Posted on 10/02/2006 12:16:23 PM PDT by seacapn
I realize this measure was snuck in at the last moment, in an unrelated bill, on the weekend. Unfortunately, people have noticed. Everyone man I know under 35 - regardless of politics - is LIVID at this legislation. Many play a little poker after work, just for fun, like any other online game. Now they have been informed by the GOP-controlled Congress that they are too dumb to handle that kind of freedom.
For younger people, the GOP is NOT the party of liberty and freedom that we knew in the past. It is the party of huge spending and power grabs like this one. I don't want to sound too ominous, but I think the GOP is mortgaging very short-term political gain for its political future. There are some things people just don't like. Being told they are too dumb to play poker - while people overseas are not - is one of them.
Our government has decided that we're too stupid for lots of things already. Only stands to reason that they'd expand the list. So it goes.
It is ridiculous, but there'll be plenty of support here.
The government is quite adept at using financial institutions as police. The $10,000 rule. Offshore accounts rule. Now the gambling site rule.
Know your customer, indeed.
Like which ones?
Did you know that if you put a hat on a snowball, it will last a really long time in Hell?
I'm too lazy.
How much money from "brick and mortar" casinos are the congressmen who voted for this bill taking?
Congrats America, way to become a Nanny state. I thought the GOP was supposed to be for LESS government intrusion in our lives.
You are right, the GOP is now the Nanny state party which spends like a drunken sailor. I'm soooo pissed right now.
It's just more gifts to the casino lobby.
Naw, we can't have that, now can we?
i for one am livid at this legislation and it really makes me wonder who the heck is running the gop.
from cardplayer.com...
What's NOT Included in The New Anti-Gaming Bill A Legal Perspective
This weekend, just before congress recessed, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) finally snuck the mildest form of the anti-gaming legislation into an unrelated bill. The Safe Port Act provides $3.4 billion for U.S.
port security and attached to that bill is a section making unlawful for banks to send money to Internet gambling sites or their intermediaries.
The bill passed both the House and Senate, meaning that it only awaits the president's signature before becoming law.
Do not panic. First and foremost, this bill does not criminalize PLAYING POKER. IN fact, the bill does not speak to the poker player at all.
After 10 years, Congress finally passed something relating to online gaming.
The bill basically makes it more difficult for players to put their money into an offshore site. However, these sites are not just going to walk away from a 12 billion dollar a year industry. Since the gambling businesses are beyond the hold of U.S. laws, when one funding source is blocked, they will open another.
Next, most banks and credit card companies already refuse to send money to offshore sites. Therefore, there are already offshore third-party companies in place that are more than happy to handle our financial transactions. The bill attempts to forbid financial institutions from sending money to intermediaries as well.
However, the government cannot stop its citizens from sending money out of the country for legitimate purposes. For example, if I want to buy a widget offshore, the Constitution protects my right to do so. As long as there is a third party, not involved in gaming, I am permitted to place my money in that receptacle from a U.S. financial institution and then spend it. Once my money goes to NETeller, I can buy a watch, or pay for a trip. Because there are legally allowable things that can be done after sending the money to NETeller, the government cannot tell my bank not to send my money there. Our Constitution protects one's personal right to send money from a U.S. bank or financial institution to a business outside of the United States.
The company I mentioned is the popular NETeller. Others will soon appear on the horizon. NETeller happens to be a publicly traded company on the London AIM Exchange with a user base of more than 2.3 million customers. More than 1,700 online merchants accept payments through the NETeller system, and most of those companies are not gaming sites. With corporate headquarters in the Isle of Man, the company processes billions of dollars yearly. Companies like NETeller are not going to pack up and disappear. This legislation merely encourages more of the same.
It will be fascinating to watch this issue unfold. If our government tries to stop US financial institutions from sending money to a place like NETeller, this would surely be fodder for a lawsuit.
The issue will probably be decided from a business perspective. If NETeller makes millions from non-gaming related sources and it would hurt their business if they lost US customers, they may voluntarily stop sending money to offshore sites. On the other hand, if a large portion of their business is online gaming, a lawsuit is in the making if NETeller is blacklisted.
The Secretary and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System have 270 days (after the bill is signed by the president) to come up with enforcement policies and procedures.
You can be sure that during this period, there will be lawsuits here, while abroad, there will be plans to protect the 6-billion-dollar-a-year industry by circumventing this new law which is applicable only in the US. Our government cannot make laws that apply to offshore companies who are regulated by the government where they are located.
I wouldn't be surprised if the offshore sites come up with programs to put large sums of money into their sites now prior to enforcement of the bill.
They could offer interest or other large incentives to keep substantial sums online.
The Poker Player's Alliance president, Michael Blocerek told me this morning that he is "outraged at the way Frist attached the anti-gaming bill to unrelated legislation at the 11th hour." The Poker Player's Alliance is a grass roots organization of more than 110,000 members. Bolcerek said:
"During the 270 day period, we will continue to fight to exempt poker."
There are many interesting twists and turns in this new legislation which I will analyze for our readers next week after the holidays.
At some point the sheeple will realize that politics isn't about principle (was it ever?), it's all about power and getting re-elected.
But there will be some Republican koolaid drinkers on FR who are all too happy that big benevolent government is making the world safer for them. Sadly those folks haven't a clue what freedom and liberty mean.
So then, as a workaround, one could possibly avoid the banking insitutions direct contact to the online casino by using services like PayPal...???
That said, I think you have to be a stone idiot to give an online casino your credit card number and gamble over the Internet. If anyone wants to gamble that badly, just mail your money to me, and I'll offer you the same odds of getting any of it back.
Bingo.
Bush and the Republicans do a great job of talking the free trade game, the WTO, lowering tariffs and barriers, etcetera. Then they go and do this and throw up a massive de facto trade barrier, while at the same time wiping out millions of dollars of equity of people overseas.
These all look like penny stocks...
Do let us hope all our Congresspeople who voted for this bill are well rewarded by the gambling industry here in America, whose interests they have now served.
the GOP is generally a law-and-order party
gambling of this type is illegal in the USA
I guess one should be grateful for their efforts
to uphold this law,
I'd like a little attention now also
to illegal immigration...
Does this mean that the spam and pop up ads from Internet gambling sites will stop now? /sarc
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.