Online gambling to be attached to defense bill???- article Uh oh!!! - Page 9

mikeh1975 · #81 09-14-2006, 06:57 PM

so tell me this.in laymans terms things are looking pretty bleak right?

mikeh1975 · #82 09-14-2006, 06:59 PM

this is crazy.is there anyway the bankers,lobbyists or other senators can make something happen to derail this?

LesJ · #83 09-14-2006, 07:38 PM

Mr. K,

Once again, thanks for a well-put together, detailed report for us.

I have a couple of quick questions.
1) Did you do any real work today, or just work on this for us???

2)Does the fact that leadership is trying to include an abortion provision as well help our cause any at all? For example, many believe the Internet Gambling provisions to be relatively speaking, non-controversial. The same can't be said, however, for anything pertaining to the abortion debate. Is it possible, some conferees may see the abortion language and object to any and all extraneous subject matter?

3)You tell us we need to be "alarmed," but I am not sure being alarmed is very productive. Is there any "action" we can engage in at this point that could in any way be productive? I guess our "phone march" had little to no effect. . . two days later and we looked screwed again.

Once again. . . thanks much!

Les

ubercuber · #84 09-14-2006, 07:46 PM

Neteller may extend credit but they are not a US Co. Unless I am missing something, Neteller could still be used to do whatever you want...with the possible exeption of wire transfers between them and your bank. Hard to believe Neteller transactions could be blocked (due to the much discussed fact that they are used for tons more than gambling transfers), but if they were wouldn't new sites pop up everyday? This is exactly what the banks are concerned about, they would need constantly updated lists of wire transfer bad guys. I am sure the poker sites will offer a few suggested methods of funding and cashing out accounts that fish can deal with... they do now.

That said, I hope they stick to credit cards. They would have almost zero opposition if they went this route.

Nate tha\\\' Great · #85 09-14-2006, 07:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Neteller may extend credit but they are not a US Co. Unless I am missing something, Neteller could still be used to do whatever you want...with the possible exeption of wire transfers between them and your bank. Hard to believe Neteller transactions could be blocked (due to the much discussed fact that they are used for tons more than gambling transfers), but if they were wouldn't new sites pop up everyday? This is exactly what the banks are concerned about, they would need constantly updated lists of wire transfer bad guys. I am sure the poker sites will offer a few suggested methods of funding and cashing out accounts that fish can deal with... they do now.

That said, I hope they stick to credit cards. They would have almost zero opposition if they went this route.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've gotta be honest -- I've always been a pessimist on the Neteller loophole scenarios. What good is Neteller if you can't get the money into your bank? Yeah, I suppose you could jump through enough hoops, and transfer money from Neteller to Third Party to Fourth Party to your bank, and make things blurry enough that it's no longer recognized as an internet gambling transaction, but I don't think a lot of casual players are going to want to do that. Moreover, while the banks surely HATE the idea of having to police transactions, the history on this kind of thing (e.g. with credit card transactions) suggests that they will do so with some vigor if this becomes law.

I'm hoping that pressure from banking/gaming lobbying groups, Senators who might have had a hold on the original legislation, and members of the Armed Services Committee who are opposed to Frist's parliamentary tactics will be enough to deter the banking langauge from being inserted into the DoD bill. But if the bill passes with that langauge included, I'm not optimstic about the near-term future of online poker.

daedalus · #86 09-14-2006, 08:19 PM

If you know a Senator from a Horse Racing state or a banking lobbyist CALL THEM NOW and let them know what's going on here!!!!

Ron Burgundy · #87 09-14-2006, 08:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I suppose you could jump through enough hoops, and transfer money from Neteller to Third Party to Fourth Party to your bank, and make things blurry enough that it's no longer recognized as an internet gambling transaction, but I don't think a lot of casual players are going to want to do that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand how Neteller would be affected by this law, if it passes. Isn't Neteller just a foreign bank? Could you elaborate?

Even if they could include Neteller/Firepay, etc. in this legislation, how hard would it be for us to open up a Barclays/RBS or any foreign bank account and use that to deposit into the poker site, or to Neteller and then the poker site?

And it's not necessarily true that casual players wouldn't be willing to do that. The poker sites could simply send emails to all US players explaining how to setup a foreign bank account, and that it would still be perfectly legal for them to play poker online.

Keep in mind that Neteller pretty much only exists because it's illegal for Paypal to make online gambling transactions. I have faith that the entrepenuers of the industry will always be able to outsmart the bible thumpers.

Nate tha\\\' Great · #88 09-14-2006, 08:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
And it's not necessarily true that casual players wouldn't be willing to do that. The poker sites could simply send emails to all US players explaining how to setup a foreign bank account, and that it would still be perfectly legal for them to play poker online.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know that I see this happening. It's one thing to offer poker games to US players in light of the inherent murky status of the Wire Act. It's another thing to encourage US players to find ways to circumvent the intent of new legislation.

Nate tha\\\' Great · #89 09-14-2006, 08:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If you know a Senator from a Horse Racing state or a banking lobbyist CALL THEM NOW and let them know what's going on here!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

See list here. These are the senators and represenatives that must be contacted.

futuredoc85 · #90 09-14-2006, 09:37 PM

i have actually heard from my parents that Jeff Sessions is extremely unhappy with Mr. Frist for this, and he is completely against anything being added on. (they know him and speak to him on occasion and see him when he comes back to alabama) Mr. K, i am curious when you said that the opposition of the armed services committe may not be enough, how likely do you think it is that leadership will roll them on this one? Also, does anyone think it would matter if Frist got a few thousand calls/letters/emails from people all over the country letting him know that should this language be attached to the DOD bill he probably shouldnt get his hopes up for a presidential bid?