Good news about gambling legislation in Congress

[jsthomas64]

I read the text of the legislation a few days ago and it really looks like the only thing this bill would do would be to cut off players from depositing new funds into your favorite on-line site. I don't think there is a provision stopping you from taking a withdrawal.

IF this did pass (which the Senate probably won't take it up) it seems this, in effect, would just cause people to go on a big run and make larger than normal deposits so they can continue playing in the future (or until the proper loophole is discovered). The potential downside would be no new players/money in the system and possibly a decline of US players over time, shifting peak playing time to other time zones. But that would be a relatively long process.

Can anyone knowledgable about the law add any further insight on how this may theoretically affect on-line players near and short term.

[reddred]

If the Bill, assuming it was passed thru the senate, would cripple all the online banking options we use to transfer money, couldn't we just send a money order, or check, or bank check to the sites?? yeah, a lot less convenient and time consuming, but how could the government stop this?? And couldn't you also get a cashout check sent to you from a site?? Again, it's like the stoneage method, but my question is, it could work, right?

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
If the Bill, assuming it was passed thru the senate, would cripple all the online banking options we use to transfer money, couldn't we just send a money order, or check, or bank check to the sites?? yeah, a lot less convenient and time consuming, but how could the government stop this?? And couldn't you also get a cashout check sent to you from a site?? Again, it's like the stoneage method, but my question is, it could work, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

You want to imagine the results if the clowns at Party customer service had to process checks?

[Christian_Peters]

[ QUOTE ]
If the Bill, assuming it was passed thru the senate, would cripple all the online banking options we use to transfer money, couldn't we just send a money order, or check, or bank check to the sites?? yeah, a lot less convenient and time consuming, but how could the government stop this?? And couldn't you also get a cashout check sent to you from a site?? Again, it's like the stoneage method, but my question is, it could work, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think so. I would like some more tech savy people to start seriously thinking about loopholes on this, but the bill will force ISP's to disable links to the websites, so, we won't be able to even access the website, I think. I think the smartest course of action for anyone who loves online poker is to do what the can to stop this from happening (which is very little), but to plan an alternative in the event it does pass. I feel like we live in Communist China or something, our goverment forcing ISP's to regulate what website I can or cannot visit.

[reddred]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the Bill, assuming it was passed thru the senate, would cripple all the online banking options we use to transfer money, couldn't we just send a money order, or check, or bank check to the sites?? yeah, a lot less convenient and time consuming, but how could the government stop this?? And couldn't you also get a cashout check sent to you from a site?? Again, it's like the stoneage method, but my question is, it could work, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think so. I would like some more tech savy people to start seriously thinking about loopholes on this, but the bill will force ISP's to disable links to the websites, so, we won't be able to even access the website, I think. I think the smartest course of action for anyone who loves online poker is to do what the can to stop this from happening (which is very little), but to plan an alternative in the event it does pass. I feel like we live in Communist China or something, our goverment forcing ISP's to regulate what website I can or cannot visit.

[/ QUOTE ]




I thought the bill was just stopping the pipeline to online banks that fascilitate the transactions to the poker sites. They can't stop us from going to the sites, can they??

[jafeather]

[ QUOTE ]
If the Bill, assuming it was passed thru the senate, would cripple all the online banking options we use to transfer money, couldn't we just send a money order, or check, or bank check to the sites?? yeah, a lot less convenient and time consuming, but how could the government stop this?? And couldn't you also get a cashout check sent to you from a site?? Again, it's like the stoneage method, but my question is, it could work, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Um....no. A check is a banking instrument just like a credit or debit card. This is prohibited by the bill, too. The bank would be forced to monitor who you write checks to and deny the cashing of certain checks. While this may seem too time consuming for banks to deal with, you have to remember that no one is sitting typing in how much you write checks for today. They just scan the amounts. They would do the same with the "Pay to the Order of" fields.

Bright side: Those looking for a loophole have nearly limitless ones here.

[mbz111]

Supposedly the bill is attempting to stop transmissions directly to the online rooms. I don't believe there is anything in the bill prohibiting money transfers to services such as NetTeller.

Also, being an IT professional, the ISPs have ways of blocking traffic to the servers where the games are hosted, and not just the websites.

[TruckeeSlick]

[ QUOTE ]

Also, being an IT professional, the ISPs have ways of blocking traffic to the servers where the games are hosted, and not just the websites.

[/ QUOTE ]

These methods could be circumvented the same way Chinese can circumvent their country's net censorship strategies. But only a few Chinese have the inclination or tech savvy to do that. The same will likely be true of the poker-playing masses here. Most won't bother -- they're likely not winning money anyway.

The feds might also subpeona ISP logs to bust a few famous as well as active unknown players as an example -- the way the recording industry went after small-time Napster users or the DEA went after Cheech Marin for selling glassware.

Finally, don't be too hopeful about the lateness of the Congressional session preventing action. There are a lot of moneyed interest groups backing a general online gambling ban, such as the NCAA and all the pro sports leagues. They are also playing the surefire "save the children" card. Poker is just a sideshow.

[MicroBob]

I agree this would be difficult to enforce (at best) and that there's a decent chance there isn't enough time for the senate to move forward with it.

However - Ben Franklin said that it appears no one in the senate has any interest in it.
If anybody is going to try to push for it in there I suspect that Senator Kyl of Arizona would be the guy.
He's been pushing this stuff more than anybody since 1997 I believe.

So I don't think it's safe to assume that we are 100% out of the woods on this one.
but hopefully they will be stuck on more of the Iraq and immigration stuff...plus 1/3 of them have to worry about their campaigns too.

[jsthomas64]

I was speaking to a friend of mine that is a staffer for an Ohio Congressperson yesteday after I posted my response. Apparently the real money, at least being funneled to the Ohio interests are the Horse-Track operators. As I'm sure you've heard, the bill makes loopholes for Tracks so they can continue to "Simulcast" over the internet and phone lines. Plus, Tracks and the Lottery are the only legal gambling in Ohio and with any further decreases in the state budgets, they're hopeful they can push through legislation to allow Tracks to also install slots like has been done in PA. The Athletic Director of OSU and the other Big Ten Universities are also pushing heavily for it since a lot of betting on college games by college students, with the most access to college players, is done on the internet. Just a little insight for anyone interested in who is really behind it.