Saturday, December 11, 2010

Legalizing Internet Poker in the U.S.


Fiona loses a hand

The Washington Post
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, December 11, 2010

Legalizing Internet poker gets push from Harry Reid in lame-duck session

As it scrambles to consider landmark legislation on taxes, immigration and gays in the military, the lame-duck Congress is suddenly engaged in a debate it didn't anticipate: whether to legalize online poker.

Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) is pushing a bill that would give official government approval to Texas hold-'em, five-card stud and other Internet poker games, which currently exist in a legal twilight zone dominated by companies operating from the Isle of Man and other exotic foreign locales.

The idea is to lure some of that multibillion-dollar business into the United States - and give the federal government up to $3 billion in annual revenues in the process.

The measure would be a boon for Las Vegas-based casinos, which supported Reid in his hard-fought reelection campaign and are eager to enter the lucrative world of online gaming. Many states and localities, including the District, have started thinking about legalizing Internet gaming on their own, giving federal lawmakers even more incentive to act.

"Under the status quo, Internet poker is played by millions of Americans every day in an essentially unregulated environment," Reid said in a statement this week. "The legislation I am working on would get our collective heads out of the sand and create a strict regulatory environment to protect U.S. consumers, prevent underage gambling and respect the decisions of states that don't allow gambling."

The bill's chances are uncertain at best, and Democratic staffers are struggling to find a way forward that doesn't bog down other legislation. But backers say the proposal offers the best odds yet for online-poker proponents, who until now have gained little traction despite millions of dollars in lobbying and campaign contributions.

Many conservative groups and GOP lawmakers, however, strongly oppose the measure, seeing it as an official sanction of immoral behavior. Legalizing poker - or any other type of online gaming - is far less likely with Republicans in control of the House next year, according to many legislative aides and lobbyists.

Lawmakers in New Jersey and California are pushing ahead with plans to legalize online gaming in those states. D.C. Council member Michael A. Brown has proposed legalizing online poker and fantasy sports gambling as a way to slash the city's $200 million budget deficit.

The Senate poker legislation was written with help from major gambling and casino interests, who played a significant role in funding Reid's expensive reelection campaign, according to lobbyists and legislative aides. Reid has collected more than $1.6 million in contributions from gaming companies and their employees over the past two decades, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Two major Las Vegas casino companies, Caesars Entertainment and MGM Resorts International, also gave a combined $375,000 to an outside Democratic group, Patriot Majority, that ran election ads in favor of Reid this fall, records show.

Reid and his supporters say the bill is a common-sense and limited solution to the problem of unregulated online poker, which is played by an estimated 10 million Americans. Proponents say a 2006 law banning financial transactions for online gambling has had little discernible effect.

"Certainly Vegas interests will be well served by this, but this is first and foremost a consumer protection issue and an opportunity for job creation and revenue for governments," said John Pappas, executive director of the Poker Players Alliance, a group that has ties to offshore gaming firms and has been pushing for legalization. "If lawmakers believe the status quo is acceptable, they're not facing reality."

Opponents say legalizing poker would harm families by encouraging reckless and problem gambling.

"Congress should not take advantage of the young, the weak, and the vulnerable in the name of new revenues to cover more government spending," Rep. Spencer Bachus (Ala.) and two other Republicans wrote in a letter to Reid.

Under Reid's proposal, the federal government would issue licenses for Internet poker operators under supervision of the Commerce Department. Approval would be limited to existing casinos, horse tracks and slot-machine makers for the first two years after the bill passes, limiting the ability of overseas companies to enter the market.

Only players inside the United States could be customers of licensed operators for the first three years. The bill would also allow states to decide for themselves whether to allow Internet poker in their jurisdictions, according to a summary issued by Reid's office.

The Reid proposal is narrower than a House bill backed by Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) that would legalize other online betting games such as mah-jongg. The poker bill, by contrast, would "make all other types of Internet gambling clearly illegal," Reid said.

The poker legislation marks a change of position for Reid, who was long considered an opponent of online gambling. Critics say the Democratic leader has flip-flopped as a favor to hometown casinos that have decided that the popularity of online poker offers them a lucrative business opportunity.

Focus on the Family, a conservative group, issued an "action alert" to supporters last week urging them to contact Reid and other lawmakers in opposition to "the largest gambling expansion effort in the history of the U.S."

The group said Internet gambling would lead to severe "addiction and social costs . . . with numerous families, marriages and lives destroyed."

Reid initially toyed with adding the proposal to the tax-cut compromise between Republicans and President Obama but decided against it amid concerns that it would further complicate that bill's chances for getting passed, according to lobbyists and aides. The measure could be added to an omnibus spending bill or other must-pass legislation in coming days.

Personal comment: Fiona, Cyndi’s Mom, has been lobbying Senator Reid not to switch his position and try to bring the bill to a vote because the Isle of Man is a part of the UK. It would seem that she failed to persuade him, but the future of bill even if it is brought up for a vote is far from certain. Support from Las Vegas gambling interests (during Senator Reid’s recent successful reelection campaign) have now placed him solidly behind legalization of on-line poker.

6 comments:

  1. As a member of the Poker Players' Alliance (PPA), which is co-headed by former Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, we believe that it is good for the country to legalize, regulate and tax online poker. As the article above stated, it would infuse billions of dollars annually into the federal government's coffers. It was a travesty to see the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enfrocement Act (UIGEA) get passed through a port security bill, because it treats poker like other money laundering schemes. Poker is a game of skill, not of chance. I play it on occasion, and am pretty good at it. I've won a few tournaments both online at at the local casino, and a few times walked out of the poker room more than $500 on the positive playing a cash game. The only times I lost a lot of money on poker is when I made mistakes overplaying hands.

    I also sometimes play blackjack, which also is a bit of a game of skill as well, with a little bit of chance. Basically, with blackjack, you just have to know the odds of certain cards coming up to either improve your hand or bust the dealer's.

    However, it seems that states and casinos are more apt to approve slot machines than poker or blackjack. Slots are the ultimate game of chance, as you have absolutely no control over what happens after each pull of the lever or push of a button. You could make thousands or millions of dollars, or you could (more likely) lose it all.

    You didn't quite make it clear which way Fiona is lobbying, whether she wanted Sen. Reid to be for or against the pro-online-poker legislation or not. It's known as HR 2267, authored by Rep. Barney Frank. If you want more on what the PPA is trying to do to protect online poker, go to www.theppa.org.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I thought it was clear when I wrote: "Fiona, Cyndi’s Mom, has been lobbying Senator Reid not to switch his position and try to bring the bill to a vote because the Isle of Man is a part of the UK. It would seem that she failed to persuade him"

    Fiona is lobbying for the bill NOT to be brought up or attached to other legislation for a vote. She represents British off shore interests.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The way it looked when I read your comment, it seemed as if she wanted the bill to be considered, that it was Reid's position to bring it on the floor of the Senate in the first place. Since the Vegas casinos are supportive of HR 2267, and Reid represents Nevada, and they helped bankroll his campaign against teabagger Sharron Angle, I thought that was what he wanted.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Reid is in favor of it now. Earlier he had been against Internet gambling and Fiona wanted him to keep that position and not to change to being in favor.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well, I'd rather see the money stay in the U.S., rather than going to the Isle of Man.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Is it possible to win a game of Tic-tac-toe? No wonder poker got the 'Strip' part with it... You'd be fully clothed with Strip Tic-tac-toe..


    There's Paul's random post of the day :)

    ReplyDelete

Blog Archive

Lijit Search

Labels

Followers

About Me

My photo
Powys , Wales, United Kingdom
I'm a classically trained dancer and SAB grad. A Dance Captain and go-to girl overseeing high-roller entertainment for a major casino/resort