The 2+2 Forum Archives: Christopher Shays replies to HR2046

I wrote my local congressman in support of HR2046 but received this reply. Unfortunately, Shays (R-CT) was one of the original sponsors of the UIGEA. I find it interesting he attempted to quote the landslide numbers in the vote, when in truth it was an addendum to a bigger, must-pass port-security bill. This is very misleading. I also find it interesting that Shays finds it his responsibility to protect ME from MYSELF and that he has based his career on this. I believe what this comes down to is personal responsbility - and he does not believe the average American has the mental fortitude to exercise this restraint on their own so he is going to do it for you by legislating your morality for you.

I have retyped the letter by hand, so there may be some typeos:

"Thank you for contacting my office expressiong support for HR2046, the internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act. I appreciate you taking the time to contact my office.

I am not a cosponsor of HR 2046 and would be inclined to oppose this bill should it come to the House floor for my consideration. This legislation would create an exemption to the ban on online gambling for properly licensed operators, allowing Americans to lawfully bet online. Specifically, the bill establishes a federal regulatory and enforcement framework to license companies to accept bets and wagers online from individuals.

In the last Congress, I was a cosponsor of HR 4411, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, and voted for this bill when it passed the House by a vote of 317 to 93 on July 11, 2006. The President signed this bill, which would prohibit banks and credit card companies from processing payments for online bets, into law on October 13, 2006.

The legislation also included provisions to prohibit gambling business from accepting credit cards and electronic transfers for online betting. In addition, the measure would modify the 1961 Wire Act (PL 87-216) to clarify that its prohibitions apply to all gambling by an technological means of communication, not just sports bets placed over telephone lines.

I believe gambling is inherently dishonest and am opposed to it in any form. During my 14 years in the state legislature I voted against every gambling bill we considered. Gambling financially cripples those who can least afford it -- the poor -- through the cruel and misleading lure of "winning it big".

I am concerned about the spread of gambling, especially among our children. We need to pause and rethink whether we truly want to legalize so many forms of gambling in so many areas of the country.

In my judgement, Internet gambling should be regulated the same way as traditional forms of gambling, as was recommended by the National Gambling Impact Study Commission. Illegal acts should be prohibited wherever they occurr -- including cyberspace -- and society clearly has the right to prevent cyberspace from being used for illegal purposes."

The 2+2 Forums