the gambling world?Would party poker be able to make it's grand entrance back to the US?Would pokerstars be legal again in WA?If it doesn't grant anything like that, then it's probably just a lame bill meant to line the pockets of a few key people and for that I would vote against it.

[tbrick412]

dapokerbum, on Friday, December 3rd, 2010, 10:58 AM, said:

So this bill would give monopoly like influence to the already big players in the gambling world?Would party poker be able to make it's grand entrance back to the US?Would pokerstars be legal again in WA?If it doesn't grant anything like that, then it's probably just a lame bill meant to line the pockets of a few key people and for that I would vote against it.

1. They are giving casinos the first shot to give them a chance against the massive share of the market tilt/stars already own.(but yes, he is lining the pockets of the casinos who are his biggest donors) nothing is stopping harrah's or wsop or whatever to use stars software as their own though.2. Not for 2 years I don't believe.3. Don't think anyone will be playing in WA if this federal bill passes.4. The bill probably isnt perfect but it's really the best shot we have because with the GOP taking over congress nothing will happen for 2-3 years if this doesnt go through. Hence everyone collectively using up their "one time" here.

[nutzbuster]

recent Yahoo article about it all (about an hour ago)http://news.yahoo.co...us_online_poker

[tbrick412]

Pretty sad this only has 7 replies. email your congressman/representatives people!

[isap]

dapokerbum, on Friday, December 3rd, 2010, 11:58 AM, said:

probably just a lame bill meant to line the pockets of a few key people and for that I would vote against it.

If you don't get this you'll get a turd like NJ's working on where it'll still be the casnios running the gig but you'll only be able to play against other people in your state.Both options are dogshit, just pick the smell you dislike least.

[FARGOpokerND]

isap, on Saturday, December 4th, 2010, 5:09 AM, said:

If you don't get this you'll get a turd like NJ's working on where it'll still be the casnios running the gig but you'll only be able to play against other people in your state.Both options are dogshit, just pick the smell you dislike least.

This is sota how I feel.Think long term...regulating now paves the road for the future.

[custom36]

tbrick412, on Saturday, December 4th, 2010, 1:55 AM, said:

Pretty sad this only has 7 replies. email your congressman/representatives people!

Mine are already voting for it as long as this gets through before that fuck Ron Johnson takes over. I really hope they can get this done.

[ajs510]

tbrick412, on Saturday, December 4th, 2010, 2:55 AM, said:

Pretty sad this only has 7 replies. email your congressman/representatives people!

There are like 7 people on this forum that still play online. <grin>

[tbrick412]

The thing that scares me about this bill is there is a 15 month "blackout" where there is supposed to be no online poker. tons and tons of people play to make money, some as their main source of income, and others for beer money or rent money. I dont understand what they would expect us to do for 15 months? Deliver pizza? It's absurd. TheEngineer posted that the PPA is fighting this hard, but there hasn't been any really updates really since it's behind the scenes.

[dapokerbum]

isap, on Saturday, December 4th, 2010, 3:09 AM, said:

If you don't get this you'll get a turd like NJ's working on where it'll still be the casnios running the gig but you'll only be able to play against other people in your state.Both options are dogshit, just pick the smell you dislike least.

Or kill this bill and wait for someone who has some common sense to get a good bill done. That is the problem with voting in america today. It feels like you have to choose dog shit or cow shit, but IMO it's shit either way, so I won't support it.

[isap]

dapokerbum, on Monday, December 6th, 2010, 11:43 AM, said:

Or kill this bill and wait for someone who has some common sense to get a good bill done.

Common sense? Have you seen the list of elected representatives? Do you seriously think any of them will ever give a shit about anyone that isn't paying them under the table to rig the market?If, tomorrow, California said "you can now only play against other Californians on www.FriendsOfArniePoker.com" would you choose that or a national option? Either way, the government - both state and national - is intent on excluding the existing big name poker sites from the short term future of online poker in the US so you'll be left with one of the other two options.

[tbrick412]

dapokerbum, on Monday, December 6th, 2010, 10:43 AM, said:

Or kill this bill and wait for someone who has some common sense to get a good bill done. That is the problem with voting in america today. It feels like you have to choose dog shit or cow shit, but IMO it's shit either way, so I won't support it.

nothing new will be passed on a federal level because unfortunately the GOP holds more seats now. the status quo we have now is quickly fading, this is really our only choice

[dapokerbum]

tbrick412, on Monday, December 6th, 2010, 9:06 AM, said:

nothing new will be passed on a federal level because unfortunately the GOP holds more seats now. the status quo we have now is quickly fading, this is really our only choice

That's just what Harry Reid and Co is counting on. So I'm supposed to be all happy because we are going to get shit for a bill but because it's "the only thing" ever I should vote for it. Sorry, but I'm not gonna do it. Just wait and see when this bill passes if you will truly be happy or if the online poker player will be better off for having this bill. My guess is it won't.

[tbrick412]

dapokerbum, on Monday, December 6th, 2010, 11:55 AM, said:

That's just what Harry Reid and Co is counting on. So I'm supposed to be all happy because we are going to get shit for a bill but because it's "the only thing" ever I should vote for it. Sorry, but I'm not gonna do it. Just wait and see when this bill passes if you will truly be happy or if the online poker player will be better off for having this bill. My guess is it won't.

I can only find one thing really wrong with the bill, and that's the blackout period. The PPA are fighting it hard and my best guess is it will be reduced to 3-6 months, and there might be a carveout to allow stars/tilt to serve americans till then. The taxes imposed on the sites are lower than any other bill proposed, and I think we'll see lower rake as a result. The only other thing I've really seen is people complaining about state opt-outs, which is kinda silly. If we oppose state opt outs and choose to have each state create their own personal poker legislation, the opt out states won't do it anyway. You're right, the bill isn't perfect, but I just don't see much justification for not supporting it.

[Balloon guy]

tbrick412, on Monday, December 6th, 2010, 9:06 AM, said:

nothing new will be passed on a federal level because unfortunately the GOP holds more seats now. the status quo we have now is quickly fading, this is really our only choice

?This is issue is not republican / democrat at all.This entire issue is strictly bribed based.Currently Harry Reid is the most bribed.Last time this was a paragraph in the Washington Times:

Quote

Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), whose home-state casinos are split over the Internet gambling measure, briefly weighed scuttling the bill over the provision before agreeing to go along, aides said.House and Senate Republican leaders pushed hard to secure the Internet gambling measure, which some Republicans viewed as a chance to clear their names after they allowed disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff to scuttle a similar measure six years ago.

This issue will always be 100% bribe related, and never party related.This is how politics in Washington is done.Last time Harrahs bought Bill Frist, a republican, and now they bought Harry Reid, a democrat.The fact that Party Poker. Full Tilt, etc havn't bought anyone yet tells you two things.1. Once it becomes 'legal' it will not necessarily be better.2. They don't feel they need to worry about it being regulated, giving up control to US regulators will cut deep into their pockets.

[tbrick412]

Balloon guy, on Monday, December 6th, 2010, 1:55 PM, said:

?This is issue is not republican / democrat at all.This entire issue is strictly bribed based.Currently Harry Reid is the most bribed.Last time this was a paragraph in the Washington Times:This issue will always be 100% bribe related, and never party related.This is how politics in Washington is done.Last time Harrahs bought Bill Frist, a republican, and now they bought Harry Reid, a democrat.The fact that Party Poker. Full Tilt, etc havn't bought anyone yet tells you two things.1. Once it becomes 'legal' it will not necessarily be better.2. They don't feel they need to worry about it being regulated, giving up control to US regulators will cut deep into their pockets.

Tons of reputable sources on the 2p2 legislation forum (TheEngineer, Skallagrim, etc.) have stated there is almost zero chance of any legislation moving anywhere now after this lame duck session. It's just not going to happen. We know that both bills introduced prior to this were by democrats, and now it's going to be impossible with us losing the house, and multiple seats in the senate. There's really no debate in my opinion that alot of republicans(not all) play the moral police role, and have many groups funding them such as FOF(Focus on the Family). Party poker hasn't done much lobbying as far as I know, but both FTP and Stars have representatives lobbying in DC daily, which also has been confirmed by the PPA members there working on the bill now. Clearly they have on good knowledge that advancing this bill or another one like it is in their best interest long term.