So much for Barney Frank

[Skallagrim]

Thank you leapfrog [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Right now the credit card "problem" at most sites is that the card issuer wont authorize the transaction. They did this because the Feds told them they might be violating the wire act. The weakness of this opinion is now well known (Courts have ruled the wire act applies only to sportsbetting).

But next comes the UIGEA....while it too is open to legal interpertation, 'Financial Service Providers' being legally REQUIRED to monitor and block tranactions is part of the law (the actual method to be in the regulations to come).

Removing that requirement as to CCs removes a financial service provider's legal risk for poker site transfers and casino transfers made with credit cards. There will be CCs issued that will do this, the profit is too much to be ignored.

And US players having problems funding accounts will be a thing of the past.

IF thats what actually happens. - If being the key word here sniper, I never said Frank would defintely do this, I responded to the OP's implication that this is "only" what he would propose.

And if it does. expect Rep. S. Berkely from Nevada to propose a bill to study how to create regulated and taxed American online poker. Which somehow will then make it possible for Harrahs to corner the US poker market.

Hey, its just as likely as any of gaboonvipers predictions [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] .

Skallagrim

[meleader2]

I don't see why Frank wasn't persuaded by the people he talked to regarding repealing the UIGEA. All they had to tell Frank was that by banning the use of credit card/payment instruments all that's going to happen is what they tried to prevent: rogue sites that steal $ from americans.

[JPFisher55]

Since alot of congressmen viewed the UIGEA as outlawing the use of credit cards for internet gambling, I think that Rep. Franks is talking about repealing the UIGEA, but stating that his committee cannot repeal the Wire Act, Travel Act and Unlawful Gambling Act that the WTO found violates GATT.

[LeapFrog]

[ QUOTE ]

Thank you leapfrog


[/ QUOTE ]
Hey, no problem.

[ QUOTE ]
Since alot of congressmen viewed the UIGEA as outlawing the use of credit cards for internet gambling, I think that Rep. Franks is talking about repealing the UIGEA, but stating that his committee cannot repeal the Wire Act, Travel Act and Unlawful Gambling Act that the WTO found violates GATT.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was rereading the AP article and am growing more confused as to what Frank is actually talking about.

[ QUOTE ]

The U.S. Congress House Financial Services Committee alone could not do more than lift a ban on using credit cards to pay for Internet gambling, he said.


[/ QUOTE ]

Is this a separate issue then say a bill to repeal the UIGEA? Some action regarding credit cards that the Financial Services Committee could take on its own? Sadly I know little about the inner workings of my own government.

[Zele]

It's worth recalling that in the days leading up to UIGEA, a lot of the media were reporting that Frist was seeking to ban the use of "credit cards". I know that in this case "credit cards" comes from a direct quote, but Frank may not have felt like listing every type of transaction his bill would cover, and used "credit cards" as a catchall for the funding aspects of UIGEA.

[yahboohoo]

[ QUOTE ]
BARNEY FRANK: "...if the storm of public unhappiness is great enough, I will try to substantially revise that ban."

[/ QUOTE ]
TRANSLATION: "Thank you for all your calls. Your money will now be accepted as well."

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
It's worth recalling that in the days leading up to UIGEA, a lot of the media were reporting that Frist was seeking to ban the use of "credit cards". I know that in this case "credit cards" comes from a direct quote, but Frank may not have felt like listing every type of transaction his bill would cover, and used "credit cards" as a catchall for the funding aspects of UIGEA.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is my read too (unable to state it so well though [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img])

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
Right now the credit card "problem" at most sites is that the card issuer wont authorize the transaction. They did this because the Feds told them they might be violating the wire act. The weakness of this opinion is now well known (Courts have ruled the wire act applies only to sportsbetting).

[/ QUOTE ]

But, this was the case, before the UIGEA... [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]


[ QUOTE ]
But next comes the UIGEA....while it too is open to legal interpertation, 'Financial Service Providers' being legally REQUIRED to monitor and block tranactions is part of the law (the actual method to be in the regulations to come). Removing that requirement as to CCs removes a financial service provider's legal risk for poker site transfers and casino transfers made with credit cards. There will be CCs issued that will do this, the profit is too much to be ignored.

[/ QUOTE ]

No regulations (stemming from the UIGEA) exist yet, they haven't even been drafted, yet you are speaking to what would change with regard to them??? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
And US players having problems funding accounts will be a thing of the past.

[/ QUOTE ]

ORLY??? [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]


[ QUOTE ]
IF thats what actually happens. - If being the key word here sniper, I never said Frank would defintely do this, I responded to the OP's implication that this is "only" what he would propose.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you misinterpret my comments... I am seriously asking for someone to factually analyze what he is talking about.. not make unfounded guesses. What did Frank mean?... its a simple question! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Surely someone must know the answer...

[LeapFrog]

[ QUOTE ]

I think you misinterpret my comments... I am seriously asking for someone to factually analyze what he is talking about.. not make unfounded guesses. What did Frank mean?... its a simple question! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Surely someone must know the answer...

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, no one is stepping up, or at least no one has responded yet. So what do you think Frank was talking about?

[Nathan_2]

This won't get fixed, if it ever is, by normal legislative processes but via the same means the UGIEA was passed, as a rider on a must pass bill developed during an end of session 2am Turkish bazaar.