So who's REALLY behind this anti-online gaming push?

[UATrewqaz]

When the various anti-online gaming measures were brought up last year and the one eventually passed (as a rider on a port security bill, ugh) most of the ire was directed towards extremist relgious whackos and politicans that were pandering to them.

This is true to a certain extent, when you ask most fundamentalist Christain conservative types if they are against online gambling most will say yes.

However compared to other issues (such as gay marriage, abortion, etc.) this issue is VERY low priority on this group's agenda.

When low priority issues like this exists, there is some lip service paid, but very little actually done.

The fact that anti-online gambling measures are being so actively enforced (it would seem, with the high profile arrests over the past few months) it makes me think more is afoot.

There has to be some group(s) who really really want to go after online gambling, as a high priority issue.

I personally think it's the B&M casino industry (Vegas, Indian gaming, etc.).

Obviously certain politicans see this as a win/win situations. Take money from the anti-online gaming lobby, pass and enforce laws to pay them back, and then say at the end of the day you "did it for the children" throwing the relgious groups (as mentioned above) a bone.

Thoughts, questions, flames?

[slothinator]

I think the goal was to push all of the foreign poker sites out the US market. I have a feeling all of the major casinos in the US will have their own LEGAL poker sites later this year.

[kassdog]

I agree with sloth. I am sort of in favor of the bill so long as some of the major casinos establish an online gaming site that is regulated. I would feel much better playing at Ceasers Palace Online Poker than some forign country . If they don't establish one than I think this is all bull [censored].

[revots33]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the goal was to push all of the foreign poker sites out the US market. I have a feeling all of the major casinos in the US will have their own LEGAL poker sites later this year.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is wishful thinking IMO. I doubt clearing the way for US-based online poker was even a consideration.

Many of these politicians (and their conservative constituents) simply see online gambling (including poker) as much more insidious than B&M casinos, especially to children. As much as I'd like to look for other reasons behind this legislation, I think the most obvious reason - to stop online gambling - is the most likely one.

[slothinator]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the goal was to push all of the foreign poker sites out the US market. I have a feeling all of the major casinos in the US will have their own LEGAL poker sites later this year.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is wishful thinking IMO. I doubt clearing the way for US-based online poker was even a consideration.

Many of these politicians (and their conservative constituents) simply see online gambling (including poker) as much more insidious than B&M casinos, especially to children. As much as I'd like to look for other reasons behind this legislation, I think the most obvious reason - to stop online gambling - is the most likely one.

[/ QUOTE ]

The casino lobbyists are pretty strong. I have heard a few people mention that they were behind getting UIGEA off the ground in the first place. Appeasing conservatives and do-gooders is just a bonus. There is going to be a void, and a lot of money to be made. American casinos will be able to fill that void and make a lot of money. The government will be able to tax that money. You may be right, but I think there is a pretty good chance we will all be playing at Harrah's on-line in about 6 months.

[JoseGonzlez]

this has been rehashed many times.

the US casinos were not behind the bill that passed.

online poker has been good for their business.

however, when it came down to it they did not have much interest in fighting it either.

[PropPlayer]

I thought it all had something to do with port security?

[TheJokerIsWild]

"You may be right, but I think there is a pretty good chance we will all be playing at Harrah's on-line in about 6 months."


As much as I wold love for this to be true, I think we are drawing dead on the possibility of this happening.

[DING-DONG YO]

[ QUOTE ]
"You may be right, but I think there is a pretty good chance we will all be playing at Harrah's on-line in about 6 months."


As much as I wold love for this to be true, I think we are drawing dead on the possibility of this happening.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm in between, I think there's a great chance of this happening, but more like 5-10 years, not 6 months, lol.

[Shack]

[ QUOTE ]
"You may be right, but I think there is a pretty good chance we will all be playing at Harrah's on-line in about 6 months."


As much as I wold love for this to be true, I think we are drawing dead on the possibility of this happening.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why's that??