The Congressional Review Act

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

I finally found some good source material on the process by which new regulations are drafted once a bill (such as the UIGEA) is passed.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/blfedregs_c.htm

In general, once a bill is passed by Congress and signed by the President, authority for drafting and enforcing regulations transfers from the Legislative Branch to agencies within the Executive Branch. In this case, I believe the relevant agency is the Federal Reserve.

However, Congress does retain the right of review, both in informal ways and in formal ways as codified by the Congressional Review Act. In fact, there is actually a backdoor way to kill the bill. Specifically, a "Resolution of Disapproval" can be introduced into each chamber. If this resolution passes both the House and the Senate, and the President signs the bill, then the bill is effectively killed.

Now, I don't want to get anyone's hopes up. The Congressional Review Act has been successfully enacted exactly once, and that was in regards to a piece of legislation that had barely passed through the Congress. Interesting find, though.

[fnord_too]

Nate,

My congressman is Bobby Scott (VA 3d). Here's a bit from his site:

[ QUOTE ]
Rep. Scott serves on the House Judiciary Committee where he is the lead Democrat on the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security and a member of the Constitution subcommittee. After taking a leave of absence in the 108th congress to serve on the House Budget Committee, Rep. Scott has returned to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce

[/ QUOTE ]

He will be chairing that subcommittee on crime, terrorism, and homeland security. According to a blurb in our local paper, online gambling is one of the things they discuss in it. I don't know where he stands on internet gambling, and I am too tired to look up his voting record on it now, but he seems to be a pretty sharp guy and is really well spoken. Also, he is completely unopposed in his district, which may or may not matter. I'll try to shoot him an email next week and ask him his position on the issue.

[Uglyowl]

Thanks Nate for the information.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know where he stands on internet gambling

[/ QUOTE ]

BTW, Robert Scott voted against HR4411

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/109/house/2/votes/363/

[whangarei]

Good find, Nate.

Anyone live in Barney Frank's district want to send him an email to see what he is planning re: the UIGEA regs? He will be chairman of the Financial Services Committee. It would be sweet if he lobbied to apply the Congressional Review Act to this BS bill. I'd send him an email but he only responds to those in his district.

[ QUOTE ]
However, Congress does retain the right of review, both in informal ways and in formal ways as codified by the Congressional Review Act. In fact, there is actually a backdoor way to kill the bill.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even though nothing may come of this, this is one of the reasons for poker players that it was so important to toss the Republicans from power in Congress.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
has been successfully enacted exactly once, and that was in regards to a piece of legislation that had barely passed through the Congress

[/ QUOTE ]


Nice find indeed Nate, though of course a longshot. Last minute add-on to a conference committee report that had no real debate = barely passed in spades.

Berge: get your member on this ASAP! /images/graemlins/smile.gif


The argument for killing the bill this way needs to be so that the study bill of the Nevada delegation has a chance to be considered before contrary implementation.

[fnord_too]

[ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
I don't know where he stands on internet gambling

[/ QUOTE ]

BTW, Robert Scott voted against HR4411

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/109/house/2/votes/363/

[/ QUOTE ]

Outstanding!

[NorthDakota]

I hope the PPA has the Proper people in Place to talk about this with Congressmen Scott...

If there is an outside chance of it helping... It should be pursued... Perhaps we should all be contacting Congressman Robert Scott...

[vinyard]

[ QUOTE ]
In general, once a bill is passed by Congress and signed by the President, authority for drafting and enforcing regulations transfers from the Legislative Branch to agencies within the Executive Branch. In this case, I believe the relevant agency is the Federal Reserve.

[/ QUOTE ] The relevant agencies are the Federal Reserve and the Department of the Treasury.

[BluffTHIS!]

Nate,

On second thought, I don't know if this would even help as much as one might think. Even if the longshot came in and congress killed the regulations, they wouldn't actually be killing the bill totally, just effective enforcement of same via regulation of financial transfers. So the legal status of the offshore sites re US players would still be the same, and the publicly traded companies still wouldn't take the risk.

What we really need is a stealth carve-out in the same manner this thing passed, and hopefully the new congress might be more conducive to same. And actually it could be done with the Nevada delegation just adding language to a study bill to suspend the IUGE in regards to poker until such time as the study is completed and congress acts on same.

[kleath]

[ QUOTE ]
Nate,

On second thought, I don't know if this would even help as much as one might think. Even if the longshot came in and congress killed the regulations, they wouldn't actually be killing the bill totally, just effective enforcement of same via regulation of financial transfers. So the legal status of the offshore sites re US players would still be the same, and the publicly traded companies still wouldn't take the risk.

What we really need is a stealth carve-out in the same manner this thing passed, and hopefully the new congress might be more conducive to same. And actually it could be done with the Nevada delegation just adding language to a study bill to suspend the IUGE in regards to poker until such time as the study is completed and congress acts on same.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not accurate as the landscape would not further change from what it is now in terms of the sites and institutions(neteller) Who are waiting to act based on the regs. Since Online gambling is in a fine state right now as it is, I think it'd be fantastic.

[TimM]

[ QUOTE ]
However, Congress does retain the right of review, both in informal ways and in formal ways as codified by the Congressional Review Act. In fact, there is actually a backdoor way to kill the bill. Specifically, a "Resolution of Disapproval" can be introduced into each chamber. If this resolution passes both the House and the Senate, and the President signs the bill, then the bill is effectively killed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can this be applied to only a portion of the bill? Obviously it's useless to hope they would apply this to the entire Port Security bill.

[SlapPappy]

[ QUOTE ]
Good find, Nate.

Anyone live in Barney Frank's district want to send him an email to see what he is planning re: the UIGEA regs? He will be chairman of the Financial Services Committee. It would be sweet if he lobbied to apply the Congressional Review Act to this BS bill. I'd send him an email but he only responds to those in his district.

[ QUOTE ]
However, Congress does retain the right of review, both in informal ways and in formal ways as codified by the Congressional Review Act. In fact, there is actually a backdoor way to kill the bill.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even though nothing may come of this, this is one of the reasons for poker players that it was so important to toss the Republicans from power in Congress.

[/ QUOTE ]

OM FRICKING GOD. This is great news. Frank hates this bill. He hit the nail on the head with his statements about it. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[SlapPappy]

<font color="orange"> Okay my only question now is why wouldn't Frank try and kill the Bill?</font> /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[SlapPappy]

<font color="red"> I just hope Fricking Pelosi doesn't get in Franks way. I read she voted for it. </font> /images/graemlins/mad.gif

<font color="blue">Pretty Colors. And from that sixty minutes interview, I am not sure what to think about her. </font>

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="red"> I just hope Fricking Pelosi doesn't get in Franks way. I read she voted for it. </font> /images/graemlins/mad.gif

<font color="blue">Pretty Colors. And from that sixty minutes interview, I am not sure what to think about her. </font>

[/ QUOTE ]

<font color="orange">Yeah, Pelosi worries me a bit, considering her vote and her statements re: IG. I don't see her driving new IG-negative legislation. But I am concerned she might get in the way of a poker carve-out or some Barney Frank -style Congressional Review Act magic.</font>

[FatalError]

[ QUOTE ]
Good find, Nate.

Anyone live in Barney Frank's district want to send him an email to see what he is planning re: the UIGEA regs? He will be chairman of the Financial Services Committee. It would be sweet if he lobbied to apply the Congressional Review Act to this BS bill. I'd send him an email but he only responds to those in his district.

[ QUOTE ]
However, Congress does retain the right of review, both in informal ways and in formal ways as codified by the Congressional Review Act. In fact, there is actually a backdoor way to kill the bill.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even though nothing may come of this, this is one of the reasons for poker players that it was so important to toss the Republicans from power in Congress.

[/ QUOTE ]

i hit him up, i'll post here when i get a response next week hopefully

i love this dude, i've lived in his district my whole life. he's basically one of those guys who can say whatever he wants and create all the controversy he wants and win a lock every time

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
i hit him up, i'll post here when i get a response next week hopefully

i love this dude, i've lived in his district my whole life. he's basically one of those guys who can say whatever he wants and create all the controversy he wants and win a lock every time

[/ QUOTE ]

Cool. Looking forward to hear his response.

[Thebes]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In general, once a bill is passed by Congress and signed by the President, authority for drafting and enforcing regulations transfers from the Legislative Branch to agencies within the Executive Branch. In this case, I believe the relevant agency is the Federal Reserve.

[/ QUOTE ] The relevant agencies are the Federal Reserve and the Department of the Treasury.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to nit-pick here, but the Federal Reserve is NOT an agency of the United States. It is a private central banking system and not a part of the evecutive branch, nor even a part of the government at all. This distinction is very important in understanding who will make the regulations and how they may do so.

[mmbt0ne]

[ QUOTE ]
He will be chairing that subcommittee on crime, terrorism, and homeland security. According to a blurb in our local paper, online gambling is one of the things they discuss in it.

[/ QUOTE ]

FWIW, the majority party is free to create/destroy any subcommittees they want. So, hopefully, this one stays and doesn't see any changes in topics they discuss.

[Cooder]

[ QUOTE ]
...and the President signs the bill...

[/ QUOTE ]

Ay, there's the rub.

[scraggs]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He will be chairing that subcommittee on crime, terrorism, and homeland security. According to a blurb in our local paper, online gambling is one of the things they discuss in it.

[/ QUOTE ]

FWIW, the majority party is free to create/destroy any subcommittees they want. So, hopefully, this one stays and doesn't see any changes in topics they discuss.

[/ QUOTE ]

[permafrost]

[ QUOTE ]
the Federal Reserve is NOT an agency of the United States. It is a private central banking system and not a part of the evecutive branch, nor even a part of the government at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

False. A quote from the website of the Federal Reserve,

[ QUOTE ]
The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.



[/ QUOTE ] shows the truth.

[permafrost]

[ QUOTE ]
The relevant agencies are the Federal Reserve and the Department of the Treasury.

[/ QUOTE ]

and they will consult with the Attorney General of the DOJ.

[J.R.]

[ QUOTE ]
Now, I don't want to get anyone's hopes up. The Congressional Review Act has been successfully enacted exactly once, and that was in regards to a piece of legislation that had barely passed through the Congress. Interesting find, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wash. Post article on effect of CRA (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/17/AR2006041701561.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns)

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Good find, Nate.

Anyone live in Barney Frank's district want to send him an email to see what he is planning re: the UIGEA regs? He will be chairman of the Financial Services Committee. It would be sweet if he lobbied to apply the Congressional Review Act to this BS bill. I'd send him an email but he only responds to those in his district.

[ QUOTE ]
However, Congress does retain the right of review, both in informal ways and in formal ways as codified by the Congressional Review Act. In fact, there is actually a backdoor way to kill the bill.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even though nothing may come of this, this is one of the reasons for poker players that it was so important to toss the Republicans from power in Congress.

[/ QUOTE ]

i hit him up, i'll post here when i get a response next week hopefully

i love this dude, i've lived in his district my whole life. he's basically one of those guys who can say whatever he wants and create all the controversy he wants and win a lock every time

[/ QUOTE ]

Fatal, you ever hear back from Barney?