Posts Tagged ‘Barney Frank’
Needless Fail League
Don’t bite the hand that feeds you. This old saying darted through my mind every time I read about the National Football League (NFL) lobbying against Representative Barney Frank’s internet gambling bill, HR 2267. Fortunately, the league ended its opposition to the bill in August because an amendment was added that would prohibit licensed online gambling operators from offering sports betting.
That doesn’t mean that the NFL’s stance on the whole issue is any less tilt-inducing to me, though. Before I get to my rant, I should say that given the NFL’s position on sports betting, I completely understand why the league, and other sports leagues for that matter, could care less about poker players. If a bill that legalizes and regulates online poker also does so for online sports betting, poker is unimportant collateral damage if the NFL manages to get the entire bill shot down. Guilt by association. I think most poker players feel the same way about sports betting. While we feel that people should be allowed to bet online, if throwing sports betting under the bus is the way for poker to come out on top, well… sorry sports bettors. Sucks to be you.
So, while I get why poker players are not a concern of the NFL, the league’s hatred of sports betting just doesn’t make sense to me. I mean, they hate it so much that they hired someone to lobby against Frank’s bill. They feel that sports betting hurts the integrity of the game. But as far as I know, there have never been any sports betting or game fixing scandals of note involving the NFL. Besides, while it’s of course possible, I find it extremely unlikely that an NFL player would be able to be influenced by criminal types to fix a game. Players get paid handsome sums of money for their skills, so the fee that someone would have to pay a player to, say, lose on purpose, would have to be pretty substantial. Plus, it would be quite difficult for a player to throw a game by himself without it being extremely obvious. I just don’t think it would realistically happen.
Getting back to my opening sentence, what really gets me is that without sports betting, the NFL wouldn’t be nearly as popular as it is today. Football season is like an extended Christmas shopping season for sports books and the Super Bowl is like Black Friday. Millions of people who either don’t have a strong rooting interest or whose team has no chance remain interested because they have money on the games. These people subscribe to DirecTV’s football package, make sure they get the NFL Network on cable, watch the commercials that feed the NFL’s coffers, and view the ads on the NFL’s website.
And all that doesn’t include fantasy football, which the NFL loves. The hypocrisy of that should be obvious. Fantasy football is gambling. It’s just in different form. Yes, many, if not most, people play fantasy for free and put no money into their leagues. But millions of people bet at least a few bucks each season, hoping that their team will win the league for a nice payout. Of course it’s gambling. Fantasy players are betting on the performance of the players they draft rather than on the performance of an NFL team. And the payouts come at the end of the season instead of at the end of each game.
One big thing that the NFL is ignoring in its loathing of online sports betting is that it’s easier to catch game fixing and the like online than it is offline. Online, all wagering history is recorded and suspicious trends are tracked. For example, in 2007, millions of dollars were bet on the European sports book Betfair against tennis player Nikolay Davydenko in a match in which he was a strong favorite and had already won the first set. He then withdrew from the match in the third set with an apparent injury. Betfair, in accordance with its agreement with the Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP), notified the ATP of this suspicious activity and cancelled all wagers on the match.
What the NFL should do is partner with the online sports books to help fight sports betting crime. Over a dozen online sports books in Europe are members of the European Sports Security Association (ESSA), which has a “mandate to keep sport clean and free from manipulation.” The ESSA members alert each other if any irregular betting patterns are detected, and in turn, alert the sports leagues and regulatory bodies. A system like this seems so obvious. In the meantime, the NFL and other professional sports leagues in the U.S. would apparently rather have online sports betting go underground with no protections, either for the bettors or the leagues, in place.
I am pleased that the NFL has dropped its opposition to the Frank bill, but it still needs to get its head out of the sand and get with the times. It owes much of its popularity to sports betting. Accept it and embrace the technological advancements that will protect the game better than prohibition will.
September 2nd – Daily Deal
On today’s Daily Deal, the coalition of California casinos clarifies its stance on internet gambling legislation, 888 reports its financial results for the first half of two-thousand ten, the World Series of Poker Main Event continues airing on ESPN and we find out who the final nominees are for this year’s Hall of Fame. It’s all ahead… faster than you can say, “I can dodge bullets, baby.”
Hello, I’m Sean Gibson and welcome to the Daily Deal by Poker News Daily.
Recently, the Commerce Casino, Bicycle Casino, Hawaiian Gardens, Hollywood Park, and the California Gaming Association joined in opposition Congressman Barney Frank’s HR 2267, which would create a full licensing and regulatory framework for the internet gambling industry in the United States.
The four casinos have found themselves in a war of words against the Poker Players Alliance, which has launched an online petition at PlayersBeforeProfits.com to reverse their stance against the groundbreaking legislation. Poker News Daily sat down with card room coalition spokesperson Waltona Manion to explore the coalition’s resistance.
Manion argued,
“We’re looking for Federal enforcement of the same strict licensing and regulation for online poker as U.S. land-based casinos abide by. This means that they have to license all of their employees and the physical operations should be in the U.S. In addition, the hardware and software should be tested and certified.”
She added, “Frank’s bill provides fewer industry regulations and player protections. It imposes lower taxes for foreign online companies than what U.S. casinos pay. It would enable illegal offshore companies to export significant money from our economy.”
We’ll keep you posted as this story develops.
888 Holdings, the gaming operator that owns 888 Poker, announced Tuesday that it will be cutting costs in order to address a loss in profits for the first half of 2010. The company has also decided to scrap its dividend in order to pay for acquisitions after the weak economy and World Cup caused a decline in poker revenue.
888’s first half financial results showed revenues were up 10.5% to one-hundred thirty million dollars, but pre-tax profit dropped by 56% to four point three million dollars. Poker revenue dropped 25% to nineteen point six million.
The WSOP Main Event continued airing on ESPN on Tuesday night with Day Two-B. Two one-hour episodes were devoted to the second Day Two and the feature table included Dan Harrington and Jeff Shulman, who were seated next to each other. Prahlad Friedman and Allied Network Solutions CEO Ted Bort tangled in a hand in which Bort called the clock after pushing all in. Friedman waited until the count reached one and quietly said, “I call,” but floor officials ruled that the clock had expired. Bort turned over top two pair and Friedman mucked.
A maelstrom of yelling ensued. ESPN aired a replay clearly showing that Friedman had called at the one-second mark and the dealer promptly said, “He called.” Nevertheless, another floor supervisor was summoned who also said the hand was dead. Don’t forget that Friedman was also involved in “Ante-gate” with Jeffrey Lisandro.
Finally, the nominees as voted by the fans are in for the Poker Hall of Fame. This year’s class is a who’s who of the poker world, all of whom have distinguished careers warranting their nominations. This year’s class of nominees, who will be voted on by the 16 living Hall of Fame members and a 17-person media panel. Only these 33 individuals cast votes for induction. The nominees are:
1. CHRIS FERGUSON
2. BARRY GREENSTEIN
3. JENNIFER HARMAN-TRANIELLO
4. DAN HARRINGTON
5. PHIL IVEY
6. LINDA JOHNSON
7. TOM McEVOY
8. DANIEL NEGREANU
9. SCOTTY NGUYEN
10. ERIK SEIDEL
Well, that does it for today’s edition of The Daily Deal, and we’ll be back with you on Tuesday of next week. Be sure to visit Poker News Daily every day for the latest poker headlines, and be sure to check us out at twitter dot com slash poker news daily. I’m Sean Gibson, thanks for tuning in, and we’ll see you next time. Now go crush those fish at the tables!
The Nightly Turbo: World Poker Tour London, Barney Frank on Jay Leno, and More
Tags: Barney Frank
Barney Frank Talks Online Poker on The Tonight Show
On Tuesday, Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) appeared on “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.” Seated onstage alongside reality television icon Kim Kardashian, Frank discussed, among other topics, the recent success of HR 2267, the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, in Committee. A lively debate with Leno ensued. Watch here.
The portion of Frank and Leno’s debate focusing on online poker and internet gambling spanned about four minutes. Frank opened the conversation by asserting, “If you have some guy who wants to play poker on the internet, we say it’s illegal… We could make billions of dollars a year by making it legal and taxing it.” The Federal Government could stand to rake in up to $42 billion over a 10-year period by legalizing and regulating the internet gambling industry in the United States.
Not everyone was onboard with Frank’s plan, including Leno, who argued, “Vegas works because you have to go to the desert to get there. You lose your money and you come home. You can’t go to the desert again until you get more money. If you’re sitting at home and you’re up late at night and you’ve got your little credit card, next thing you know, it’s like a mini bar.”
Leno began making a potato chip comparison, but Frank cut him off by noting that there are casinos everywhere in the country, not just Las Vegas. No desert surrounds Tunica or Atlantic City, for example. In addition, HR 2267 only allows for debit card and prepaid card payments as part of a Manager’s Amendment.
Leno then reminded Frank that residents of many states were sold the lottery because all of the money that would go toward schools. Now, educational institutions across the country are struggling despite the influx of cash. Frank explained, “The problems that teachers and others face in schools can’t always be solved by money… The fact that someone oversells an idea doesn’t make it a bad idea, it makes them a bad salesman.”
Frank continued by arguing, “If you want to hit somebody or you want to burn somebody’s house or steal somebody’s car, then I want to stop you because you’re doing it to somebody else. If you want to be foolish with your own money, if you want to gamble, if you want to drink, if you want to smoke, I will tell you it’s a bad idea, but I think it’s a mistake for the government to try to stop you.” Frank has routinely argued that adults should be able to do what they want within the privacy of their own home.
The conversation then quickly digressed from internet gambling, with Leno explaining that smoking marijuana is essentially legal because everyone does it. If you’re caught, it’s only a small slap on the wrist. Frank responded, “I don’t want to say to the cops, ‘We say it’s illegal, but wink at it and go after this one.’ There’s also an element of racial discrimination in the way it’s enforced.”
One amendment to HR 2267 outlawed advertising internet gambling sites to children. The topic of kids not being exposed to internet gambling came up on “The Tonight Show,” with Frank claiming, “I do agree you can limit this to kids and in fact we’ve done that. Joe Camel has disappeared. As a general rule, the government shouldn’t be trying to live people’s lives for them. You protect people from other people hurting them.”
Congress is currently on recess until September 13th. Its target adjournment is October 8th in advance of the general elections in the United States, meaning that the legislative body will have just 20 days to tackle the internet gambling issue. In all likelihood, a “Lame Duck” session will occur as well, giving HR 2267 one last chance. Stay tuned to Poker News Daily for the latest headlines from Capitol Hill.
September 1st – Daily Deal
On today’s edition of the Daily Deal, Barney Frank may step down as Financial Services Committee Chairman; the World Poker Tour and Fox Sports Net extend a partnership; and Gus “The Great Dane” Hansen gets taken to the cleaners by Phil Ivey and Cole South.
Hello, I’m Sean Gibson and welcome to the Daily Deal by Poker News Daily.
In November, the United States will hold its general elections. On Capitol Hill, the entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate will be determined. If after the elections Republicans gain control of the House, then Congressman Barney Frank’s time as the Financial Services Committee Chairman may come to an end, and in the worst case scenario he would be replaced by notoriously anti-gaming Congressman Spencer Bachus.
Frank has been one of the strongest supporters of the legalization of online poker and he is currently promoting HR 2267, the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act. The bill was marked up in the Financial Services Committee in late July and has received the support of seventy co-sponsors. Frank has been in the House since 1980 and served as the Financial Services Committee Chairman since 2007.
The World Poker Tour and Fox Sports Net announced this week that they will continue their broadcast and promotional relationship, settling on an agreement that will stretch until 2013. The World Poker Tour’s ninth Season will begin airing in January two thousand eleven, starting with the Bellagio Cup.
The broadcast will have several improvements, including new anchor Kimberly Lansing and the introduction of the beautiful Royal Flush Girls. Season nine will also debut a yet-to-be-named new analyst who will host a recurring segment called “The Raw Deal.”
New World Poker Tour CEO Steve Heller said: “This season promises to be unlike any previous incarnations of the WPT … The shows will be faster-paced and edgier, featuring the biggest names in poker mixing it up with more up-and-coming stars, pre-final table action, and, as always, poker’s greatest and most recognizable play-by-play commentary team of Mike Sexton and Vince Van Patten.”
HighStakesDB.com has reported that hyper-aggressive pro Gus Hansen lost over one million dollars last Sunday… to just two opponents.
Cole South of CardRunners fame and eight-time World Series of Poker bracelet winner Phil Ivey took Hansen for more than one point one million dollars, almost half of the “Great Dane’s” net losses on the year. HighStakesDB – which tracks the action at high-stakes online poker tables – reported that Hansen’s losses Sunday came primarily in two and four thousand Fixed Limit Omaha Hi-Lo. He lost nearly $400,000 to Ivey in that game along with $99,000 to South, and an additional three hundred and thirty five thousand in Omaha Eight or Better when it was part of a Seven Game rotation.
All told, Hansen is down $2.3 million dollars for this year, while Ivey has cashed $3.5 million on online play. South is up eighty thousand due to a recent downswing.
Guess we should be asking for holiday gifts from Ivey, South and Jungleman this year!
Thanks for watching The Daily Deal once again, and as always be sure to bookmark Poker News Daily for the latest in poker news. Be sure to add us to your twitter feed at http://twitter.com/pokernewsdaily. I’m Sean Gibson and may the flop be with you!
Tags: aced, Barney Frank, bellagio, Cole South, Gus Hansen, legal, Online Poker, Phil Ivey, poker player, usa, WSOP
California Horse Racing Wagering Bill Through To Senate
A bill, which is backed by one of the largest players in the online gaming industry, is up for a vote in the California General Assembly that would open up online betting on horse racing for the state’s residents.
The proposed bill, named SB 1072 in the California legislature, would up the cut for the state regarding its percentage of the take of wagers on horse racing. More importantly, perhaps, is the provision in the bill that would allow for “exchange betting,” otherwise known as internet wagering. The bill was on the fast track to being enacted before opposition to the legislation delayed its passage.
The bill has been amended by California Senator Ron Calderon, a Democrat from Montebello serving Senate District 30, to alleviate the concerns of much of the opposition, which included California horse trainers, among others. Under Calderon’s amendments and his sponsorship, implementation of the law (if passed through the Senate and signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger) would be studied by the state legislature and the California Horse Racing Board for approximately 20 months to set the rules for implementation. This means that the law would not take effect until 2012 at the earliest.
European gaming conglomerate Betfair was critical in getting Calderon’s amended bill voted through, along with Magna International Developments. Betfair, who is also the sponsor of the World Series of Poker Europe, is the owner of the United States’ largest horse racing wagering site, TVG.com. The company sponsors races at New York’s Saratoga racetrack and, through TVG, offers internet wagering to millions of customers.
Intrastate gaming is a subject that the state of California, currently facing billions of dollars in budget shortfalls, is examining as a means of alleviating the situation. Along with the current bill that would open up wagering on horse racing, there is an ongoing drive to push for intrastate online poker, although a bill introduced earlier this year by Senator Rod Wright fell short over the California General Assembly’s summer session.
Wright’s bill, SB 1485, would have opened up the California online gaming market, in particular poker, to control by the state. The now dead bill would have authorized three “hub operators” to provide legal internet gambling outlets to California residents for a period of five years. The state would have taken 20% of the revenues monthly, which would have been paid to a specially created internet gambling fund. California residents also would have faced stiff penalties for playing on unauthorized sites.
The intrastate gaming debate has come forward as of late because of furor over the Commerce Casino’s stance against federal legislation that would fully legalize internet gaming. In testimony in July in front of the House Financial Services Committee regarding Congressman Barney Frank‘s Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act (HR 2267), Commerce chairman Tom Malkasian came out against the proposed bill for several reasons.
Among the points cited by Malkasian was that the revenue generated by the new legislation would not stay in the United States, online companies would not face the same regulation that land-based casinos face, and jobs would be lost rather than created. His stance, which other top California card rooms such as Hollywood Park, the Bicycle Casino, and Hawaiian Gardens have stated they agree with, has angered many in the poker community.
Commerce Casino Clarifies Stance on Online Poker Legislation
Recently, the Commerce Casino, Bicycle Casino, Hawaiian Gardens, and Hollywood Park joined in opposition Congressman Barney Frank’s (D-MA) HR 2267, which would create a full licensing and regulatory framework for the internet gambling industry in the United States. The four casinos have found themselves in a war of words of sorts against the Poker Players Alliance (PPA), which has launched an online petition at PlayersBeforeProfits.com to reverse their stance against the groundbreaking legislation. Poker News Daily sat down with card room coalition spokesperson Waltona Manion to explore the coalition’s resistance.
Many in the industry have asked what brand of internet gambling legislation the Commerce Casino and its allies in California would support, if any. Federal licensing? State licensing? Poker only? Manion explained that the coalition is not against internet gambling: “We’re looking for Federal enforcement of the same strict licensing and regulation for online poker as U.S. land-based casinos abide by. This means that they have to license all of their employees and the physical operations should be in the U.S. In addition, the hardware and software should be tested and certified.” The California Gaming Association also opposes HR 2267.
The coalition also supports not granting Federal licenses to any entity that has violated U.S. law. Manion added, “Another criteria would be poker only. The Frank bill as it’s currently written authorizes all types of gaming. That violates Federal law and breaks agreements of states and tribal nations. It would violate the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.” One amendment to Frank’s HR 2267 prohibited online wagering on sports, leading to the NFL dropping its opposition to the bill. Manion also stated that states should have the right to continue to regulate gaming in their own jurisdiction.
Manion also expressed concern over the level of protections included in Frank’s measure: “Frank’s bill provides fewer industry regulations and player protections. It imposes lower taxes for foreign online companies than what U.S. casinos pay. It would enable illegal offshore companies to export significant money from our economy.” The tax companion bill to HR 2267 is Congressman Jim McDermott’s (D-WA) HR 4976, which has not yet been marked up in the House Ways and Means Committee.
Despite the spat playing out in the public arena, Manion told PND that the poker lobbying organization and the California casinos have not yet sat down and discussed their differences on HR 2267: “The PPA’s leadership were present during the Financial Services Committee hearing and said nothing to us. They did not contact anyone from the Commerce Casino or any of the card rooms. Had the PPA contacted the Commerce or the major card rooms in California and said they had major concerns or if they had read the testimony more closely, they would agree that most of what we’re talking about is valid.”
According to a 2009 survey by Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, and Associates, 55% to 57% of Californians support the state collecting revenues from online poker. Among the most important factors to respondents were ensuring that minors don’t play, full transparency, independent audits, and cracking down on unauthorized sites. The West Coast state could be among the first to green light intrastate internet gambling given a sizable budget shortfall. California State Senator Rod Wright had introduced SB 1485 this year, but the bill ultimately stalled on its way to becoming law in July.
HR 2267 offers an opt-out provision for states and tribes that don’t want to take part in a Federal internet gambling scheme. However, Manion believes that the provision won’t stand up if reviewed by the World Trade Organization (WTO): “We don’t believe that the opt-out provision as currently written will hold up to WTO scrutiny. If they were to challenge HR 2267, that’d be the component that would be challenged. We should preempt that now so we don’t get a challenge from the WTO. It would leave state-regulated gaming vulnerable.”
Nevertheless, if HR 2267 were to become law before the end of the current legislative session, California could opt out of the legislation and go it alone in the online poker world. However, its lack of liquidity compared to the Federal model could result in its demise. Manion remarked, “Our immediate focus is amending the Federal legislation and also working with the state legislature on legislation they believe would ensure that California revenues stay in California. If the Frank bill passed, the opt-out provision would be in play and California could opt out. The California state legislature could also act in advance of Frank’s bill becoming law.”
HR 2267 was marked up and passed out of the Financial Services Committee on July 28th. Congress is currently in recess.
The PPA’s petition has lapped 7,200 players and talk of a boycott of the Commerce has arisen among poker pros. UB.com pro Annie Duke, for example, commented via Twitter, “I and some other pros are boycotting them as well. I will give my business to a place that supports the players.” What the next chapter will be in this ongoing saga is anyone’s guess.
Poker Players Alliance Responds to Commerce Casino’s Opposition on Online Gambling Legislation
Barney Frank Out as Financial Services Committee Chair in 2011?
In November, voters in the United States will head to the polls for general elections. On Capitol Hill, the entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate will be determined. If Republicans were to gain control of the House, then Congressman Barney Frank’s (D-MA) tenure as Financial Services Committee Chairman may come to an end.
A recent Financial Times article discussed the future of the lower Congressional body: “Polls show control of the House of Representatives is too close to call while the Democrats are expected to retain control of the Senate, albeit with a reduced majority.” Frank has been in the House since 1980 and served as the Financial Services Committee Chairman since 2007. Democrats currently control nearly 60% of the seats in the House and Senate.
Congressman Spencer Bachus (R-AL) serves as the Ranking Member of the House Financial Services Committee, although he apparently seems far from a lock to take over the Chair should the opportunity arise. However, the Financial Times revealed, “Mr. Bachus said, ‘I will be the chairman if we’re in the majority.’ [Congressman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX)] said, ‘My expectation is that Spencer Bachus will be the next Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee and I support him.’”
What’s the significance of this story for online poker players, you ask? Frank is internet gambling’s number one supporter on Capitol Hill, having offered up a handful of bills to legalize the industry in the United States. His latest effort, HR 2267, the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, was marked up in the Financial Services Committee in late July and has received the support of 70 co-sponsors.
HR 2267 received about a dozen amendments during mark-up, ranging from ensuring that online sports betting would not be legalized to prohibiting existing sites that serve the U.S. market “illegally” from applying for a license. Now, the measure awaits its time on the House floor, although HR 2267 being attached to a must-pass bill later this year is a possibility. Ironically, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) was attached to an unrelated port security measure to become law in 2006.
Bachus remains one of the strongest opponents of legalized internet gambling. During HR 2267’s markup hearing on July 28th, Bachus opened the proceedings by arguing, “After all of the talk of the past year of shutting the casinos down on Wall Street, why would we take steps today to open casinos in every bedroom and every dorm room on iPods, Blackberrys, iPhones, and computers?”
In the meantime, HR 2267 has caused a rift of sorts in the poker community. The Commerce Casino’s Tom Malkasian was among those witnesses who spoke against the bill in a July 21st House Financial Services Committee hearing. In response, the Poker Players Alliance (PPA), the industry’s main lobbying voice, issued an online petition to force the Commerce to change its position. The petition, found at PlayersBeforeProfits.com, has received over 7,000 signatures.
The Commerce Casino then fired back, arguing in a press release distributed in Friday, “Nevada casinos, offshore companies, and Washington insiders don’t want California to benefit from its own market. Our economic future is not their concern. We support free enterprise, fair competition, and the principle that what plays in California, stays in California.” The Los Angeles casino also claimed support from the Bicycle Casino, Hawaiian Gardens Casino, and Hollywood Park Casino.
Several poker pros have suggested a boycott of the Commerce Casino, although one has not yet occurred. The Bicycle Casino is fresh off hosting the World Poker Tour’s Legends of Poker, which saw Andy Frankenberger walk away with the title and $750,000 top prize.
Stay tuned to Poker News Daily for the latest headlines from Capitol Hill and beyond.
August 30th – Daily Deal
Happy Monday to everyone! On today’s Daily Deal, the Commerce Casino receives support from several of its competitors, Daniel Negreanu fires insults at Annie Duke, and an important figure in the Senate comes out in favor of online poker legislation. It’s all ahead… right now!
Hello, I’m Sean Gibson and welcome to the Daily Deal by Poker News Daily.
Let the battle lines be drawn. Several days after the Poker Players Alliance issued a petition to reverse the Commerce Casino’s stance against pro-internet gambling legislation in the United States, more casinos have come onboard to strike down the bill. In a letter issued to the press late Friday night from Commerce Casino Board members, it was revealed that the Bicycle Casino, Hawaiian Gardens, and Hollywood Park casinos also oppose Congressman Barney Frank’s HR 2267.
The press release claimed, “Californians wager an estimated thirteen point four billion dollars annually. That makes California the largest internet gaming market in the world, and without state legislation to protect it, critically-needed billions will be captured by offshore and out-of-state operators never to return.”
Why the Commerce Casino, Bike, or any other California casino wouldn’t just apply for a license under HR Two-Two-Six-Seven remains to be seen. PPA Executive Director John Pappas speculated in an exclusive interview with Poker News Daily, “They don’t want to compete with existing online operators or Harrah’s or Wynn or Google or anyone else who may get involved in internet gambling. They prefer to have their own fiefdom in California… A lot of lawmakers went out of their way to address their concerns via amendments, yet they still continue to oppose the bill.”
Moving over to another bitter dispute, in an interview with PokerPlayer, PokerStars pro Daniel Negreanu fired off what many have deemed inappropriate comments against Annie Duke. In an article entitled “The Evolution of Daniel Negreanu,” he was asked about the two-thousand ten World Series of Poker Ladies Event in which more than a dozen men played.
Negreanu voiced his disgust at the whole situation and then went on a tirade about Duke, who has never been an advocate of the tournament:
“What irked me is that this woman has the audacity on her website to call herself ‘the best female poker player in the world.’ So I’m like ‘how offensive are you, you f***ing c***? You want to say you’re speaking for women, yet you claim superiority over all of them.’”
Wow. Well … after afterwards Duke issued an open letter to PokerStars about the use of the c-word and the site ultimately responded, “PokerStars does not support the use of derogatory or hurtful language directed at any other player. While this was a personal matter between two players, we wish that better judgment had been used in the choice of words.”
Duke’s brother Howard Lederer and Tony G have been among those pros weighing in on the spat.
Finally, according to the Reno Gazette-Journal newspaper, U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid claimed he would support the legalization of online poker in the United States. Reid also stated he would not support any other form of online gaming, including sports betting.
Reid also won’t support anything that hurts Nevada jobs, but the Senate Majority Leader will play a huge role in whether online poker is legalized. No progress has been made on legalizing internet gambling or online poker in the Senate, so having Reid as an ally could go a long way.
That does it for today’s Daily Deal, be sure to check back every weekday for a new episode of this show. Also be sure to check back with Poker News Daily throughout your day to find out the latest in poker news. I’m Sean Gibson hoping you have an amazing week at the tables!
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid Supports Online Poker Legislation
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) had long been on the fence regarding the legalization of online poker in the States. But when Reid sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke asking for a delay for the enforcement of Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) regulations in November of last year, it became clear that the influential politician was becoming more favorable toward poker on the internet.
This week, Reid showed even more support of online poker in the state of Nevada. According to the Reno Gazette-Journal newspaper, Reid claimed he would support the legalization of online poker in the United States during an August 16 meeting at the Atlantis Casino Resort Spa. Reid also stated he would not support any other form of online gaming, including sports betting.
The news was disconcerting to Nevada gaming executives, who fear that the legalization of online poker will result in a major loss of customers in brick-and-mortar casinos.
“It (online poker) is just the tip of the iceberg and could open up this state to more online gaming,” said Bill Hughes, the Marketing Director of Peppermill, to the Reno Gazette-Journal. “It will only draw more money out of this state, from our poker rooms and eventually other facilities.”
Reid has stated that he would not support anything that hurts Nevada jobs, but the Senate Majority Leader will play a huge role in whether online poker is legalized. The House Financial Services Committee passed HR 2267, the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, in July and the bill is currently waiting on a vote by the full House. HR 2267 would effectively legalize online poker, overturning a 2006 law that bars offshore sites from accepting money from U.S. bettors.
Congress is on summer recess until September 8, at which point Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) hopes the House Ways and Means Committee will mark up their tax companion bill, HR 4976, and bring both measures to the floor.
Meanwhile, gaming properties in Nevada, such as Harrah’s Entertainment and MGM Resorts International, are in the process of developing strategies to monetize the legalization of internet gaming. With the future of sites like PokerStars, UB.com, and Full Tilt Poker up in the air following the markup amendments of HR 2267, people like Jan Jones, Harrah’s Senior Vice President for Communications and Government Relations, seem to think online poker would improve Nevada’s gaming market.
“If you look at the businesses that are surviving today, they approach their customers in three ways,” Jones told the Gazette-Journal. “One is brick and mortar. One is direct marketing sales, and the other is the internet.
“The businesses that have not done that have gone out of business. Look at record stores. Look at newspapers. In the gaming industry, we need to realize, where are the X-Y generation customers? They are all on the internet. That is where they play. That is where they congregate, and if we don’t leverage the internet, then we run the risk of becoming an old person’s entertainment.”
Stay tuned to Poker News Daily for the latest news on Capitol Hill.
Poker Players Alliance Comments on Commerce Casino HR 2267 Stance
Recently, the Poker Players Alliance (PPA), the main lobbying force for the poker industry, launched a petition at PlayersBeforeProfits.com to reverse the Commerce Casino’s stance on critical internet gambling legislation. HR 2267, dubbed the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, was successfully marked up in the House Financial Services Committee last month and now waits for its time to be debated in Congress.
Nearly 7,000 players had signed the online petition at the time of writing and the PPA was shooting for 10,000. The push came as a result of an action alert sent by the PPA to its members and followed testimony in the House Financial Services Committee from the Commerce Casino’s Tom Malkasian. His testimony claimed in part that HR 2267 is “based on false revenue assumptions that would require removal of the right of any state or tribe to opt out of the bill in order to achieve the advertised tax revenue of $42 billion over ten years.”
Malkasian also highlighted that allowing illegal operators to receive licenses under HR 2267 equates to “locking in unprecedented market advantages that can undermine and destabilize the land-based casino gaming industry.” He also voiced concerns over HR 2267 conflicting with tribal compacts and allowing internet gambling sites to be located outside of the United States. The latter three concerns were each addressed during markup as part of a dozen amendments tacked onto the bill.
PPA Executive Director John Pappas told Poker News Daily, “They don’t want to compete with existing online operators or Harrah’s or Wynn or Google or anyone else who may get involved in internet gambling. They prefer to have their own fiefdom in California… A lot of lawmakers went out of their way to address their concerns via amendments, yet they still continue to oppose the bill.”
The PPA’s action alert merely called for players to contact the Commerce and express their disappointment with the casino’s stance towards the sweeping internet gambling legislation. Players took it upon themselves to suggest a boycott, which the PPA did not initially ask for. Pappas explained, “We felt that poker players can make those types of decisions on their own. We want to reserve a boycott and I don’t think it’s something we intended to call for. Should the Commerce continue to be obstinate, then we might revise our stance there.”
Pappas questioned why the Commerce wouldn’t be content to apply for a license under HR 2267 if the bill were to become law. The PPA’s main face speculated, “For a long time, they dominated the poker scene in California and they feel entitled to California’s online poker players’ money. Maybe they don’t feel that they’re as strong and won’t be able to compete.” On Friday night, Commerce Casino officials distributed a press release claiming support from the Bicycle Casino, Hawaiian Gardens Casino, and Hollywood Park Casino in opposition to Congressman Barney Frank’s bill.
As part of his House Financial Services Committee testimony, Malkasian likened legalizing internet gambling to legalizing marijuana, a comparison Pappas did not look kindly upon: “In essence, they’re calling the pro players endorsing sites drug dealers. That would offend me, especially when it comes from our purported friends. It wouldn’t have been shocking if it were from Focus on the Family or Congressman Bob Goodlatte, but when it’s coming from a supposed friend of poker because it doesn’t fit their business model, of course we’ll voice our concern.”
After an internal debate on the proper course of action, the PPA launched PlayersBeforeProfits.com. “We came to a decision after hearing from so many of our members,” Pappas told Poker News Daily. “We felt obligated to inform our members about it. Our goal is to get 10,000 signatures. We’ll go back to the Commerce and see if they’ve revaluated their position after we do.”
Stay tuned to Poker News Daily for the latest legislative developments.
Bicycle Casino, Hawaiian Gardens, Hollywood Park Side with Commerce
Let the battle lines be drawn. Several days after the Poker Players Alliance (PPA) issued a petition to reverse the Commerce Casino’s stance against pro-internet gambling legislation in the United States, more casinos have come onboard to strike down the bill.
In a letter issued to the press late Friday night from Commerce Casino Board members Tom Malkasian and Haig Papaian, it was revealed that the Bicycle Casino, Hawaiian Gardens, and Hollywood Park also oppose Congressman Barney Frank’s (D-MA) HR 2267. None of the three additional casinos was quoted in any way.
Calling industry lobbying groups like the PPA “special interest groups receiving funds from illegal offshore gaming operators,” Malkasian and Papaian assert, “Poker players deserve to know the real facts so let us be clear: We support online poker and we are working hard to make sure it will benefit all Americans. America’s poker community should be united in opposing the Frank legislation that would ship jobs, revenue, and taxes beyond our communities. We need to work together to keep American dollars at home.”
The authors of the letter claim to employ more than 20,000 workers in California, a state that has been hit with a massive budget shortfall. It also cites a 2008 study from the California Public Policy institute saying that 70% of California residents use the internet and “according to another study in 2009, Californians wager an estimated $13.4 billion annually. That makes California the largest internet gaming market in the world, and without state legislation to protect it, critically-needed billions will be captured by offshore and out-of-state operators never to return.”
On Friday, PPA Executive Director John Pappas told Poker News Daily that 6,000 players had signed an online petition found at PlayersBeforeProfits.com to reverse the Commerce Casino’s stance. The organization was gunning for 10,000 names in total.
In response to the press release from the Commerce Casino Board members, UB.com pro Annie Duke chided via Twitter, “Your press release might be more credible if you got the bill number correct. It’s HR 2267.” The press release cites the Commerce Casino’s opposition to HR 4976, the tax companion bill to HR 2267 proposed by Congressman Jim McDermott (D-WA). However, Malkasian’s testimony in front of the House Financial Services Committee last month was wholeheartedly against Frank’s HR 2267.
In reaction to the harsh opposition set forth by the Commerce Casino, Pappas commented, “There are requirements in HR 2267 that companies set up at least 50% of their operations in the United States. On their concern of illegal operators, anyone who has been operating illegally won’t be able to get a license. It’s pretty clear their only concern is that they don’t want to compete.” A dozen amendments were added to HR 2267 in a markup hearing held one month ago to the day addressing many of the Commerce Casino’s concerns.
The Commerce Casino’s statements wraps up by saying, “We strongly support poker-only legislation. California lawmakers should be the first to bring an illegal enterprise under legal supervision, provide needed consumer protections, and capture revenue that can benefit our state first.” An e-mail address of supportonlinepoker@commercecasino.net is given for players looking for additional information.
Among the 6,000 poker players that have signed the PPA’s online petition are Patrik Antonius, Tom Dwan, Phil Ivey, John Juanda, Erick Lindgren, Joe Sebok, and new PokerStars pro David Williams. All that’s required to sign is your name, city, and state. The PPA has even gone so far as to provide an avenue for players to Tweet the Commerce Casino automatically. Alternately, you can leave your telephone number and the PPA will personally patch you through to the Commerce Casino.
The addition of the Bike, Hawaiian Gardens, and Hollywood Park may open the rift even further between online poker players seeking legislation and the brick-and-mortar casinos they placate. Calls for a boycott of the Commerce have surfaced and many of the aforementioned “illegal offshore gaming operators” sponsor pros like Ivey, Duke, and Sebok through their dot-net counterparts. The Bike and Commerce both hold World Poker Tour events, with the former fresh off crowning a champion in the Legends of Poker.
Stay tuned to Poker News Daily on Sunday for an exclusive response from Pappas.
Top Poker Pros Unite Against Commerce Casino Stance On Poker Regulation
Reacting to testimony by the vice chairman of the board of the Commerce Casino during hearings about online poker regulation in Congress, several top poker pros have taken on a protest of the card room.
During hearings in July in front of the House Financial Services Committee regarding HR 2267 – the bill Massachusetts’ Representative Barney Frank introduced called the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act – Tom Malkasian, who identified himself during his testimony as “an owner, board member and director of strategic planning of the Commerce Casino,” came out with a surprising opinion of the proposed law. In his testimony to the committee, he firmly stated, “I must testify in strong opposition to HR 2267 and urge Members of the Committee to vote against it, barring numerous and significant changes.”
Malkasian detailed in his testimony his opposition to the proposed law on several fronts. He first took on the proposed revenues that the law would bring in, saying that they were “built on false assumptions and conflicting representations.” He cites that some studies looked at the basis of operations for online gaming sites would be located in the United States, something that isn’t guaranteed in HR 2267. Malkasian looks at details demonstrating possible conflict regarding states opting in or out of the regulatory guidelines, leaving to question the actual revenues earned. Finally, Malkasian states that the regulatory framework is inadequate for the job at hand.
Malkasian’s testimony has riled many in the professional ranks of poker, to the extent of announcing a potential boycott of one of the top card rooms in California. The furor has reached a point that there is an actual website – called PlayersBeforeProfits.com – that people can visit to sign a petition. The site has also issued an “open letter” to the Commerce Casino to change its stance on HR 2267.
The letter states, “As dedicated poker players, both online and live, both professional and amateur, we are extremely disappointed in the position Commerce Casino has taken in opposition to federal legislation to license and regulate online poker. Your opposition puts your narrow corporate interests ahead of the interests of America’s poker players.”
The open letter goes on to tout the benefits of HR 2267, including the creation of “a U.S. regulated online poker framework in this country, requiring all online poker sites to measure up to strict safety and consumer protection standards – requirements that do not exist today. More importantly, this bill will create an open and competitive market, giving players a choice of many sites on which to play against others from across the country and the world.”
The statement finishes by saying, “It is disheartening that one of our own in the poker community is opposing good public policy that will keep players safe and preserve our rights to play poker online. We strongly urge Commerce Casino to support America’s poker players. Please change your position on HR 2267.”
The letter, which has been endorsed by nearly 1,100 people at the time of writing and signed by top pros such as former World Champions Doyle Brunson, Chris Ferguson and Greg Raymer, and players as diverse as “Poker After Dark” creator Mori Eskandani and online phenom Tom “durrrr” Dwan, has spurred reaction on several fronts. Through their Twitter feeds, several pros have also been ratcheting up the heat on the Commerce Casino to the point of a discussed boycott.
Poker News Daily guest columnist Annie Duke has been quite vocal over Twitter, saying “I and some other pros are boycotting them as well. I will give my business to a place that supports the players.” Rafe Furst sounded off on the controversy by Tweeting, “Tell @CommerceCasino to support poker players and change their position & support HR2267 – the online poker bill.” Daniel Negreanu waded into the waters as well by tweeting, “Boo @CommerceCasino testified against the online poker bill. Tell them to put players before profits & support HR 2267.”
Poker News Daily contacted the Commerce Casino and was told by an unnamed spokesperson that “a statement about the situation” would be forthcoming.
FBI Seizes $13.3 Million From Online Poker Processors
The owner of two payment processors for online poker sites has agreed to forfeit $13.3 million seized by the FBI in June of last year. Ahmad Khawaja, together with his two firms, Allied Systems and Allied Wallet, reached a civil settlement with the U.S. Government this week in order to keep from getting into further legal trouble.
Khawaja’s two payment processors were at the forefront a federal case involving online gambling fund transfers. Allied Wallet and Allied Systems actively processed funds to players from sites such as PokerStars, the world’s biggest online poker site. The companies also transferred money from outside the U.S. through wire transfers from people who understood that the money was being exchanged as part of the gambling operation.
According to a civil forfeiture complaint by the U.S. Government, the funds constituted proceeds of operating an illegal gambling business that were deposited between January 2009 and May 2009 in an account at Goldwater Bank in Scottsdale, Arizona. Those funds were traceable to PokerStars and other offshore online gambling companies, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation confiscated all $13.3 million at Goldwater Bank in June 2009.
The government has not bothered offshore online gambling sites since the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) was signed into law, instead primarily focusing its efforts on the payment processors that are aiding in completing the financial transactions. PokerStars wasn’t pleased when word of the settlement between Khawaja and the government was released.
“PokerStars does not condone efforts by processors to conceal the nature or purpose of funds used to play online poker,” a spokesperson for PokerStars said. “PokerStars has taken steps to ensure that processors properly disclose the nature of their business to their relevant financial institutions.”
Payment processors like Khawaja’s are being watched even more closely since the UIGEA’s regulations went into effect in June of this year. The law, passed in 2006, aims to stop online gambling by preventing credit card companies and banks from processing fund transfers for unlawful internet gambling. The fight to regulate online poker in the U.S. took a big step last month with the passage of Barney Frank’s H.R. 2267, the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act. However, there’s still a long climb ahead in order to turn the bill into a law, leaving sites like PokerStars concerned in the meantime.
Even if legislation were to pass, there’s no guarantee PokerStars would even be allowed to conduct business in the U.S. One of the amendments added to the legislation during the markup phase was that any company that that has illegally done business in the U.S. would be prohibited from getting a license to operate in the States. PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, and UB.com would fall under that category and likely be forced out of the U.S. gaming market if that amendment held up.
Stay tuned to Poker News Daily for the latest from Capitol Hill.
Kentucky Internet Gambling Lawsuit Amended to Include Party Gaming
In late March, the Commonwealth of Kentucky filed suit against Pocket Kings, the purported operators of Full Tilt Poker, seeking the amount of money lost by state residents between March 2005 and September 2009. Now, the complaint has been amended to include Party Gaming, which recently announced a merger with bwin.
Reacting to the news that Party Gaming, whose online poker site PartyPoker hasn’t accepted real money wagers from U.S. residents since 2006, was singled out was Interactive Media Entertainment and Gaming Association (iMEGA) Chairman Joe Brennan. iMEGA has been at the forefront of the fight to protect 141 internet gambling domain names that were seized two years ago in a separate legal battle and may ultimately face forfeiture. The case is pending in the Kentucky Supreme Court.
Brennan told Poker News Daily on Thursday, “This is a last minute ploy by the Commonwealth to try to force a settlement. I think they named Party because the company is engaged in a merger and they’re trying to use that to get money out of them. They’re probably trying to get Party to pay out some cash settlement. Party has been around for a while and nothing has changed other than they’re trying to undergo a merger.” Gambling911 reported that Kentucky attorneys are seeking funds lost by state residents between August 2005 and October 2006.
PartyPoker, whose parent company is publicly traded on the London Stock Exchange, vacated the U.S. market in 2006 after the passage of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA). Attorney Jeff Ifrah speculated, “It’s unclear how long the Commonwealth has been researching the viability of claims against anyone. They may have been looking at Party for a while now, even before the merger announcement. They were certainly looking at them last year when they started thinking about putting a complaint together.”
Party Gaming has already signed a non-prosecution agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice and one of its co-founders, Anurag Dikshit, faces sentencing later this year after admitting Wire Act violations. Doubting the success of Kentucky’s case against Party Gaming was Ifrah, who told Poker News Daily, “In their complaint against Party, they continue to omit any reference to any specific loser. They’ve made broad references to losers and broad references to Kentucky residents, but there’s still no proof. They’re hoping a judge will grant them discovery.”
PartyPoker was once the largest online poker site in the world and, when it departed the U.S. market in 2006, was in the midst of its Monster promotion. According to PokerScout.com, PartyPoker boasts a seven-day running average of 3,350 real money ring game players and is the third largest site worldwide behind PokerStars and Full Tilt. PartyPoker ranks just ahead of Playtech’s iPoker Network and features World Poker Tour host Mike Sexton, “High Stakes Poker” hostess Kara Scott, and bad boy Tony G as its sponsored pros.
Brennan summed up the news by calling out Kentucky’s attorneys, who are allegedly working on a contingency basis: “It is the plaintiff’s attorneys who have now used the name of the Commonwealth of Kentucky to try to blackmail Party Gaming and use the occasion of their merger as an opportunity to get some sort of settlement out of them. It’s about as contemptible and reprehensible as anything I can imagine.”
Curiously, PartyPoker was not named in the original lawsuit seeking the forfeiture of 141 domain names, including those belonging to PokerStars, Absolute Poker, UB.com, and Full Tilt.
Party Gaming likely won’t reenter the U.S. market until a full licensing and regulatory framework is in place. A bill proposed by Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) would do just that and passed out of the House Financial Services Committee two weeks ago. However, with the current Congressional session quickly coming to an end, its future appears to be in doubt. The bill, numbered HR 2267, boasts 70 co-sponsors.
Tags: 2009, 2011, absolute poker, Barney Frank, high stakes, kara scott, legal, Online Poker, pokerstars
NFL Drops Opposition to Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection and Enforcement Act
Tags: Barney Frank
Will HR 2267 Be Beneficial for Washington State Players?
HR 2267, Congressman Barney Frank’s (D-MA) Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, made it out of the House Financial Services Committee in late July. Across the United States, online poker players have been wading through the bill’s language and dozen-plus amendments to comprehend what the lay of the land will be should it become law.
In Washington State, playing online poker is a Class C felony. HR 2267, contrastingly, creates a Federally approved licensing and regulatory regime and would give each state one full legislative session to opt out. Accordingly, if Washington State elected not to opt out of the bill, online poker players could be returning to the felts in droves.
Poker Players Alliance (PPA) Washington State Director Lee Rousso told PocketFives.com in a post last week, “Washington could opt out of HR 2267. It is a flaw in the bill that the opt-out can be communicated by the governor. It would have been a better bill if legislative action were required to opt-out. It is not even clear that a legislative act could force the governor to opt-in.” Therefore, opting out of HR 2267 appears to be a simple task. However, whether government officials in Washington State would do so remains to be seen.
Rousso, who has been fighting a legal battle to overturn the statute that makes playing online poker a felony, added, “In spite of these concerns, I think it is more likely that Washington would not opt-out. Although Governor Gregoire claims to be opposed to gambling, it is also true that she has never met a tax that she did not like. Once internet poker has the Federal seal of approval, it is far more likely that Washington would tax it rather than ban it.”
HR 2267’s tax companion bill, Congressman Jim McDermott’s (D-WA) HR 4976, prescribes that states and tribal governments can extract 6% of deposits made onto licensed internet gambling sites. McDermott, whose home state imposes the harshest penalty in the country for playing internet poker, also proposed a 2% Federal tax in his bill. Both revenue measures would help to eradicate massive budget shortfalls that have plagued states and the U.S. Government.
During the July 28th markup hearing of HR 2267, Congressman Joe Baca (D-CA) proposed an amendment that would have required states and tribes to opt into the internet gambling scheme rather than opt out. Supporting the amendment was Ranking Member Spencer Bachus (R-AL), who told his fellow lawmakers, “An opt-in is stronger than an opt-out. If we’re going to legalize gambling on every iPod in America… it sweeps away all state laws.”
Frank responded by asserting, “You’re setting a dangerous precedent that your use of the internet is subject to state law.” Frank added that he believed Baca supported gambling, but wanted to protect those who engage in it in California from competition. Congressman Dan Maffei (D-NY) supported the idea that Baca’s amendment was simply a way to kill the bill: “You would have just a crazy quilt system if you had states decide whether to opt in or out. If we were to approve [Baca’s amendment], it would be a stealth way of gutting the bill.”
In May, the PPA staged a rally on the steps of the Washington State Supreme Court in Olympia following Rousso’s testimony there. Rousso primarily argued that the bill making online poker a Class C felony violates the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution because it protects in-state interests from out-of-state competition. Rousso told Poker News Daily that month, “The Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution doesn’t allow that. I think it’s clear that online poker is international commerce, which means the states can’t regulate it.”
Stay tuned to Poker News Daily for the latest legislative headlines.
Atlantic City Hosts New Jersey Gambling Summit
On Friday, a “who’s who” in the New Jersey gambling world turned out to the Atlantic City Convention Center. The topic: how to rejuvenate the city’s fledgling casinos and, at the same time, preserve the storied horse racing industry in the northern part of the state.
On July 21st, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie released a plan to resurrect an industry that has come under fire in part due to competition in neighboring states like Delaware and Pennsylvania. A Philadelphia Inquirer story published on Saturday morning detailed Christie’s economic plans: “It calls for the creation of a state-controlled Atlantic City Tourism District, streamlining casino regulations, keeping all gaming revenue collected by the Casino Reinvestment Development Authority in Atlantic City, and better marketing of the city as a brand, among other things.”
Economists, representatives of organized labor, and other key industry leaders gathered in South Jersey on Friday. Among them was Interactive Media Entertainment and Gaming Association (iMEGA) Chairman Joe Brennan, who told Poker News Daily about the attendees’ reaction to a possible intrastate internet gambling framework: “There wasn’t one sense either way. The bigger issue was North Jersey versus South Jersey economic developments issues. The question: How do we save the horse racing industry in the North and preserve the gaming enterprises in the South?”
An intrastate internet gambling bill proposed by State Senator Raymond Lesniak has been voted out of a New Jersey Senate committee. However, it has yet to be discussed by the state’s assembly. Brennan noted that revenues from licensed intrastate gambling outfits could be used to fund purses at racetracks like Monmouth Park in Oceanport and the Meadowlands Racetrack in East Rutherford.
According to the Inquirer, New Jersey State Senator Paul Sarlo commented on Friday, “Instead of new casinos in other states, why not a new world-class casino in the shadow of New York? We could keep the revenues in New Jersey.” Also speaking on Friday were Mark Juliano, CEO of Trump Entertainment Resorts, and Melanie Brenner of the Poker Voters of America.
Lesniak’s bill will not be deemed “dead” at the end of the year like Congressman Barney Frank’s HR 2267 will be on Capitol Hill. Instead, New Jersey terms aren’t expiring in 2010, leaving the door open for future discussion of the intrastate internet gambling measure. Brennan explained, “Today’s event was made up of the political leadership of the legislature weighing in on the bill, so I’d say it has pretty good prospects.”
According to a separate Inquirer story, about 300 people made their way to Atlantic City on Friday. In addition to monitoring Lesniak’s bill, iMEGA has been heavily involved in the push to bring sports betting to New Jersey as a way to boost revenues. In the opening days of June, Lesniak’s bill was approved out of the New Jersey Senate Wagering and Tourism Committee by a 3:1 margin.
To support the bill, iMEGA commissioned a study by Econsult that revealed up to 1,900 jobs could be created by the addition of intrastate internet gambling. In addition, Lesniak’s bill could result in up to $250 million in annual gross gaming revenue and up to $55 million in annual state tax revenue. Brennan explained in a June press release, “Being an engine for real job creation and attracting investment, and the opportunity to be the global hub for a high-tech industry is a much more meaningful opportunity for legislators to consider.”
Stay tuned to Poker News Daily for the latest from New Jersey.
August 4th – Daily Deal
Hello, I’m Sean Gibson and welcome to this express edition of the Daily Deal by Poker News Daily.
In breaking news from Cake Poker, the site will release an update to the new client in the near future to fix a potentially hazardous security issue. According to Cake Poker Card Room Manager Lee Jones, the fix implements OpenSSL into all client-server communication. On Tuesday night, the old Cake Poker client received the update correcting the security flaw.
PokerTableRatings.com, which first reported the security vulnerability on July 26th, has promised to take the new version’s updated Beta client for a test drive. The Cake Poker Network used an XOR-based encryption similar to the security issue experienced on the CEREUS Network back in May. PokerTableRatings.com noted that Cake Poker Network skins like DoylesRoom and Bruce Poker have not yet received an update.
On Tuesday night, the 2010 World Series of Poker Tournament of Champions aired on ESPN. This week marked the last preliminary tournament leading up to the Main Event, which will begin next Tuesday at eight P-M Eastern Time. Huck Seed defeated Full Tilt Poker’s Howard Lederer in the finale of the Tournament of Champions and banked five-hundred thousand dollars. The tournament appeared on the WSOP slate for the first time since 2006, when Mike Sexton beat Daniel Negreanu for the title.
Finally, online poker players have been celebrating the passage of H-R two-two-six-seven by the House Financial Services Committee last week. However, now that the House is out of session for its summer recess, what will the future of the bill be?
PND asked Poker Players Alliance Executive Director John Pappas what we can expect. He responded,
“What Barney Frank indicated in the committee hearing last week was that his intent was to move HR two-two-six-seven simultaneously with the revenue bill in the Ways and Means Committee. In September, we hope to have the Ways and Means Committee mark up their bill and bring both bills to the floor.”
Less optimistic was Interactive Media Entertainment and Gaming Association Chairman Joe Brennan, who told PND, “Frank’s bill has no companion bill in the Senate. All of these amendments were thrown in and it’s a bill that doesn’t have a chance of passing before the end of this Congress.”
Congress returns to Capitol Hill on September tenth.
That does it for this express edition of The Daily Deal, and as always be sure to check back with us all day long for the latest in poker news. This is Sean Gibson reporting for Poker News Daily dot com.
Future of Barney Frank Online Poker Bill Unclear
Last week, online poker players across the United States watched as HR 2267 passed out of the House Financial Services Committee by a 2:1 margin, 41-22. The winds of change are clearly in the air, but how long will the internet poker world wait until regulation finally comes to fruition?
Among those ardently working on Capitol Hill is Poker Players Alliance (PPA) Executive Director John Pappas, who told Poker News Daily on Tuesday that he was elated to see the somewhat bipartisan support for HR 2267: “I was really pleased with the overwhelming majority and the bipartisan support for the legislation. If you look back just four short years ago, the House passed an Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA)-like prohibition by a wide margin. Just two years ago, we had a bill defeated on a 32-32 stalemate. Now, we have a pro-internet poker bill that passed by a 2:1 margin.”
Time is quickly running out on the 2010 legislative session, with less than a month remaining for Congress to act. The lawmaking body is on summer recess until September 10th and has a target adjournment of October 8th for general elections. Pappas shared the PPA’s timeline for action: “What Barney Frank (D-MA) indicated in the committee hearing last week was that his intent was to move HR 2267 simultaneously with the revenue bill in the Ways and Means Committee. In September, we hope to have the Ways and Means Committee mark up their bill and bring both bills to the floor.”
The revenue companion bill to Frank’s HR 2267 is HR 4976, introduced by Congressman Jim McDermott (D-WA). It was discussed in the House Ways and Means Committee in May and boasts four co-sponsors. Meanwhile, HR 2267 lacks a supported counterpart in the Senate, where Senator Robert Menendez’s (D-NJ) S 1597 has not been discussed in any committee and offers no co-sponsors.
Among the various amendments added to HR 2267 last week included one by Congressman Brad Sherman (D-CA) forbidding those internet gambling sites operating illegally in the United States now from receiving licenses. The inclusion has raised the question as to whether rooms like PokerStars and Full Tilt will exist in a regulated regime. Pappas speculated, “Most of the online poker sites have well-reasoned legal opinions that say they’re not operating in violation of any Federal law. It’s hard to prove that someone is operating illegally if you haven’t convicted or indicted anyone. How can they be considered illegal if they continue to operate without any legal repercussions?”
Not optimistic about HR 2267’s chances of becoming law before the end of the legislative session was Interactive Media Entertainment and Gaming Association (iMEGA) Chairman Joe Brennan, who told Poker News Daily, “Frank’s bill has no companion bill in the Senate. All of these amendments were thrown in and it’s a bill that doesn’t have a chance of passing before the end of this Congress.”
Brennan also questioned whether the 14 amendments added to HR 2267 increased its chances of approval in the House: “On the face of it, it was a difficult bill made even more difficult by all of those amendments. The post-markup bill is something that anyone who is in the industry now should be concerned about. It’s so nakedly tilted away from current operators to establish a standard for individuals and companies as far as licensure.”
An amendment proposed by Ranking Member Spencer Bachus (R-AL) and Michele Bachmann (R-MN) prohibits anyone who has “knowingly participated in, or should have known they were participating in, any illegal internet gambling activity” on or since the passage of the UIGEA in 2006 from receiving a license. Consequently, how the clause is enacted will play a major role in determining who is able to serve the U.S. market. Companies like Party Gaming, for example, have signed non-prosecution agreements with the U.S. Department of Justice.
Pappas added that the PPA has seen a spike in donations since the markup hearing. Read our complete recap of the HR 2267 markup.
Internet Gambling Legislation: What’s Next
July 30th – Daily Deal
Topics: HR 2267, statement from Alfonse D’Amato, bwin/PartyGaming merger and Vegas Casinos headed to the auction block.
Coming up on the Daily Deal, we’ll continue the discussion about the house committee passing HR 2267, get a statement from the PPA’s Alfonse D’Amato, find out which two poker superpowers are merging, and find out which vegas casinos are headed for the auction block.
Hello, I’m Sean Gibson and welcome to the Daily Deal by Poker News Daily. We start once again with news out of Washington, as the victory celebration continues for poker. Thanks to the work of Barney Frank and the Poker Players Alliance, progress was made with the committee passing of HR 2267. It might just be a first step in a long journey to get online poker legalized in the United States, but at this point many are very encouraged with the progress. The bill is now heading to the House of Representatives for a majority vote. Alfonse D’Amato, chairman of the PPA said,
“Congress has a choice — it can license and regulate it to provide government oversight and consumer protections, or our lawmakers can stick their heads in the sand, ignore it, and leave consumers to play on non-U.S. regulated websites in all 50 states. I’m glad the Financial Services Committee today overwhelmingly chose to act and protect Americans as well as preserve the fundamental freedoms of adults and the Internet.”
Big news out of Europe as a long rumored merger in the online gaming industry was revealed when Austrian based BWIN and Gibraltar based PartyGaming announced their merger. The pact is expected to be completed by the first quarter of two thousand eleven and will create the largest publically traded online gaming conglomerate in the industry. According to Gaming Intelligence, the two companies combined to earn six hundred and eight two million euros in 2009. The merger does have some roadblocks left to clear, one of which is approval of seventy five percent of each company’s stock holders. Stock prices of both companies saw sharp increases in value once the announcement was made.
News out of Vegas tells us after months of legal troubles, Station Casinos filed papers indicating that it has reached a settlement with a group to keep the company afloat and out of bankruptcy. Some of the properties include the Red Rock Resort and Boulder and Palace Station. Another eleven of Station’s properties are going to go up for auction next week.
Well that does it for today’s edition of The Daily deal and we thank you for tuning in. Be sure to follow us at twitter dot come slash poker news daily and come back to our site for the latest poker news and interviews. I’m sean Gibson wishing you a fantastic poker weekend!
Tags: 2009, Barney Frank, interview, legal, Online Poker, poker player, Poker Players Alliance, usa, vegas
What Might Poker Boom II Look Like?
With Barney Frank’s Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act finally passing in the House Financial Services Committee this week, dreams of fully legal and regulated online poker have been revived in the poker community. Sure, there are some people who would prefer the status quo (and these people are mistaken, but that’s a whole other discussion), but most look at the 41-22 vote, despite the bill’s flaws, as a very positive step in the right direction. There is a long way to go in the legislative process, but if we eventually do see the United States market open up for legal online poker, what will things look like? What follows is my little brainstorm on what we might be able to expect and not expect from a potential Poker Boom II.
Fish Population
Most people expect that if the flood gates open to the U.S., millions upon millions of American fish will flood the poker waterways. We will return to the Golden Age of poker, circa 2004-2005, when it seemed like everyone was terrible at the game and profits could flow in for solid players as easily as water comes out of the tap.
I don’t really see this happening. To an extent, yes, but not as much as some like to fantasize. Naturally, if poker becomes completely legal in the U.S., there will be a significant initial injection of casual players who were afraid to play when it was “illegal.” They will also be encouraged to play since getting money to and from the sites will be easier. So, yes, games will likely become softer, at least for a while. But we won’t see pre-UIGEA fish levels. Why? Mainly because even the fish are more skilled today than they were six or seven years ago. Keep in mind that before the poker renaissance, Fixed-Limit Hold’em was much more popular than No-Limit Hold’em. Much of the poker population was new to No-Limit, so as No-Limit became the game of choice, the average skill level was fairly low. Obviously, there will be plenty of new and poor poker players in Poker Boom II, but on average, the skill level of the population will be higher than it was back in the day because of all of the educational tools we now have at our disposal.
Poker Room Competition
I have no doubt that, unless the costs are insanely prohibitive, that all of the poker rooms and networks that have stayed out of the U.S. market will jump right back in should poker become 100 percent legal. And I think we all know that the U.S.-based brick and mortar gambling firms will be the first in line for licenses. There is some question right now as to whether the big players like PokerStars and Full Tilt will be allowed to stay in the game, but my guess is that they will be major players one way or another. So, there should be a lot of competition, at least in the early going.
I predict, though (and I have no evidence to support this), that some of the smaller existing rooms/networks and, maybe even some of the bigger ones, will join up with the land-based American casino giants. It might just be a partnership, with the online poker room providing its technology and customers and the American company providing the U.S.-base of operations, “respected” name, and fast-track to a license. It could also be in the form of an American firm buying one of the online rooms as a quick way to get up and running.
In the long run, therefore, competition may narrow a bit (understanding that other new poker rooms will likely sprout up, too). And that’s not a bad thing. Competition is great. It is a catalyst for creativity, innovation, and progress, and gives customers choices. But in all honesty, I don’t know if I want too much competition in online poker, as it has the potential to split up the player base. One nice thing about online poker is that we can play on more than one site simultaneously, but with players so beholden to rakeback nowadays, it seems that more people stick to just one or two rooms so they can build up rakeback and rewards, rather than playing at whichever rooms have the best games or promos at any given time. I’d rather have a handful of large rooms competing hard against each other than scads of smaller rooms trying to eke out an existence.
Bonuses
Remember when the likes of Party Poker and the Prima (now Microgaming) rooms routinely offered sweet deposit and reload bonuses several years ago? Those easy-to-earn, high value bonuses were my ticket to a growing bankroll. I do think that when the U.S. market opens up and the poker rooms roll in, there will be a lot of big bonuses offered as they all try to fight for our funds, but the days of the half-hour, $200 bonus are over. The poker rooms wised up a while back, realizing that they could offer high dollar amount bonuses and attract customers, but make them fairly difficult to earn, especially for low stakes players. I don’t think this will change. We might see some player-friendly bonuses early on, but I don’t think they will last.
Rake
One of the biggest fears poker players have about legalized and regulated internet poker is the taxes that will be imposed on the poker rooms will be passed through to the players in the form of higher rake. I don’t believe this will happen, and if it does, it will be very minor. I admittedly don’t have any numbers in front of me to back this up, but it makes sense to me that the poker rooms will save enough money from the reduced expenses of funds processing to make up for the potentially higher costs from taxes. Right now, online poker money processing is messy; poker rooms have to constantly look for new processors to skirt U.S. regulations and these processors likely aren’t as cheap as they once were. The poker rooms would probably be more than willing to pay a gaming tax if it meant slashing payment processing costs.
BLOG – A Response to Senator Spencer Bachus
July 29th – Daily Deal
Special Edition recap of H.R. 2267 passing in committee hearing.
On today’s edition of The Daily Deal, we have a special edition for you today. We’ll recap yesterday’s huge victory for poker in the United States, find out what amendments were added and find out what’s next for the bill.
Hello, I’m Sean Gibson and welcome to The Daily Deal, brought to you by Poker News Daily. There is big news out of Washington as the house financial services committee met on Wednesday to discuss HR 2267. The bill, introduced by Barney Frank, calls for internet gambling regulation, consumer protection and enforcement. Many representatives were on hand to file amendments and make their voices heard. After several hours of debate, the bill was passed by a vote of forty-one to twenty-two. This marks the first of what will be many steps to be taken in order to regulate and fully legalize online poker in the United States.
The committee began discussion on provisions of the bill in the markup phase, which is where a congressional committee makes changes to a bill before it is voted on. Now that it has passed that step, it will go to the House of Representatives for another vote. Should it receive a majority vote there, it would then be passed along to the Senate for another majority vote, before being signed into law by the President.
Several amendments were made to HR 2267 on Wednesday, with each being handled invidiually and voted on by the representatives in attendance. Thirteen amendments passed, with the first being that sites that have intentionally broken internet gaming laws will be forbidden to get licenses in the United States. Other amendments include many that protect minors from being solicited via email or advertisements while others force all facilities of licensees that operate do so completely within the borders of the United States.
This marks a huge victory for the poker industry and those that want to enjoy the freedom of playing legally in the United States. Although it is just the first of many steps, the overwhelming margin of victory for the bill is a good indicator of its potential in congress.
The Poker players alliance, led by executive director John Pappas said,
“We commend the lawmakers who helped make H.R. 2267 stronger through a variety of consumer protection mandates … we thank Representatives John Campbell, Mary Jo Kilroy, and Melissa Bean for their thoughtful additions to the bill and their interest in preserving the rights of adult poker players in their districts.”
PokerStars has come out in support of HR 2267, despite the first amendment to the bill which might prevent them from doing business. It is pokerstars’s stance that they have been operating legally, and therefore, not affected by that first amendment. Whether that is true or not, and whether the bill is passed or not, remains to be seen.
Thanks for joining us for this special edition of the daily deal and as always you can follow us at twitter or bookmark our site for our daily updates. I’m sean gibson wishing you deep runs in all your tournaments!
Poker Players Alliance Reacts to Passage of HR 2267
The tireless work of Rep. Barney Frank and the Poker Players Alliance finally made some progress Wednesday as HR 2267, the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, passed the House Financial Services Committee by a vote of 41-22. The result can be viewed as a small but important victory for the poker community, on a battle that has been fought over and over again on Capitol Hill over the past few years.
The bill, which could ultimately lead to the legality and regulation of online poker in the States, will now be sent to the House of Representatives for more amendments and a majority vote. Should the bill get the majority vote from the House of Representatives, it would then be passed along to the Senate for another majority vote, before being signed into law by the President.
Wednesday’s win was just the first of many in order to regulate online poker in the United States, but the PPA was very encouraged by the result.
“The fact is, online poker is not going away,” said Alfonse D’Amato, chairman of the PPA. “Congress has a choice — it can license and regulate it to provide government oversight and consumer protections, or our lawmakers can stick their heads in the sand, ignore it, and leave consumers to play on non-U.S. regulated websites in all 50 states. I’m glad the Financial Services Committee today overwhelmingly chose to act and protect Americans as well as preserve the fundamental freedoms of adults and the Internet.”
The committee spent hours Wednesday amending HR 2267 and several modifications were made to the bill. They include mandatory implementation of technologies to protect against underage gambling; high standards to prevent fraud, abuse and cheating, to ensure fair games for customers; requirements for operators to set daily, weekly or monthly limits on deposits and losses to monitor and detect individuals with excessive gaming habits; and requirements to ensure that bettors are restricted from using credit cards to gamble on the Internet.
“We commend the lawmakers who helped make H.R. 2267 stronger through a variety of consumer protection mandates,” said John Pappas, PPA executive director. “In particular, we thank Representatives John Campbell, Mary Jo Kilroy, and Melissa Bean for their thoughtful additions to the bill and their interest in preserving the rights of adult poker players in their districts.”
One area of concern lies within the first amendment discussed on Wednesday, which restricts sites that have intentionally broken Internet gaming laws from getting a license to conduct business in the United States. This will likely affect larger online poker sites such as PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker and the old Ultimate Bet, all of which allowed players from the U.S. to play on their site following the passage of the UIGEA. The amendment, which was introduced by Congressman Brad Sherman, passed by a voice vote.
In a press release following the hearing, the PPA made the following statement regarding the amendment: “There is still much work to be done and areas of policy in this bill that must still be addressed. To be clear, despite the concerns of some of our members, nothing in the Committee-passed legislation precludes lawful Internet poker-only operators whom U.S. players know and trust today from the opportunity to operate under a regulated system. The PPA will work with House and Senate lawmakers to ensure that the final legislation produces the best regulated online gaming environment for the consumer.”
Stay tuned to Poker News Daily for the latest from Capitol Hill.?
U.S. House Committee Votes in Favor of Online Gambling Regulation Bill
Should it become law, the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act of 2009 would establish a federal regulatory and enforcement framework under which Internet gambling operators could obtain licenses authorizing them to accept bets and wagers from individuals in the United States.
The Act passed in the House Financial Services Committee by margin of 41-22 and must now go through both the full House and Senate before becoming law.
According to the Committee, the legislation comes in response to the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA), which restricted the use of the payments system for Americans who gamble online.
The new act will require licensees to take appropriate safeguards to prevent fraud, money laundering, underage and compulsive gambling.
It also contains protections to prevent minors from gambling online; prevents inappropriate online advertising targeted toward underage or compulsive gamblers; prohibits licensees from accepting bets or wagers from persons on the self excluded list of compulsive gamblers and persons delinquent with child support payments; prevents the use of a credit card to gamble online; requires that players set financial loss limits; strengthens regulatory requirements regarding integrity and fairness; bans violators of federal and state gambling laws from obtaining a license; and requires a substantial U.S. presence as a condition of obtaining a license.
PokerStars, the World's largest online poker site, has come out quickly to applaud the Committee's support of the bill.
"The bill, sponsored by Committee Chairman Barney Frank, offers a long overdue common sense approach to Internet gaming regulation in the United States," reads a release.
"PokerStars wholeheartedly supports the efforts of Chairman Frank and the bill's proponents. This bill represents the most significant U.S. legislative accomplishment in the history of the Internet gaming industry."
Although PokerStars has continued to allow U.S. Players on its site through the passage of the UIGEA, the company believes its activities in the U.S. are and at all times have been lawful and will not prevent the organization from obtaining a license should the bill become law.
"PokerStars maintains its strong support for H.R. 2267 and encourages the full House and ultimately the Senate to move quickly to secure passage during the current Congressional term," said Paul Telford, PokerStars' General Counsel.
"PokerStars, a pioneer in operating online poker under stringent regulatory frameworks, looks forward to working with incumbent and new operators in promoting a safe and healthy online poker industry in the United States, as it currently does under similar licensing models in Italy and France."
Visit PokerListings.com
House Financial Services Committee Votes to Approve Barney Frank’s Internet Gambling Legislation
HR 2267 Passes House Financial Services Committee
After postponing the hearing on Tuesday, the House Financial Services Committee met on Wednesday to discuss Rep. Barney Frank’s proposed bill H.R. 2267, the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act. Many representatives were on hand to file amendments and make their voices heard, and after several hours the bill was passed by a vote of 41-22, finalizing the first of many steps to be taken in order to regulate online poker in the United States.
The hearing got underway just after 10:00 a.m. ET and the committee began discussing provisions of the bill in the markup phase. This is the phase where a Congressional committee makes changes to a bill before it is voted on and eventually sent to the House of Representatives for another vote. Should the bill get the majority vote from the House of Representatives, it would then be passed along to the Senate for another majority vote, before being signed into law by the President.
Several amendments were made to HR 2267 on Wednesday. Each amendment was handled individually and voted on by the representatives in attendance. Here’s a recap of what was discussed:
Amendment 1 (Congressman Brad Sherman, Calif.): Sites that have intentionally broken Internet gaming laws cannot get a license to conduct business in the United States. This will likely affect larger online poker sites such as PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker and the old Ultimate Bet, all of whom allowed players from the U.S. to play on their site after the UIGEA went into effect. Amendment is taken to a voice vote, where representatives are asked to motion whether they are in favor or against the amendment. Amendment passes by voice vote.
Amendment 2 (Congressman Peter King, New York): Prohibits sports betting, excluding horseracing. King and several other representatives strongly support the notion of keeping sports clean and away from anything that will undermine the integrity of the game. Amendment passes by voice vote.
Amendment 3 (Congresswoman Mary Jo Kilroy, Ohio): Secretary of Treasury has the power to prohibit unsolicited emails and advertisements targeted to minors and problem gamblers. Amendment passes by voice vote.
Amendment 4 (Congressman Spencer Bachus, Alabama, and Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, Minnesota): Forbids offshore sites that have illegally done business in the US, along with people who have been employed by said sites, from getting a license. Bachus aims to include everyone associated with an “illegally-run” online gambling site be banned; Frank disputes the provision, saying that a janitor or restaurant worker employed inside of a brick and mortar casino would not be held responsible for the mishandlings of upper management; the same should hold true for an online company. Bachus withdraws amendment and says he would like to resubmit. Bachus reintroduces amendment later in the day, stipulating that only those who knew they were working at an illegally-run Internet site will be banned from obtaining a license. Amendment is later voted on by roll-call.
Amendment 5 (Congressman Joe Baca, Calif.): Allows Indian tribes to participate in Internet gambling. Frank quickly denies the amendment as it is not germane, or relevant to the subject.
Amendment 6 (Congressman Joe Baca, Calif): Allow states/tribes to opt-in to Internet gambling. Frank emphasizes that the choice to gamble online should be up to the person, not to the state where they reside. Amendment denied by voice vote, but is later voted on by roll-call.
Amendment 7 (Congressman John Campbell, Calif): Includes several provisions: 1.) All facilities of licensees that operate and/or accept wagers be located in the US; 2.) States and tribes must have parallel authority; 3.) Bettors must be at least 21 years of age; 4.) Age and residence of bettors must be verified; 5.) Odds of winning at each game must be posted online, 6.) The identities of legal and illegal gambling sites must be verified by the treasury in order for banks to prohibit certain financial transactions; 7.) Owners must meet licensing requirements; 8.) Sites must provide loss limits for each bettor. Amendment passes by voice vote.
Amendment 8 (Congressman Brad Sherman, Calif.): States are given one full legislative session to opt out, as opposed to the original period of 90 days. Amendment passes by voice vote.
Amendment 9 (Congressman John Campbell, Calif): Internet sites who advertise towards minors will have their license revoked. Amendment passes by voice vote.
Amendment 10 (Congresswoman Melissa Bean, Illinois): Treasury is required to observe Internet sites and accordingly sanction fines and revoke licenses if minors are found gambling. Amendment passes by voice vote.
Amendment 11 (Manager’s amendment — the majority and minority member who managed the debate): Bets are to be made with prepaid cards and debit cards only; bettors will be restricted from using credit cards on Internet gambling sites. In addition, the House Financial Services Committee will have no jurisdiction on tribal rights. Amendment passes by voice vote.
Amendment 12 (Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, Minnesota): Internet sites are forbidden from allowing people who are delinquent on child support from gambling on their site. Sites who don’t obey this rule lose their license. Amendment passes by voice vote.
Amendment 13 (Congressman Gary Peters, Michigan): State and tribal lotteries are exempt from licensing requirements, as long as they are intrastate activities. Currently, these lotteries are already subject to state licensing, and the Federal government should not get involved. Amendment passes by voice vote.
Following the passing of the final amendment of the afternoon, Rep. Bachus called for a roll call vote, which Rep. Frank scheduled for 3:20 p.m. ET. The first roll call vote was on the opt-in amendment by Rep. Baca, which was defeated by a vote of 37-22. The next in line was Bachus’ amendment, which was also voted down, by a vote of 43-22. Finally, HR 2267 came before the committee, and it passed by an overwhelming margin of 41-22.
Stay tuned to Poker News Daily as we continue the follow the fight to regulate online poker in the U.S.