UIGEA Enforcement forum?

[redbeard]

so what can we as voters and american citizens do to try and affect the regulatory process? is there someone i can call to try and sway their opinion or express my view? at this point it doesn't do any good to call a represenative or senator. we can hope the PPA has some lobbying affect and donate to them, but outside of that what can we do?

[Indiana]

[ QUOTE ]
I am being only partly facetious. I think that the 2+2 general readership has shown no interest in trying to shape or affect the Regulations to come. They would rather take it in the chest, then discuss either how "unfair" it is or how it can be easily circumvented by 1% of the players willing to do so.

Your proposed forum would get nothing constructive in terms of affecting what is regulated, a legitimate topic. Rather, you would get a lot of blather about how "the sites" are good, bad or indifferent or how if you install a flux capcitator, you can still deposit and play or mask your IP.

[/ QUOTE ]

u right

[Robin Foolz]

[ QUOTE ]
so what can we as voters and american citizens do to try and affect the regulatory process? is there someone i can call to try and sway their opinion or express my view? at this point it doesn't do any good to call a represenative or senator. we can hope the PPA has some lobbying affect and donate to them, but outside of that what can we do?

[/ QUOTE ]

there was nothing you (or gambling joe doe for that matter) could do politically to prevent insidious passage of this bill and there is nothing you can do now 'politically' in shaping the regulations.

the regulatory panel doesn't care about gambling joe and his gambling habits. c'mon. let's get real here. the only concern the panel will likely have is to ensure the banks won't have to go out of their way too much to get them in compliance with the new law. in which case we continue to sit tight and just play. the banks have a powerful lobbying group that will be advocating for minimum regulatory changes in the way banks operate, not because of gambling, but because the banks do not want to incur any more unnecessary costs to comply with the view of morans in washington.

[MiltonFriedman]

"there is nothing you can do now 'politically' in shaping the regulations."

I disagree. You can write and email the PPA about how important it is to lobby on the formulation of the regulations. Push them to pay attention.

Possible issues in formulating the Regs:

1. The definition of the Business of Betting or Wagering requires that the "business" accept a risk of the outcome of the game, sporting event or other basis for a "bet or wager". (This would be HUGE for poker.)

2. Scrutiny of EFT or ACH transactions would be unreasonably burdensome on banks, raise the cost of such services, et cetera .... while intruding heavily into everyone's private banking matters.

3. IntraState internet gaming: sites from two or more States should be allowed to aggregate their betting pools or games, just like the powerball lottery.

There is no "regulatory panel", by the way. there will be a couple of GS something attorneys assigned from each agency, along with whatever regulatory supervisors are always involved, to write some proposed regulations, to be published for comment in the Federal Register.

You are correct that there is not much to do NOW, except bug the PPA to get to those people when appointed and begin to educate them.

Better yet, a prospective "regulation writer" mole, who is poker-friendly would do wonders for all poker players in the US. Writing federal regs is a mind-numbingly dull task. However, as noted, the focus will be on the banking effect, a deft insert re the scope of the "business of betting or wagering" might get through.

[MLSchaff]

I think "lobbying" of any kind in regards to the formation of the regulations could backfire badly.

As it is, the banking industry has a very strong incentive to see that the regulations lack teeth. Couple this with the fact that at this point, given the election results, no one stands to benefit from strict regulations or the enforcement of those regulations.

Drawing attention to the regs while they are in process is in my opinion the surest way to point out items for inclusion that might have otherwise been great loopholes. Better to wait for the initial drafts and then start exercising whatever power we as a community have to the extent necessary once we know what those regs might look like.

[MiltonFriedman]

"Drawing attention to the regs while they are in process"

I understand your point, but argue that the other side is certainly NOT going to ignore the regs while they are in process ... in fact they have already posted talking points and issues on one of their forums. My view is that we cannnot afford a one-sided regulatory process.

It is true that the banking industry has an incentive to weaken their responsibility, but why rely on them alone ?

However, you need not worry. I am certain that the PPA plans to do nothing on the regulatory front.