why was this law passed? [Archive] - Two Plus Two Newer Archives

ski

10-01-2006, 01:50 PM

I understand that there are probably a number of reasons.

I always thought the US just wanted a cut of the profits for online gambling in addition to pleasing the Christian and other lobbies that want to ban online gambling for moral reasons.

My question is what did Frist and the others responsible for online gambling language being attached to the bill gain? Has the language of the bill opened up doors for the US to somehow profit on this by allowing it to keep happening? It is difficult for me to beleive that this was attached for moral reasons + reaching "moral" voters alone.

matrix

10-01-2006, 02:04 PM

as I see it Frist did this to score brownie points so he can get some nice fat campaign donations (and maybe a bunch of extra votes) when he runs for pres in 2008.

The older (and wiser ??) I get the more convinced I become that no politician in the history of the world has EVER done anything for "moral" reasons alone - there always is some ulterior motive and it usually involves a significant amount of money. Tho perhaps I am a little too cynical.

Brice

10-01-2006, 02:08 PM

The thing is that it is no that big of an issue. I come from Southern Baptist family that votes Republican (many from TN). I have talked to them about it and they really had no opinion one way or the other on it. They also do not know of my poker playing so that did not influence them.

They are much more concerned about other issues.

IcyHotMonkey

10-01-2006, 02:11 PM

obviously you're not educated in the system of our nation. Internet gambling is a DIRECT threat to port security. Just the other day they caught a guy with an illegal gun hiding inside a shipping container. And what exactly was he doing hiding in shipping container you might ask. He was immersed in a $10 Rebuy tournament on partypoker through his palm pilot.

henke74

10-01-2006, 02:20 PM

Isnt it also supposed to prevent terrorists from washing and transfering money?

Maybe if the american senators played some poker they would increase their logical thinking somewhat. Im european and surprised to see USA becoming like this. Probably the last place one would think should restrict personal freedom, liberty and individualism.

I saw somewhere that 5000 americans die every year from food poisoning. Compare that to the number dead from terrorism and one get perspective. Still when we turn on Fox or CNN we dont see programs about "the war on food poisoning" and alike.

So clean some restaurants instead of banning this and that and it would actually save more lives without altering the way people live their lives. Cant belive this crap.

MicroBob

10-01-2006, 02:27 PM

My parents and their friends are all very conservative also (very pro George W., Rush Limbaugh, etc) and they don't know anyone who has issues with gambling on the internet and they think this is a non-issue.

i think many conservatives and southern baptists even feel that way.

But by taking charge here and leading the way for this Frist can still score points with the Christian leaders...even if many of their very own Christians don't think this is a very big deal.
It's Frist actually getting to say that he did something to 'save the children and addicts' and try to make himself look good by combating such an evil situation.

In short, he'll get some funds, and he'll get to say he did something positive.
And he probably really does think it really is a bad thing.
They see these 'rogue' type sites from 3rd world countries and they make a distinction in their mind that that alone makes it way worse than the horse-racing or lottery stuff somehow.

The_Wreck

10-01-2006, 02:28 PM

sounds like something that would happen in China rather than the US, being land of the free and all that. I'm sure it has nothing to do with morals, but money, and thats the reason why it will be probably be sorted out in the end, whenevr that may be.

Supwithbates

10-01-2006, 02:41 PM

Let me start by saying that I'm an avid poker player online and I hate Bill Frist. I believe in a small government that shouldn't be telling me how to spend my money.

THat said, I understand the reasoning behind the ban. Poker does not contribute positively to society. While it may be a game of skill, it is still a dangerous way that could potentially lose a great deal of money immediately. Comparing it to something like horseracing isn't fair, as horse races are not something you could blow your fortune on every day with the click of a mouse... for one thing, horse races aren't held every day.
It's also unfair to compare gambling to investing in the stock market. Investing in the stock market helps our economy by providing capital for companies that provide us goods and services. Any similar connection with poker would be tenuous at best. Even skill-less forms of gambling such as the lottery benefit local school systems.

Again, I don't think it's any of the government's business how we spend out money, but pretending that poker is a positive aspect of society is a stretch. Professional poker players aren't really contributing much of anything to society.

scorer

10-01-2006, 02:44 PM

underage online gambling, households ruined by degenerate gamblers who have wifes and kids and they suffer, usa government not taxing this and not able to create employment within us boundaries from online gambling. There's a few for you.

The_Wreck

10-01-2006, 02:45 PM

understand what reasoning? I thought it was because of all the untaxed cash moving out of the US to the poker companies.

MicroBob

10-01-2006, 02:49 PM

the wreck - That is only one of the reasons.

Frist and others are really concerned (at least they pretend to be) with the morals of gambling and how it can ruin families and how easy it is for kids to do it too.

I agree with your assessment that this whole 'land of the free' thing for the U.S. seems to be somewhat hypocritical in light of actions that our government takes on a regular basis.

But this is hardly an original idea and is held by many Americans who are frequently disgusted with some of our country's actions.

jlkrusty

10-01-2006, 02:56 PM

Imagine the following hypothetical commercial ad in support of Frist:

"Congress tried to do something about internet gambling for 10 years, but instead of doing anything, the online problem just exploded. Internet Gambling destroyed lives. People lost their house with a simple click of the mouse. Even children were becoming slaves to the online gambling addiction. Someone needed to do something, but who would do it? Who would step up and take on this difficult moral challenge? Frist would!

Vote for Frist--he'll get the job done!"

--Paid by the Christian Coalition, Supporters of Frist for President.

dibbs

10-01-2006, 03:18 PM

As I understand it, Frist wanted to add a "moral victory" to his list of achievements to help his presidential run in 2008, and to suckup to Leach helping him with Iowa primaries or whatever, Im not very good at this stuff though.

And as far as how it passed, thats just how our system works. I remember the first time I saw the Simpsons episode where Krusty becomes a congressman and attaches his Airplane ReRouting Bill to the must pass "Flags for Orphans" bill I didnt even believe our political process could be so horribly constructed, but hey, there it is.

Berge20

10-01-2006, 03:22 PM

...and there ya have it

betgo

10-01-2006, 03:32 PM

Poker sites have lots of money. They were being forced to spend a lot of it fighting this bill and more trying to influence the inplimentation, challenge it courts, try to repeal it, find ways around it etc.

It is important that the politicians get a cut of any industry, particularly a questionable one. They also may not mind destroying the industry.

5thStreetHog

10-01-2006, 03:32 PM

I hear repeatedly about reasoning for the poker ban being, "man loses everything gambling , his family suffers ect.".Its the same arguement used for every prohibition of all victimless crimes.Here is a thought.Maybe if a man choses to destroy himself, he is the problem not the means he uses to accomplish this.Its called personal responsibility and is something that comes along with freedom and or living in a free society.But what do i know,im not christian.

Thremp

10-01-2006, 03:41 PM

Poker sites have very little money compared to B&M, not to mention hundreds of millions of dollars of tax is avoided and this helps to solidify his Christian Fundamentalist base and you've got really no compelling reasons not to.

It sucks for us, but is sweet for him.

You don't think Harrah's, MGM etc all wanted this passed more than anyone?

schroedy

10-01-2006, 03:48 PM

You are obviously a commie, pinko, leftist, liberal, demo scum who doesn't understand.

As is evidenced by your phrase -- "illegal gun."

Read the 2d Amendment [censored]: No guns are illegal.

[the immediately preceeding post brought to you by sarcasm dot com.]

Hoi Polloi

10-01-2006, 04:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
They are much more concerned about other issues.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think there is much truth to the notion that Frist in playing to the social/"christian" conservative leadership with this ploy. Essentially proving his regressive social policy bona fides by saying "see I am your lapdog."

Should he succeed and indeed need their support in primaries or even capture the nomination and run in the general in 2008 there will be plenty of time to figure out which social issues will have the best effect in getting earnest social conservatives like your family out to the polls. These two activities have little to do with each other.

In the meantime, sending some of your poker money to candidates who will see that Frist's likely successor in Republican Senate leadership, the truly aweful Mitch McConnell, is not the majority leader, is a good idea.

Look at the Talent(R)/McCaskill(D) race in Missouri, the Dewine(R)/Brown(D) race in Ohio and the Santorum(R)/Casey(D) race in Pennsylvania. Each of the Republican incumbents will continue to mine the political gold of regressive social issues if we let them. Their opponents, besides being solid public servants, will help shift the majority to the "let's-not-divide-and-conquer-with-invasive-social-legislation" party.

Of course, depending on where you live, there's lots more you can do beyond contributing money to the campaigns.

My fingers are crossed.

SparkyDog

10-01-2006, 04:25 PM

remember frist's caucaus or whatever in iowa with leach about six weeks ago? this is somethinf frist is doing to bolster his standing among social conservatives, which will definitely help him win the primary when you consider that the other frontrunners aren't as socially conservative as he is. i think this is more of a primary election tactic than anything, frist has to get the nomination first.

IcyHotMonkey

10-01-2006, 04:35 PM

Here’s a list of the types of firearms that are generally illegal to own under federal law:

* Fully automatic machine guns
* Gun with an obliterated serial number
* Gun not detectable by a walk-through metal detector
* Shotgun with a barrel length less than 18 inches, or an overall length less than 26 inches
* Rifle with a barrel length less than 16 inches, or an overall length less than 26 inches
* Silencer

It's a good thing my silenced, fully automatic, 17 inch barrel, non detectable by metal detector, obliterated serial number with a detachable 15 inch rifle barrel shotgun is safely under my bed.

AAAA

10-01-2006, 04:40 PM

Somehow I wonder if these Bible thumpers realize that they are likely putting hundreds or thousands of third world people out of jobs...

Maybe we could get a list of all the families that lose their jobs in Costa Rica, Antigua and all the other weak economies that had been thriving with decent paying jobs that gaming companies provided.

Willie the Cat

10-01-2006, 04:43 PM

There are hundreds of horse races run every day. Even races from Australia and Hong Kong can be bet on. I stopped betting on them because (IMO) it's more like veterinarian racing than horse racing. Too many drugs.

destroBU

10-01-2006, 04:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Even skill-less forms of gambling such as the lottery benefit local school systems.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's only because they're taxed. If they just made online gambling legal like normal B&M gambling is in many areas, they'd tax the hell out of it, too, and once again schools and so forth would benefit.

And while I didn't see anyone arguing that poker is a positive thing for society, I think you could make the argument that it is some small positive in that it is one of america's favorite pastimes. Long before the Hold Em boom, Americans were regularly having their "poker night," and now it's even more prevalent. It's a legitimate pastime and the pros are a form of entertainment, just like sports. Obviously, I don't think that's a huge monstrous benefit to society, but it's something.

As someone else mentioned, if it wasn't for poker, degenerates would just gamble on something else. If they couldn't gamble on something else, they'd take up drugs. If they couldn't find drugs, it'd be alcohol... and so on. These degenerate addict types just need to go life-busto before they're ever going to have a chance at turning their lives around. Getting rid of online poker/gambling isn't going to change that at all.

oldmcycles

10-01-2006, 05:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Here’s a list of the types of firearms that are generally illegal to own under federal law:

* Fully automatic machine guns
* Gun with an obliterated serial number
* Gun not detectable by a walk-through metal detector
* Shotgun with a barrel length less than 18 inches, or an overall length less than 26 inches
* Rifle with a barrel length less than 16 inches, or an overall length less than 26 inches
* Silencer

It's a good thing my silenced, fully automatic, 17 inch barrel, non detectable by metal detector, obliterated serial number with a detachable 15 inch rifle barrel shotgun is safely under my bed.

[/ QUOTE ]

You got one too? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

ncboiler

10-01-2006, 05:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]

i think many conservatives and southern baptists even feel that way.

[/ QUOTE ]

I live in NC so I am surrounded by Southern Baptists I can tell you that they wonder aloud why this is even an issue. They feel pretty much like the rest of us. There are more important issues and the government has no business in the matter. It's not going to score many brownie points with them. Myself. I have votd for exacly one Democrate in my life. I am voting straight ticket Dem this time. I'm not ready to go over to the darkside yet but sometimes in order to rebuild a house you have to tear down the old one.

ncboiler

10-01-2006, 05:59 PM

Thremp

10-01-2006, 06:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The positive value of poker: It is one of the few segments in the US economy where we may have a trade surplus.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pointless.

ncboiler

10-01-2006, 06:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The positive value of poker: It is one of the few segments in the US economy where we may have a trade surplus.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pointless.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was being sarcastic

aislephive

10-01-2006, 06:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Let me start by saying that I'm an avid poker player online and I hate Bill Frist. I believe in a small government that shouldn't be telling me how to spend my money.

THat said, I understand the reasoning behind the ban. Poker does not contribute positively to society. While it may be a game of skill, it is still a dangerous way that could potentially lose a great deal of money immediately. Comparing it to something like horseracing isn't fair, as horse races are not something you could blow your fortune on every day with the click of a mouse... for one thing, horse races aren't held every day.
It's also unfair to compare gambling to investing in the stock market. Investing in the stock market helps our economy by providing capital for companies that provide us goods and services. Any similar connection with poker would be tenuous at best. Even skill-less forms of gambling such as the lottery benefit local school systems.

Again, I don't think it's any of the government's business how we spend out money, but pretending that poker is a positive aspect of society is a stretch. Professional poker players aren't really contributing much of anything to society.

[/ QUOTE ]

Simply put, this line of logic does not work. America is a free country, and nothing you do has to contribute to society.

Besides that, the internet gambling ban is extremely hypocritical as we all know. Blackjack, craps, slots, etc all are games of 100% luck with an edge to the house and are allowed in casinos everywhere. Every day people blow money on the lottery where they have no edge, both online and off. Horse racing, fantasy football, etc. is all allowed as well. The only difference between all of these things and online poker is that the U.S. gets nothing from it. The ban is about money and money only. Clearly it has nothing to do with morals, and if it did then that would be unconstitutional. Seperation of church and state rings a bell there. You can not claim to be a country of freedom and then tell people what they can and can not do in their own homes. If people have gambling problems, they will just go gamble in their local casino or with a bunch of buddies, that's all there is to it.

sandycove

10-01-2006, 06:31 PM

From the New York Times 30 September:

[ QUOTE ]
...At the urging of conservative groups and the National Football League, among other interests, the port security measure carried legislation cracking down on Internet gambling by prohibiting credit card companies and other financial institutions from processing the exchange of money between bettors and Web sites. The prohibition, which exempts some horse-racing operations, has previously passed the House and Senate at different times but has never cleared Congress.

“Although we can’t monitor every online gambler or regulate offshore gambling, we can police the financial institutions that disregard our laws,” said Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, the majority leader, who lobbied to add the crackdown to the port bill...

[/ QUOTE ]

Phil123

10-01-2006, 07:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
America is a free country

[/ QUOTE ]
I have never laughed so much in my life /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Losing all

10-01-2006, 07:05 PM

I understand why the NFL wants it to look like they're against gambling, but to actually fight against it? unreal

JOHNY CA$H

10-01-2006, 07:07 PM

No, bang on actually.

llayner

10-01-2006, 07:11 PM

if you're a smart player who's making money, you should be paying taxes or you're just looking for trouble...sorry if this is a downer, but its just like freelance income in that respect.

horseraces take play everyday - ditto on the preious post..

Uglyowl

10-01-2006, 07:12 PM

With Bill Frist being a doctor, I would think he would tackle cigarrete smoking /images/graemlins/confused.gif

demon102

10-01-2006, 07:31 PM

I live in Delaware the little wonder. Gambling is supposedly illeagal here in casino form and I guess now in online form too but I can take a 15 minutes walk to Delaware park and bet on horses or the mindless coin eating machine they call slots. Ive gone with freinds a few times and found this place to be totally point less. Poker is so different filled with lots of fun and complexity of skill and sense I started playing this is the only thing Ill never get tired of studying. The govnt just wants the money only reason y these mindless horse tracks are around. They are so full of [censored] trying to ban onine poker and if I met Frist in life Id have to smack him around with my dick while my friend video tapes it so I could post it on the net. Frist= tool

JAA

10-01-2006, 08:07 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Professional poker players aren't really contributing much of anything to society.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummmm I pay an assload of taxes, donate to multiple charities, and spend lots of my money on goods and services. I bet I "contribute" more to society than most. And what kind of argument is "If a person doesn't "contribute" x amount to society you should outlaw their profession"?

- Jeff

Brice

10-01-2006, 08:14 PM

[ QUOTE ]
With Bill Frist being a doctor, I would think he would tackle cigarrete smoking /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Cigarrets have the same qualities as online gambling. They are both addictive, affect children, and can tear a family apart. The difference? $$$$

I have said all along that the B & M cardrooms are the key. If they want online gambling, then it will be legal and regualted (and taxed).

sweetjazz

10-01-2006, 08:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
as I see it Frist did this to score brownie points so he can get some nice fat campaign donations (and maybe a bunch of extra votes) when he runs for pres in 2008.

The older (and wiser ??) I get the more convinced I become that no politician in the history of the world has EVER done anything for "moral" reasons alone - there always is some ulterior motive and it usually involves a significant amount of money. Tho perhaps I am a little too cynical.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is the primary reason. I don't think he will run many ads on the issue, because it just isn't a winner. But the leadership will write bigger checks to him (or at least so he calculates) and he can use that money to run ads to increase his name recognition. Don't forget that he is not really *that* well known because Americans don't follow politics too closely. Some people don't know him at all and others don't know much about what he stands for.

Also, it's not easy to actually ban something and have as little impact on Americans as it is to ban online gambling. Yes we poker players lost our "job" or our primary source of income, but no official American jobs were lost. Imagine, for example, trying to ban B&M casinos now. There would be a huge uproar over how many Americans will lose their job.

The reality is that this legislation was politically advantageous to Frist, and the man has no scruples taking away the liberties and freedoms of others to advance his career. Whether he is moderately intelligent and aware of what he is doing, or just profoundly too stupid to understand the concepts of liberty and freedom, I don't have enough information to speculate on.

catalyst

10-01-2006, 08:22 PM

I know this is ridiculously early, but why haven't there been stronger pushes to regulate the online gaming industry within the U.S. With regulation, it would be safer for players, the US would have a better ability to tax the industry, and so on. Just seems like there are so many benefits to regulating, but there haven't been any legitimate pushes to get this going. I know the President hasn't even signed this bill yet, so it is early. But, why hasn't this been pushed previously, it seems logical that players wouldn't have a problem leaving a company based in Gibralter to play at a presumably safer site, governed by the laws in the US.

Poker_Ace

10-02-2006, 12:47 AM

The exact same rationale would apply to legalizing drugs and the government has not done that either -- it makes too much sense.

jrbick

10-02-2006, 01:06 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Imagine the following hypothetical commercial ad in support of Frist:

"Congress tried to do something about internet gambling for 10 years, but instead of doing anything, the online problem just exploded. Internet Gambling destroyed lives. People lost their house with a simple click of the mouse. Even children were becoming slaves to the online gambling addiction. Someone needed to do something, but who would do it? Who would step up and take on this difficult moral challenge? Frist would!

Vote for Frist--he'll get the job done!"

--Paid by the Christian Coalition, Supporters of Frist for President.

[/ QUOTE ]

FFS WHY HASN'T THE THREAD ENDED AFTER THIS POST????

THIS TOPIC HAS BEEN DISCUSSED/MENTIONED A BILLION TIMES BEFORE. ANYONE WHO THINKS THAT ATHIS HAS NTHING TO DO W/ THE MORAL FABIRC OF OUR COUNTRY IS PRETTY MISTAKEN. IF HE CARED ABOUT THAT HE WOULD FOUGHT AS HARD AS POSSIBLE TO BAN ALL FORMS OF INTERNET GAMBLING. SO WHY'D HE KEEP PERSUING WHAT LITTLE HE COULD? SO IT WOULD MAKEA DIFFERNCE? PSHHHH. QUOTED POSTER IS DEAD ON. HERE'S WHAT'S [censored] SICK -- HE STANDS ABOUT ZERO CHANCE OF GOP NOM MCCAIN RUNNING. SO, TX A LOT FRIST. NICE WASTE OF PAPER. AT LEAST HEA HAS SOMETHING TO TALK BOUT NOW COME PRIMARIES. TX FOR PUTTING ME OUT OF THE JOB. REAL "CHRISTIAN" OF YOU. WHY DON[T YOU JUST GO AHEAD AND JUMP ON THE BANDWAGON WITH THE TELECOMUNICATIONS COMPANIES AND REGULATE THE REST OF THE INTERNET WHILE YOU'RE AT IT. [censored].

antidan444

10-02-2006, 01:08 AM

That might be the first all-caps post I've ever applauded.

I'm really disgusted by my government right now.

schroedy

10-02-2006, 01:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm really disgusted by my government right now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please. Vote them out! All of them!

antidan444

10-02-2006, 01:14 AM

I plan on trying.

breaktwister

10-02-2006, 01:18 AM

Frist did this for popularity? Thats the craziest thing Ive ever heard! LOL - this guy is goning to be running for Prez? Freakin' idiot has shot himself in the foot with this one I think.

I'd never heard of him before, but know I know that anybody voting for this man is an idiot.

antidan444

10-02-2006, 01:19 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I'd never heard of him before, but know I know that anybody voting for this man is an idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately we have a lot of those here.

Jooka

10-02-2006, 01:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]

You don't think Harrah's, MGM etc all wanted this passed more than anyone?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you would be dead wrong on this particular thought. Tournies will have less players due to less sattelites which means they dont gain from those tournies as much as they want to. Small time B&M's sure but the major players in Vegas/across the country, no way in hell they wanted this passed.

jrbick

10-02-2006, 01:23 AM

BlackAndRed

10-02-2006, 01:28 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Frist did this for popularity? Thats the craziest thing Ive ever heard! LOL - this guy is goning to be running for Prez? Freakin' idiot has shot himself in the foot with this one I think

[/ QUOTE ]

No way. It's a nice move by Frist. The Republican nomination will eventually likely be a two way race between a 'base conservative' (read: establishment hack), and a supposed 'maverick'. Frist is trying to position himself to be the favorite for the 'base conservative' spot, and this will give him some good credibility with the Christian groups that he needs to support him. Oh yes, and those groups have massive amounts of money, and in our pol system, money = success.

Plus, this is probably a nationally popular move. Dangerous online gambling predators are sucking impressionable children into their cluches, creating zombie-addicts who can't stop themselves from maxxing out mom's credit card on Party 3/6. Or so is the public perception.

Hoi Polloi

10-02-2006, 11:29 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Besides that, the internet gambling ban is extremely hypocritical as we all know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your argument seems to assume that politics and hypocrisy do not mix. I believe to the contrary that Senator Frist is pushing this crap because he wants to demonstrate to and convince the Donald Wildmons, James Dobsons and Jerry Falwells of the world that he is their boy. Offshore casinos are a relatively powerless target so by Frist's political calculation the downside risk is minimal.

Let me repeat, this is about power and has nothing directly to do with revenues, morals or principles. So reviewing those categories is quite pointless. The only recourse the opponents of this legislation have is mounting a credible political opposition. Putting the GOP into the minority in the House and/or Senate would be a good start toward that end.

Suigin406

10-02-2006, 11:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here’s a list of the types of firearms that are generally illegal to own under federal law:

* Fully automatic machine guns
* Gun with an obliterated serial number
* Gun not detectable by a walk-through metal detector
* Shotgun with a barrel length less than 18 inches, or an overall length less than 26 inches
* Rifle with a barrel length less than 16 inches, or an overall length less than 26 inches
* Silencer

It's a good thing my silenced, fully automatic, 17 inch barrel, non detectable by metal detector, obliterated serial number with a detachable 15 inch rifle barrel shotgun is safely under my bed.

[/ QUOTE ]

You got one too? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

u should show it to frist...give him a good demonstration on how it works...

westmt01

10-02-2006, 11:46 AM

If the medterm elections were not a month away, and if the Republican party was not in danger of losing control of one or both chambers of Congress, this bill never gets ram-rodded through so quickly. It languishes for years, perhaps never reaching the floor of either chamber.

I'm a political independent, so this is not a politically biased stab at either party, but this law is just another attempt to portray the Republicans as the moral guardians of the universe ahead of an election in which they are extremely vulnerable. Of course, they are also throwing the "L" word into the ring (terrorism), to show the great uninformed masses that by banning online gambling they are also making our country safer from terrorists. It would be funny if it weren't so ridiculous.

We, the online poker community, are just another victim of the machinery of politics.

BukNaked36

10-02-2006, 11:57 AM

I'll never understand how poker is so immoral when within two hours drive I have -

* State run lottery

* State run scratch offs

* State autorized dog tracks with slot machines on site

* State authorized horse tracks with off track betting widely available.

* State authorized river boat gambling (it's on the water, so...it's...OK?)

* State authorized Indian casinos (hey they're a whole different country so we can't control them - kind of like the Poker sites are in???)

PokerSlut

10-02-2006, 12:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You don't think Harrah's, MGM etc all wanted this passed more than anyone?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are an idiot if you think the B&M casinos were LOSING money due to online poker. Anyone who has been playing poker since before the online boom could tell you that poker was practically on life support in many B&Ms before online poker started getting more people playing and into the B&M cardrooms. Over the past few years every casino in Vegas has added a poker room. There are easily 10x as many games going in B&M casinos now as there were a decade ago. If it has hurt any casino, it probably hurt Binion's the most.

Also, take a look at how big the WSOP (and other events like WPT) has gotten over the past few years thanks to online qualifiers. Harrah's had 9000 people at this year's main event and overall the WSOP generated so much action every cardroom in Vegas made out like crazy this summer. What B&M manager in their right mind would want that gravy train to end? If this bill turns out to really have teeth and stop people from playing online, we'll be lucky to see even half as many people in next year's WSOP.

westmt01

10-02-2006, 12:22 PM

You used the key word: "State". The government gets a piece of all those activities. Of course if Congress had been smart enough to regulate online gambling instead of trying to squash it, the federal gov't would make money (tax revenue), B&M casinos would make more money (more people playing poker = more people visiting their poker rooms = more profits = more tax money for the State), abuses such as 11-year-old Junior playing on daddy's credit card would decrease dramatically, the number of fish would explode attracting even more fish increasing the scope of all of the above, and basically everyone would be happy.

But the government can't have that.

BigBry

10-02-2006, 12:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
What B&M manager in their right mind would want that gravy train to end?

[/ QUOTE ]

B&M manager and corporate casino heads are 2 very different things. Anything that takes away from the slot play is not a good thing in the big-picture view of a casino. My guess is they are neutral to slightly positive on this.

Here's a long-range prediction based solely on the fact the Reid (D-NV)rolled over at the last minute: the casinos hope this crushes the bulk of online sites. They also hope the Dems take the Senate. We get a study on how much regulating/taxing brings in, and in a few years we switch back, and US casinos are allowed to open gambling sites.

Anyway, I've worked for GOP Congressmen, State reps, and was on a GOP Board. After this move, I'm writing checks to Dem opponents in the swing races across the country. Let's see how well Frist's Presidential bid does when he's the guy in charge that loses the Senate.

Johnny#5

10-02-2006, 12:58 PM

And then there's the argument that some of America's best minds are dedicating themselves to poker instead of increasing wealth for the country, since poker is a zero-sum game and all. As much as I hate to admit it, I think internet poker is -EV for the country as a whole.

Do I agree with the law? No. I'm the limited government type. I do think it was passed for monetary reasons and that the "Save our family" rhetoric is crap.

westmt01

10-02-2006, 01:02 PM

This sounds very plausible. I still think Internet gambling will get regulated rather than squashed at some point. Yet more political dancing and wrangling needs to take place first.

BillLumberg

10-02-2006, 01:04 PM

Do you guys seriously believe this has anything to do with morals or whats best for american society? Politics is about money and power (same thing). Hello Harrahs online poker?

DrPhysic

10-02-2006, 01:05 PM

As I see it, this was solely and simply a means for Bill Frist and a couple of others to have political leverage for the upcoming elections and Frist's presumed presidential run, (read beating chest yelling "Looky what I did"!) for the benefit of the bible thumpers in Tennessee and other parts of the bible belt.

Doc

westmt01

10-02-2006, 01:10 PM

Yes, the government is right about the wasted brainpower: I was going to discover a cure for cancer today but decided to play in a $5 tournament instead!

Seriously, I agree with you that internet poker probably is -EV for society, but then again so are cheeseburgers. Neither Congress nor Mr. Frist are so deeply concerned with our well-being - they're a LOT more concerned about getting re-elected. So we're the victims.

BillLumberg

10-02-2006, 01:13 PM

Its certainly -EV...what leisure activity isnt?

cbloom

10-02-2006, 01:14 PM

The NFL didn't care about poker obviously, but they are very anti sports-betting.

Politicians get a ton of money from Indian Casinos, race tracks, and other B&M gambling operations. Dunno if that played any role in this. Clearly it was mainly grandstanding by Frist to show his "strong morals" or whatever.

Teetster

10-02-2006, 01:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Frist did this for popularity? Thats the craziest thing Ive ever heard! LOL - this guy is goning to be running for Prez? Freakin' idiot has shot himself in the foot with this one I think.

I'd never heard of him before, but know I know that anybody voting for this man is an idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know, I used to be proud to be a republican. Now I don't even mention it. GWB is a [censored] embarassment, and has done more to harm the US world reputation, US economy, and US freedoms than any man anywhere, ever. We're a [censored] laughing stock to the world, and we've made enemies everywhere. And, he's watching as corporations send US jobs overseas by the thousands. Awesome.

Now another idiot republican bans internet gambling. Why? So I have to drive an hour to go to B&M indian casino? You still get no taxes from that. Idiots.

Its time to get the republicans out of office. Bill Clinton may have [censored] around in office, but when he was in charge we didn't do half as much stupid [censored] as the republicans have done in the past 6 years.

blueodum

10-02-2006, 02:01 PM

THat said, I understand the reasoning behind the ban. Poker does not contribute positively to society. While it may be a game of skill, it is still a dangerous way that could potentially lose a great deal of money immediately. Comparing it to something like horseracing isn't fair, as horse races are not something you could blow your fortune on every day with the click of a mouse... for one thing, horse races aren't held every day.
It's also unfair to compare gambling to investing in the stock market. Investing in the stock market helps our economy by providing capital for companies that provide us goods and services. Any similar connection with poker would be tenuous at best. Even skill-less forms of gambling such as the lottery benefit local school systems.

Again, I don't think it's any of the government's business how we spend out money, but pretending that poker is a positive aspect of society is a stretch. Professional poker players aren't really contributing much of anything to society.

I have to disagree with you on most of your substantive points.

1) There is no limit to how much you can bet at the race track. There are always races taking place somewhere that you can wager on electronically, so the situation is pretty much analogous to online poker.

2) I'll partially agree about the stock market, but it is more difficult to justify the utility of speculation, as opposed to long-term investment. Financial speculators have inflicted great damage on various (mostly) healthy economies around the world at various times. Online poker has never done anything like that.

3) The lottery is a voluntary tax. It's hard to see any entertainment value gained by the participant (as opposed to poker), and poker can be said to foster analytical and intuitive skills and encourages the development of positive character traits, like discipline. Therefore it has a lot of educational potential, which lottery playing does not.

If online poker were taxed and regulated, it could also provide funding to social programs within US juridictions.

4) The poker industry (taken as a whole) is basically a leisure industry, just as spectator sports, amusement parks and cinemas are. It provides jobs to many people and entertainment and intellectual stimulus to its players. If you are going to say that poker does nothing productive for society, then you'll have to make the same statement about the entire leisure sector of the ecomonmy. And if that's the way you want to go, then it's Taliban, here we come.