Talked to My Friend Who Helped Write HR4411: 75% Chance it Passes

[danielkomen]

I was down in DC this weekend and ran into a friend of mine from college who was actively involved in writing 4411. I won't tell you witch Rep he works for as I don't want to get him canned, but my friend has a law degree and clearly was really involved with this bill.

Anyway, we were at a bar and he had had a few drinks so maybe there is some exaggeration because he clearly spent a lot of time on this bill and has some attachment to it(although personally I don't think he cares in it being passed).

1) He said it is 75% the bill passes the Senate. I argued with him on this one and said it wasn't even in a Committee yet. He said it didn't matter. He said they could just attach it to another bill and that already was an option that had been considered this week.

2) If it passes, I asked him what that means. He said #1 No more neteller. He said we'd have to set up foreign bank accounts if we wanted to play poker.

3) I said, poker wasn't "predominantly subject to chance". He was a bit vague on this one and seemed to indicate the main point of the bill was to go after sports betting (which is already 100% illegal I think under the wire act). So not sure if people could argue poker sites should still be legal but say craps sites shouldn't.

4) He tried to act like the horseracing exemption wasn't an exemption that horseracing was already regulated by some horseracing act. He said the lottery exemption wasn't an exemption like everyone else said it was.

[Wynton]

[ QUOTE ]
I won't tell you witch Rep he works for

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoever it was, the rep was definitely a witch rep.

[DING-DONG YO]

It is 75% to pass because someone put a spell on it.

[Berge20]

From my view, any of us who work on legislation tend to over estimate the likelihood of it becoming law or passing a certain chamber. I know that I'm guilty of it frequently and I think we just tell ourselves that kind of thing to sort of justify the time/energy/work put into things.

[mrhat187]

I'll take vegas odds, or "trade sports" over someone who worked on the bill. 4 to 1 against /images/graemlins/wink.gif. The very funny part, if it does pass does your friend really think 10 million dollars in funding it going to do a whole lot? Whats that a few toliets, and a couple hammers in government spending terms.

[otctrader]

[ QUOTE ]
I was down in DC this weekend and ran into a friend of mine from college who was actively involved in writing 4411. I won't tell you witch Rep he works for as I don't want to get him canned, but my friend has a law degree and clearly was really involved with this bill.

Anyway, we were at a bar and he had had a few drinks so maybe there is some exaggeration because he clearly spent a lot of time on this bill and has some attachment to it(although personally I don't think he cares in it being passed).

1) He said it is 75% the bill passes the Senate. I argued with him on this one and said it wasn't even in a Committee yet. He said it didn't matter. He said they could just attach it to another bill and that already was an option that had been considered this week.

2) If it passes, I asked him what that means. He said #1 No more neteller. He said we'd have to set up foreign bank accounts if we wanted to play poker.

3) I said, poker wasn't "predominantly subject to chance". He was a bit vague on this one and seemed to indicate the main point of the bill was to go after sports betting (which is already 100% illegal I think under the wire act). So not sure if people could argue poker sites should still be legal but say craps sites shouldn't.

4) He tried to act like the horseracing exemption wasn't an exemption that horseracing was already regulated by some horseracing act. He said the lottery exemption wasn't an exemption like everyone else said it was.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he's so confident, ask him if he wants to make an even money wager with you, then lay it off on tradesports.

[Ignignokt]

"I talked with someone who worked on X; he believes X will pass/win/sell like crazy/go public and make him rich."

[DDBeast]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I was down in DC this weekend and ran into a friend of mine from college who was actively involved in writing 4411. I won't tell you witch Rep he works for as I don't want to get him canned, but my friend has a law degree and clearly was really involved with this bill.

Anyway, we were at a bar and he had had a few drinks so maybe there is some exaggeration because he clearly spent a lot of time on this bill and has some attachment to it(although personally I don't think he cares in it being passed).

1) He said it is 75% the bill passes the Senate. I argued with him on this one and said it wasn't even in a Committee yet. He said it didn't matter. He said they could just attach it to another bill and that already was an option that had been considered this week.

2) If it passes, I asked him what that means. He said #1 No more neteller. He said we'd have to set up foreign bank accounts if we wanted to play poker.

3) I said, poker wasn't "predominantly subject to chance". He was a bit vague on this one and seemed to indicate the main point of the bill was to go after sports betting (which is already 100% illegal I think under the wire act). So not sure if people could argue poker sites should still be legal but say craps sites shouldn't.

4) He tried to act like the horseracing exemption wasn't an exemption that horseracing was already regulated by some horseracing act. He said the lottery exemption wasn't an exemption like everyone else said it was.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he's so confident, ask him if he wants to make an even money wager with you, then lay it off on tradesports.

[/ QUOTE ]
nh

[Mr.K]

[ QUOTE ]
From my view, any of us who work on legislation tend to over estimate the likelihood of it becoming law or passing a certain chamber. I know that I'm guilty of it frequently and I think we just tell ourselves that kind of thing to sort of justify the time/energy/work put into things.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is an excellent point, and one that should not be ignored.

[baberahamlincoln]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I was down in DC this weekend and ran into a friend of mine from college who was actively involved in writing 4411. I won't tell you witch Rep he works for as I don't want to get him canned, but my friend has a law degree and clearly was really involved with this bill.

Anyway, we were at a bar and he had had a few drinks so maybe there is some exaggeration because he clearly spent a lot of time on this bill and has some attachment to it(although personally I don't think he cares in it being passed).

1) He said it is 75% the bill passes the Senate. I argued with him on this one and said it wasn't even in a Committee yet. He said it didn't matter. He said they could just attach it to another bill and that already was an option that had been considered this week.

2) If it passes, I asked him what that means. He said #1 No more neteller. He said we'd have to set up foreign bank accounts if we wanted to play poker.

3) I said, poker wasn't "predominantly subject to chance". He was a bit vague on this one and seemed to indicate the main point of the bill was to go after sports betting (which is already 100% illegal I think under the wire act). So not sure if people could argue poker sites should still be legal but say craps sites shouldn't.

4) He tried to act like the horseracing exemption wasn't an exemption that horseracing was already regulated by some horseracing act. He said the lottery exemption wasn't an exemption like everyone else said it was.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he's so confident, ask him if he wants to make an even money wager with you, then lay it off on tradesports.

[/ QUOTE ]

smart man