[Nate tha\\\' Great]

I think we need a sticky on this topic.

1. There are limits on what anyone based offshore (e.g. PartyPoker, NETELLER) can do, both from a legal and practical perspective.

2. We don't know what degree of lobbying actually took place. The nature of lobbying is such that much needs to take place behind the scenes. It would be imprudent for the ABA to release a public statement saying "we'll cut off any funding for the Frist in '08 campaign if you keep pushing this bill, Mr. Majority Leader".

3. Several Senators had holds on the bill, something that could well have been the direct result of lobbying efforts. And even after Frist decided to play hardball, he had to shop around for several bills before he found one that would host his internet gambling legislation. This all moved very fast and at the end of the day, Frist's degree of determination was strong enough to overcome all but the strongest lobbying efforts.

4. The fact that the bill did NOT include langauge on the Wire Act shows a very deliberate attempt to compromise, which may well have been influenced by the lobbies. If the Wire Act langauge had been included too, then a lot of the workarounds that people are discussing would not be viable.

5. On the banking side, the lobbying efforts are in certain ways just beginning, as they can influence the way that the regulations are drawn up and enforced. There's plenty of wiggle room in the legislation to allow for "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" interpretations.