House Committee to Hold Internet Gambling Hearing 6/8

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Having watched the hearing in its entirity, very little positive came of the event, lets be honest here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll be honest. It was an excellent hearing for us, and we got everything we could have possibly expected from it.

What were you expecting?

[Fishhead24]

What was I expecting?

Exactly what came down, very little.

Hell, there was nobody there for one thing.

Let me ask you and others......what do you make the chances(betting line) of a law being passed to make it legal(in the feds eyes) to play poker online by 2009?

[Fishhead24]

[ QUOTE ]
What was I expecting?

Exactly what came down, very little.

Hell, there was nobody there for one thing.

Let me ask you and others......what do you make the chances(betting line) of a law being passed to make it legal(in the feds eyes) to play poker online by 2009?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry for not being optimistic at this time, but I've seen how the government operates on this issue after closely following this for the past 10 years.

Listen, having had 300 or so offshore sportsbetting/pokerroom accounts in that timeframe, hope I'm wrong as can be. However, a large probability that this is not the case.

-FH-

[daedalus]

[ QUOTE ]
I uploaded the video:


http://myserver.cnn-gambling.mpg

[/ QUOTE ]

sick beat

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry for not being optimistic at this time, but I've seen how the government operates on this issue after closely following this for the past 10 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, we haven't had much success at the federal level in that time. Of course, we weren't really fighting back, either. Many of us figured the feds either couldn't or wouldn't do anything about it. Now we see how that's changed, so we're energized now. That's what really got my attention about the hearing. Our side was proudly on the offensive, finally. We took the hearing on the facts. Groups like Focus on the Family often say Internet gambling thrives in the dark, and all they need to do is to bring our industry into the light to reveal its true nature. Well, we were in the light yesterday, and we shined...finally. It was their position that couldn't withstand scrutiny. They even conceded that the Bible is pro-gambling! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] I didn't see that one coming.

We have a long way to go. Permafrost describes it as a triathlon, and I don't disagree. But, you know what? People complete triathlons all the time! We can, too.

[ QUOTE ]
Listen, having had 300 or so offshore sportsbetting/pokerroom accounts in that timeframe, hope I'm wrong as can be. However, a large probability that this is not the case.

[/ QUOTE ]

The likelihood of getting worse laws has gone way down as a result of this hearing and the various bills floating around the House. Even if we pass nothing this year, keeping them at bay while legitimizing our standing to the general public is a great accomplishment for us.

While I'm not crazy about the status quo, there are still enough fish swimming around for many of us to keep an acceptable earn rate while we get the laws straightened out.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Hell, there was nobody there for one thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not unusual for an early hearing on a bill that hasn't been scheduled for a vote. Our clear-cut, undisputed winning of the hearing may inspire our opponents to request another hearing, which would be good for us.

[ QUOTE ]
Let me ask you and others......what do you make the chances(betting line) of a law being passed to make it legal(in the feds eyes) to play poker online by 2009?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the likelihood of a law being passed that makes Internet poker illegal (in the law's eyes) has gone down dramatically this year. Goodlatte promised to introduce a bill that expands the Wire Act to include poker....seems he hasn't done that. I don't imagine he'll do it next year, as it's an election year. In that time frame, we'll have two years of momentum on our side. So, I'd put the probability of Goodlatte outlawing Internet poker via the Wire Act at <5%. Immediately following UIGEA, I'd have put it at ~50% (by 2009), so we're really strengthened here (at least IMO).

As for the chances of the feds explicitly legalizing poker by 2009, I think we're still underdogs, but that's just how it is, I guess. I don't think we stop fighting back just because we're not favored at this point. We're certainly improved our position greatly in the past few months, and I hope we'll all keep up the work to continue improving our position.

[RGL]

I'd add that it's a multiple front war.

The one front is legislative, and I share Engineer's assessment and applaud his leadership in herding this group of cats, me included.

The other fronts are regulatory and enforcement. Those governmental forces tasked with formulating regulation and the banking industry tasked with implementing blocking seemingly have real problems making the legislation work. It's very complicated, costly and probably impossible to make regs work effectively.

Meanwhile, high profile punitive actions have been initiated through the courts as intimidation for the online and funding companies and as a nod to the interests who supported the legislation in the first place. So far, Neteller, public companies and defendants have cooperated, participated and negotiated for the most part. These hearings at least put on the U.S. record some countervailing arguments and may give some at least moral support for fighting back.

I submit that anything that makes it clear that the pro gambling forces can and will legitimately fight back impact the regulatory and enforcement fronts. Failure on these fronts, coupled with a market that continues to participate in the targeted industry, is the a probable path to decriminalization just as is was with alcohol prohibition.

IMHO, it was a great day for our side. Now, can someone please figure out, facilitate or point the way to an online video file of the proceedings THAT WORKS!

[The Bandit Fish]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=zhvJ7_C2Oqk

Not a Rick Roll! Only 7.5 minutes though, so I guess it's just highlights or something.

[KEW]

[ QUOTE ]
http://youtube.com/watch?v=zhvJ7_C2Oqk

Not a Rick Roll! Only 7.5 minutes though, so I guess it's just highlights or something.

[/ QUOTE ]

NO highlight is complete without our friend "The Oracle"..
She rocked and silenced the room...We really need to find a way to view the entire hearing...

[TreyWilly]

Just wanted to quote myself like Fishhead24