online gambling bill

hedgehog

Registered
Forum Member
Oct 30, 2003
32,869
674
113
50
TX
Finally something I agree with:00hour
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawmakers are rolling the dice on Internet gambling.

Reps. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, and Peter King, R-N.Y., unveiled legislation Wednesday that would enable Americans to legally gamble online.

"The government should not interfere with people's liberty unless there is a good reason," Frank said. "This is, I believe, the single biggest example of an intrusion into the principle that people should be free to do things on the Internet. It's clearly the case that gambling is an activity that can be done offline but not online."

The law currently prohibits credit card companies and banks from processing bets placed on online gambling Web sites.

The legislation will repeal language passed in 2006 and signed into law by President Bush that made it illegal for banks and credit card companies to process bets made on the Internet.

Opponents argue that this will serve as a "clear danger to our youth" and encourage gambling addiction at a young age.

"If you put a computer in a teenager's bedroom, or in a student's dorm room at college, it's a temptation that many fall prey to," Rep. Spencer Bachus, R-Ala., said in a statement. "In fact, studies have shown that the earlier one begins gambling, the more likely it is he or she will become a compulsive problem gambler."

But Frank said his bill will include safeguards to prevent underage or compulsive gambling and other illegal activity.

"The notion that a society should prohibit something entirely because of the possibility that children will abuse it is a terrible blow to liberty," Frank said.

Among the safeguards in the bill is that any Internet gambling operator would be required to: ensure an individual placing a bet is of legal age (as defined by the law in the state or tribal area) and physically located in that jurisdiction, combats compulsive Internet gambling and money laundering, and protects privacy.

Frank added that he feels this will lift the burden off banks, which are compelled under the current legislation to regulate gambling activity.

The Poker Players Alliance, chaired by former New York Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, supports the bill. D'Amato said Wednesday in a press release that he is "grateful for Chairman Frank's leadership and will be activating our grassroots army made up of over one million members to help him drive legislation."

Michael Brodsky, head of Youbet.com, an online gambling Web site, praised Frank's bill.

"Banning Internet gambling has the same effect as the ban on alcohol had during Prohibition," Brodsky said. "It merely drives the activity underground, forgoes massive tax revenues and makes criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens.

"Chairman Frank's bill realities and would bring this underground activity into the light," he added.
 
Last edited:

BobbyBlueChip

Trustee
Forum Member
Dec 27, 2000
20,750
310
83
53
Belly of the Beast
Thank god the Republicans are finally gonna get their way under a Democratic Congress and Executive branch on something the liberals pushed through in the Republican Congress and Executive branch back in 2006.

Great News!!!

Maybe Jaek will be in a better mood
 

The Sponge

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 24, 2006
17,263
97
0
i think this is a bad idea. Now all the terrorist are gonna go back to funding sports books. We stopped millions of terrorist from this farce of a bill. Now what are we gonna do? I don't feel as safe as i did this morning. Those religious nuts are not gonna take this lightly.
 

hedgehog

Registered
Forum Member
Oct 30, 2003
32,869
674
113
50
TX
i think this is a bad idea. Now all the terrorist are gonna go back to funding sports books. We stopped millions of terrorist from this farce of a bill. Now what are we gonna do? I don't feel as safe as i did this morning. Those religious nuts are not gonna take this lightly.

Do you ever have positive things to say? :shrug:
 

BleedDodgerBlue

Admin
Forum Member
Feb 12, 2004
7,383
82
0
49
los angeles
I'm against it for the most part. Things are fine now for me at least. I don't see any need to have government get involved in any way and raise rake or juice which will inevitably happen. Who cares if you can't use a credit card to deposit? But I guess I'm in the minority.


gl
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,503
183
63
Bowling Green Ky
I'm against it for the most part. Things are fine now for me at least. I don't see any need to have government get involved in any way and raise rake or juice which will inevitably happen. Who cares if you can't use a credit card to deposit? But I guess I'm in the minority.


gl

For Jacks sake I hope it passes--but far as I'm concerned- I'm with you--wouldn't remotely opt for Uncle Sam tax a net programs over now--personally things are no diff for me now than 10 years ago--can access any book I want--only slight drawback is no Neteller.
 

yyz

Under .500
Forum Member
Mar 16, 2000
43,254
2,215
113
On the course!
I'm not sure where the "tax" would figure in, though?

You bet in Vegas, and you don't pay taxes, the BOOK does. So, what's the beef?
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top