What's new

Online Gamblers Serious Must Read

Rating - 100%
234   0   0
Joined
Jan 9, 2006
Messages
9,446
Location
Mid-Atlantic
Long and short on this, more than likely looks like "The Man" is talking away more freedoms created from the Internet. Will take away credit card companies from funding on line gambling sites, thus no on line gambling like poker, blackjack, and I would guess sports betting. For me, I may want to use the credit cards now and load up a few sites if this goes down. This burns my azz.:angryteet


Bill Passed to Limit Internet Gambling
Wednesday, July 12, 2006 4:28 AM EDT
The Associated Press
By NANCY ZUCKERBROD

Listen to Audio

WASHINGTON (AP) — If online poker is your passion or if you fancy Internet roulette, you might want to consider taking up a new hobby.

Congress has taken a significant step toward banning most online gambling.

The House voted 317-93 Tuesday for legislation that would prohibit credit cards and other payment forms from being used to settle Internet wagers. It would clarify and update current law to spell out that most gambling is illegal online.

It also would allow law enforcement officials to work with Internet providers to block access to gambling Web sites. The bill would exempt state-run lotteries and horse racing.

The fight now moves to the Senate. Leaders in that chamber have not identified Internet gambling as a priority, and the bill's supporters say the House vote gives them momentum to push the Senate to act. The bill's main champion in that chamber, Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., said Tuesday he would pursue it aggressively.

Supporters of a ban say the Internet's widespread availability makes it too easy to gamble, something that can create betting addictions and financial problems.

"It puts gambling in every living room, at every school desk and at every work station," said John Kindt, a business professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign who has studied the issue and supports the bill.

Critics argue that the legislation favors some gambling industries over others and that regulating the $12 billion industry and collecting taxes on it would be more effective than a ban.

"Prohibition as a general principal is a bad principal, because it doesn't work," said Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas.

The American Gaming Association, the industry's largest lobby, opposed online gambling in the past but recently softened its stance and backed a study of the feasibility of regulating it.

The Internet gambling industry is headquartered almost entirely outside the United States, although about half its customers live in the U.S.

The bill's sponsors successfully beat back an amendment to strip out exemptions in the bill for the horse racing industry and state lotteries.

Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., sponsored the failed amendment. She said it was unfair to allow online lotteries and Internet betting on horse racing to flourish while cracking down on other kinds of sports betting, casino games and card games like poker.

If the horse provision were stricken from the bill, there's a good chance the measure would run into objections in the Senate from Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and others.

Under the provision concerning horse racing, betting operators would not be prohibited from any activity allowed under the Interstate Horseracing Act. That law was written in the 1970s to set up rules for interstate betting on racing. The industry successfully lobbied for legislation several years ago to clarify that Internet betting on horse racing is allowed.

Greg Avioli, chief executive officer of the National Thoroughbred Racing Association, acknowledged the House bill likely would move Internet gamblers away from banned sites toward horseracing sites.

However, he said the racing industry did not get a new exemption but that Congress recognized existing federal law, meaning the Interstate Horseracing Act.

The Justice Department has taken a different view on the legality of Internet betting on horse races.

In a World Trade Organization case involving Antigua, the department said online betting on horse racing remains illegal under the 1961 Wire Act despite the existence of the more recently passed, and updated, horse racing law.

The department hasn't actively enforced its stance, though it recently indicated it was considering taking action on the issue.

"This bill does not touch the dispute between the Justice Department and the horse racing community," Rep. Jim Leach, R-Iowa, said of the House-passed gambling ban, which he helped write.

Congress has considered banning online gambling in the past.

In 2000, disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff led a fierce campaign against a similar bill on behalf of an online lottery company. Supporters of the bill brought up that history Tuesday and suggested that a vote for the bill was a way to make a statement against Abramoff's influence.

Opponents of the latest bill argued that the current lottery exemption wasn't in the bill in 2000, and, if it had been, Abramoff's client might have supported the legislation.

———

The bill is H.R.4411

———

On the Net:

Congress: thomas.loc.gov
 

Jwrussell

April '05 BoM
Rating - 100%
105   0   0
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
9,828
Location
Tampa, FL
Honestly, this doesn't affect much from what I see. Most credit card companies already won't allow you to use their cards for betting purposes. The part about working with internet provides is BS though. Wonder how many will bend over.
 

CWS

<b>Lead Moderator</b>
Staff member
Rating - 100%
227   0   0
Joined
Feb 8, 2006
Messages
17,527
Location
West coast
You have it exactly right. Legislating morality. They did the same thing with cigarettes and credit cards. The premise was loss of taxes but the bleeding heart non-smokers got right on the band wagon. Supposedly you cnat buy cigarettes anywher with visa or mc. Merchant can lose the right to takes cards.
 

tobby4

June '05 BoM
Rating - 100%
57   0   0
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
11,978
Location
Atlanta
Yea it is Bullshit, but all you have to do is mail a M.O in to many of these sites, I know you can to the particular sports site that I use...
 

kirscovitch

Mad Matt
Rating - 100%
51   0   0
Joined
Jan 1, 2006
Messages
2,418
Location
Aniwa WI
just another thing that big brother is gonna do to increase the pressure of the noose around all of our freedom loving, cigar smoking, sport betting necks....
 
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
May 3, 2006
Messages
1,035
Location
San Angelo, TX
I have a problem with the government trying to regulate the internet. My mother in law is addicted to QVC. Maybe the government should ban credit card payments to them.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 26, 2005
Messages
889
Location
Sacramento
lapyap originally started as a way to pay for pr0n sites, but when they were bought by eBay, they stopped doing that.

I wouldn't worry about it too much, someone living outside the country will start up a service to transfer money via the internet, and they will be outside the jurisdiction of the U.S. government.

Any attempt to legislate morality will fail. Look at prohibition......
 
Rating - 100%
234   0   0
Joined
Jan 9, 2006
Messages
9,446
Location
Mid-Atlantic
Terrasco said:
I have a problem with the government trying to regulate the internet. My mother in law is addicted to QVC. Maybe the government should ban credit card payments to them.
I smell a family intervention.
 
Rating - 100%
10   0   0
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Messages
2,610
Location
Deliverance Country
This burns me bad. It's merely another way for the government to protect their own interests under the umbrella of "protecting the public from themselves". It's an utter load of nonsense. It's about protected state supported gambling. They don't want that money going overseas. I hate when they try to hide their true motives in some sort of moral montage. "Oh we are doing this for the good of man because we must think for them". "The public is much too ignorant to be able to handle the horrors of gambling...we must protect them". The lottery is a tax on the poorest of the poor. Who do you think uses the lottery the most? Those that receive welfare are the ones that fund the lottery system. It's a tax on the mathmatically challenged. So, who protects the poor from the fantasy of winning 90 million? But, government forbid a man like myself play a game of skill such as No limit Hold em. I paid bills through residency with online poker. It was my second job. It was a fun way to relax and to make easy money. I find these kind of laws pure nonsense.
 

cvm4

BoM - July '05 & Dec. '10
Rating - 100%
197   0   0
Joined
Dec 13, 2004
Messages
22,035
Location
Jackson, MS
This still has to pass in the Senate, where it's on the bottom of their priority list. I really wouldn't worry at all.
 

CWS

<b>Lead Moderator</b>
Staff member
Rating - 100%
227   0   0
Joined
Feb 8, 2006
Messages
17,527
Location
West coast
cvm4 said:
This still has to pass in the Senate, where it's on the bottom of their priority list. I really wouldn't worry at all.
Unfortuneatly, thats what I said a year ago about the new tobacco tax law headed into the senate and now its on the ballot in November. Thier idea is to just keep putting up infront of the voters until they believe its true.
 
Top