7/10/2007 iMEGA Suit Against UIGEA Strongest Fight Against the US Bill

[permafrost]

[ QUOTE ]
Being foreign does not make a business unlawful, ever buy a foreign automobile / The location of the poker site is irrelevant under UIGE Act, especially if a site is located and licensed to conduct its business legally from say the UK or Costa Rica, Antigua or the Isle of Mann.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your foreign car manufacturer has to obey US rules and regulations that pertain to cars and their sale here. They don't come here with a product for sale and claim their car is legal in their home country, so too bad about your safety or emission standards, hiring laws, state mandates, etc.

[ QUOTE ]
If there is no federal ban on poker sites, and we are assuming arguendo State B allows players to play, what is "unlawful" ?


[/ QUOTE ]
That's my point, if a state allows players to play at regulated businesses, where is the risk of injury and unconstitutionality since UIGEA wouldn't apply? If a bank has a new law to follow, they will just deal with it like the hundreds of other laws they obey.

[JPFisher55]

[ QUOTE ]
is chilled actually a legal term?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, many court cases use the term to mean that some government action makes it harder, riskier or otherwise less desirable to conduct an activity that has some protection under the constitution. Usually the court states that the governmental action or law etc. has or may have a chilling affect.

[xxThe_Lebowskixx]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
is chilled actually a legal term?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, many court cases use the term to mean that some government action makes it harder, riskier or otherwise less desirable to conduct an activity that has some protection under the constitution. Usually the court states that the governmental action or law etc. has or may have a chilling affect.

[/ QUOTE ]

isnt that an "urban" word?

[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
"But I think we would lose every single state if they can opt in or out."

Really think so ?

"Hello, Governor Schwartnegger, would you like a 40% affiliate deal to help out the State of California ? Yes, just like the Lottery, only better."

[/ QUOTE ]

State budget offices are still under the impression, right or wrong, that poker competes with lotteries. State lotteries are declining in sales. In a state such as California. the Indians would fight tooth and nail against online poker. Every horse lobby would fight. The horse lobbies aren't just the betting services, but jockeys, breeders, and trainers. If they think horse handle will decline, they will fight it. FoF will fight us state by state, and governors can count voters. States will be harder than the Feds.

[Skallagrim]

I disagree legislurker, although all your observations are correct IMHO. But the general public is not going to go worry about just poker in most states. California already has all the legal poker you could want...adding internet poker, which already takes place as everyone knows, is not going to change the income streams of any of your groups by enough to make it important enough for them to really buy the votes needed, I think. Its internet slots that worry them.

PS, the point is now clear for JP, the AG is only threating sites. Has he tried to indict any yet JP [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] ?

[Coy_Roy]

[ QUOTE ]
But the general public is not going to go worry

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not the general public that will worry, it's the racetracks, the thoroughbred industry, the already established b&m casino's, etc;

I have to agree with Legislurker.

[JPFisher55]

To the best of my knowledge no. Like most states Missouri rarely attempts to enforce its gambling laws. The only cases that I have have knowledge concern giveaways that the AG deems to be illegal lotteries. Usually such cases result in a cease and desist order but not criminal prosecution.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But the general public is not going to go worry

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not the general public that will worry, it's the racetracks, the thoroughbred industry, the already established b&m casino's, etc;

I have to agree with Legislurker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is one of those instances where it's easy to believe the press. However, if we look more deeply, our inevitable defeat is not so obvious.

First off, if NO state will allow Internet poker, how do we expect the feds to pass it? Should we give up? I'm not ready to.

Perhaps it's time for us to be as powerful as the horses. We'll keep speaking up. The horses are more powerful than even FoF, apparently. All we need is a little of that.

Also, it's the established casinos that will run this. MGM is in favor of Internet gaming; Harrah's is on the fence. Internet poker helps casinos; just look at the "poker craze" and what it meant to B&M casinos. Internet poker doesn't really hurt racetracks or horses either. In fact, greater acceptance of wagering helps them.

Finally, there are more of us than there are of them. We just have to stay on messsage.

P.S. I have to correct one thing. Nevada will not opt out. They already have Internet gaming licensing on the books. All they'll need is federal legislation permitting them to allow accpetance of international wagers to move forward. With that, other states will likely gradually fall in line, with poker leading the way.

Let's not write our own obituaries just yet.

[Legislurker]

Pass it or not, if the states have any input, they will say no. Frank is being pushed by the banks, not poker players. Whatever gets the banks off the hook, he is gone from our camp. I dont think its defeat we are headed for, but a long uphill fight if a state opt-out is included. It IS a poison pill.

BTW, we will never be as powerful as the horses. They have farms that buy from other farms, and pay huge property taxes. Its a part of local economies that they rely on. The revenue from them is on the books and in use. States for the most part have bicameral legislatures with one house representing counties. Horse interests have people they have given to for life, and family run businesses that vote for them. We can only dream.

The established casinos, I still don't think they are on board fully. Execs have always dissed poker, look how poorly Harrah's handles WSOP. They still suspect they may be canniblizing their own revenues. Their execs are low talent
and conservative with established business models. Change is a 4 letter word.

Youre right, we may get Nevada, ND, and a few other tiny ones. But unless the feds wield the commerce clause we are [censored] in the A.

[TheEngineer]

The equine industry is strong? Well, let's use that to our advantage, like judo masters. Check out [censored] the horses.