US Outlaws Online Gambling 579
imaginaryelf writes, "As reported earlier on Slashdot, in the closing hours of the US Congressional session on Friday, September 29, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (H.R.4411.RH) was attached to the Safe Port Act of 2006 H.R.4954.EAS.
To the surprise of many, the bill passed both the House and the Senate, and Bush is expected to sign it into law this week. This effectively outlaws online gambling in the US, by way of making it illegal for credit-card companies to collect payments for bets. The financial markets punished the stock of online gambling companies as some prepared to pull out of the US entirely."
hooray. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:hooray. (Score:5, Informative)
These are the people that want the government to protect them from all the bad things, and lobby and vote accordingly. I'd be a lot more liberal if I knew people would still be responsible for their actions. But I know that's not going to be the case.
I live in Southeastern Connecticut, home of Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun casinos. I visit both regularly, simply because of the restaurants and other offerings. I don't gamble at all. However, I constantly see the people with tattered clothes sitting at the machines, the mother with her 6 year old sleeping on the carpet next to her at 2 AM. I see the signs mounted on all the pay phones with the free # for the gambling addiction hotline... which are there only after lobbying pressured them.
The average American owes thousands to credit card debt already. I'm not saying it's right, but I'm saying it's a prime example of how people will piss and whine to politicians about the things they don't like rather than make conservative decisions in life. The same people want schools to raise their children for them. And they want the government to protect them from themselves.
You'd be surprised how many people will be happy that online gambling is effectively shut down. And it's probably not going to be the moral conservatives who speak the loudest in favor of it.
Re:hooray. (Score:5, Interesting)
YES NO DON'T KNOW REFUSED
5% 90% 4.5% 0.4%
49 868 43 4
Question #2: "Should the federal government prevent Americans from playing poker in Las Vegas?"
YES NO DON'T KNOW REFUSED
5.5% 90.7% 3.3% 0.5%
53 874 32 5
Question #3: "Should the federal government prevent Americans from playing poker in Casinos on Indian Reservations?"
YES NO DON'T KNOW REFUSED
8.3% 86.6% 4.6% 0.5%
80 835 44 5
Question #4: "Should the federal government prevent Americans from playing poker for charitable fundraisers?"
YES NO DON'T KNOW REFUSED
8.1% 86.9% 4.4% 0.6%
78 838 42 6
-Page 1 of 2-
Question #5: "Should the federal government prevent Americans from playing poker on the Internet?"
YES NO DON'T KNOW REFUSED
18% 74.2% 7.4% 0.4%
174 715 71 4
Question #6: "Should the federal government prevent Americans from playing poker in the privacy of your own home?"
YES NO DON'T KNOW REFUSED
3% 94.7% 1.8% 0.5%
29 913 17 5
Question #7: "Do you believe the federal government should be managing Americans gambling behaviors on the Internet?"
YES NO DON'T KNOW REFUSED
26.9% 66.1% 6.4% 0.6%
259 637 62 6
Re:not necessarily bad (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:not necessarily bad (Score:5, Insightful)
So while American lumber continues to destroy spotted owl habitat, all the cheap + BETTER QUALITY lumber (words of the US housing industry, not mine) remains unharvested. Congrats american consumer - you lose too!
The US always has, and always will, be a big bully on the global economic scene. The question now is whether that advantage trickles down to the american consumer, or if the new robber barons can re-establish their hoovervilles.
Re:not necessarily bad (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:not necessarily bad (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Then we can retroactively take screwed up adults from thier parents!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
We are.
- Highly irresponsible Republicans
Re:not necessarily bad (Score:5, Insightful)
Because that's what The People want? Does there need to be any other reason?
Remember, government derives its power from the just consent of the governed.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Circumvention (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Circumvention (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Money laundering laws. The gist being that they don't care what middlemen your money goes through, it's the endpoints that count.
Money Laundering (Score:3, Funny)
Yeop.
Worse Problem (Score:2, Insightful)
Don't try to tell me that the return on investment is guaranteed, or that business ventures aren't a gamble, because they are. 90% of businesses fail in their first year.
Anyone want to bet that online casinos will be targeted by this law, but Wall Street will remain strangely exempt?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know about all states, but in Ohio, the lottery is still legal, and thats definitely gambling. Maybe if some of the profits went to fund schools they wouldn't have outlawed it.
My Sim City 4 city has been thriving with a casino for quite some time. They even erected a statue of me because they love me so!
Re:Worse Problem (Score:4, Interesting)
It excludes things that are based on statistical returns (They're allowing stuff like fantasy football), and a few other things.
So I don't think it covers the stock markets.
Re:Worse Problem (Score:4, Funny)
Didn't you read the article? Betting online is illegal...
Investing isn't gambling (Score:3)
You'd get into all kinds of trouble, not because it's gambling but because it's investing. The SEC would want to have a word with you. You'd have to explain how you're planning on tracking all those lottery tickets, when they can just bypass you as the middle man an
Re:Circumvention (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact that the NSA and IRS keep a close eye on all bank transactions between U.S. citizens and foreign banks to look for money-laundering?
-Eric
It will never stick (Score:3, Funny)
Ah, but they will (Score:2, Insightful)
5 will get you 10 they won't enforce it.
They'll have the legit online gaming community look after it for them -- the big casino companies, who have the most to gain from this. I bet you don't have to look very far to see who really was behind this. It's not about money laundering, it's about a big business keeping it's slice of the pie.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm having a hard time caring... (Score:2)
Whoop-dee-doo.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I'm having a hard time caring... (Score:5, Insightful)
Rights do not depend on laws; either to grant said rights, nor can rights be revoked by law. If something is a right then it's something
you can do without asking anybody's permission, period. You can voluntary accept the authority of some entity (maybe called "government" or something) to restrict *your* rights if *you* want to, but don't make the mistake of assuming that govt. has any inate authority to restrict anyone else's rights.
As such, I will say that free people have a "right to gamble" and have most likely never granted the United States government - or any other government - any authority to restrict it. As far as I'm concerned, any law restricting gambling is invalid, null and void and should be ignored.
Basically it goes back to the old saw... "We have exactly as much freedom as we are willing to demand and as we can defend."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This law does, however, bring up a point that I think needs to be addressed by a constitutional amendment: All bills should be reasonably related to a single subject. Also, politicians that tack an amendment like this on to an unrelated bill should be publicly tarred, feathered, and barred from office for life.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Rubbish. It's currently illegal to gamble on certain outcomes (sports, card games, etc.), while being legal to gamble on other outcomes (share prices, for example). It's a completely arbitrary distinction, that has no logical rationale. Either you believe that gambling is immoral and should be banned or you don't. To selectively allow some types of gambling while banning others is just bizarre.
Disclaimer: I make my income fr
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The issue is that online gambling is not regulated by the US or US states and is in competition with US companies.
I think this legislation has much more to do with competition than morality...
Ever hear of a lobbyist named Abramoff? He bought and sold politicians to protect his gambling clients... he got caught but our corrupt politicians are continuing th
37 states allow gambling (Score:5, Insightful)
If the federal government is in the business of outlawing gambling, they should do it across the board. Otherwise, they should stick to matters within their charter - national defense, negotiating international treaties, and protecting interstate commerce.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
They call it a 'lottery' but it's really just a glorified numbers racket. That doesn't stop the states from operating them, now does it?
Oh, it's a lot more than that. Casino's shave 1-2% from what goes through their system (not sure exactly how much, but certainly relatively little). Lotteries take something closer 50% of the cash that goes through them and generally encourage the less wealthy to participate...impact on gambling stocks (Score:4, Funny)
I bet they did. Shit, someone's knocking at my door.
Sour Grapes (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Just tell the (US) credit card companies they can't do business with a casino unless the transaction is clearly marked GAMBLING in the charges statement. Then tell them to produce a statement every year in January totalling anything that is marked that way, a lot like a 1099-G. The Govt will assess X% witholding on the transactions, through the CC company, and the gambler has to file for it or forfeit the money. If the CC company doesn't comply, they get hit with 10x pena
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Sour Grapes (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
If it was just about taxes they wouldn't be banning all online gambling, just the kind they can't tax.
Re:Sour Grapes (Score:4, Insightful)
However, I see this as mostly about competition with brick&mortar 'destinations'.
Without a monopoly on gambling, where would Las Vegas be? Without Las Vegas, where would Nevada be?
I feel that this business model monopoly is the real reason. If you could gamble from home, you would be less motivated to visit such locations, and that would hurt other industries. The money made from the tax on actual gambling (from both casinos & patrons), while significant, is a fraction of what would be lost overall if these destinations were to lose their monopoly status. At a minimum, you'd need to also account for the sales tax lost on gas/travel, lodging & dining when doing the comparison.
And finally, include the number of voters that are employed by these industries. That number is the real currency in politics.
Anyway, there's more to this than just reduced gaming-tax revenue.
(Sorry if this post is oddly written - I blame it on the caffeine)
Damn, Gotta Love the Wording. (Score:4, Interesting)
Shifting responsibilities (Score:5, Insightful)
If you shut down the payment options, you will greatly reduce the number of violators. It's an effective way of achieving their goal.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
why was a bill needed?
Because elections are six weeks away.
Social conservatives are a fickle electorate. In order to ensure they turn out, Republican strategists toss stuff like this out there to appeal to them.
Does this affect trying to get money out? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Politically incorrect and I don't care (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
America was started because of unjust Taxation without representation on the colonies that were started by privateers with charters to incorporate from England.
Re:Politically incorrect and I don't care (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, most of the 'founding fathers' who formed our original government and signed the Constitution were Deists [sullivan-county.com]. Even the ones who were Protestant would have vilified the current group that calls themselves conservatives. You can point your outrage at much more recent [slate.com] revisionism.
Re:Politically incorrect and I don't care (Score:4, Funny)
The liberal media would have you believe that Christopher Columbus was the first to settle America, but that honor really belongs to The Fonz. He edged out Grover Washington to be our first president, but declined once he found out that he couldn't have all three Hooper Triplets as his first ladies.
Fun Fact: The indian greeting "how" is derived from The Fonz's "heyyyyyyy".
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It wasn't. Polio really took hold years later. Nearly all of the founders of this country could walk just fine.
Re: (Score:2)
You know - what is Sweden's immigration policy?
its all about protectionism (Score:5, Insightful)
In my state the hypocrisy is reaching new heights as the GOP governor continues to try to allow slot machines at horse tracks while it is still technically illegal to play poker among friends.
Re: (Score:2)
Affects eBay and PayPal/ (Score:4, Funny)
Does this mean they're going to take down eBay and PayPal?
I certainly feel like I'm gambling whenever I do business there?
How about Ameritrade? Stocks are certainly gambling
Re: (Score:2)
it's so sad... (Score:5, Interesting)
Gotta love the system... (Score:5, Insightful)
Surely anyone voting against the bill will be blasted for not securing US ports, even when it was a vote in protest to the anti-gambling legislation.
The way the US government goes around telling the world how to run their 'democracy' is so incredibly laughable at this point.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Gotta love the system... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Gotta love the system... (Score:4, Insightful)
"at this point"? Dude, just because you've finally opened up your eyes to see it doesn't mean it's new. This has been going on for a long time.
Don't act like 90% of what slashdotters bitch about and pin on Bush is "new", it's just the fact that something has you pissed off and you finally are starting to see what has pissed the rest of us off for so long. What's the saying about those who forget the past? What about the ones that never knew the past?
The unfortunate thing? by the time the Dems take back power a new generation is going to be moving in and getting pissed at the same exact antics under a new banner and they're going to be saying the same thing and voting against President X thinking that the other side wouldn't do the same thing because they were too young/naive to remember the last time the other party did the same thing. It's a piss poor cycle of events and there will never be serious reform as long as people keep seeing politics on this same level.
I said it before, I'll say it again: (Score:3, Funny)
- Kent Brokman
Sick of that bullshit tailcoat riding they do (Score:5, Insightful)
I think its about time that Congress get off their lazy asses and start drafting their own bills for the particular agenda items they have. This sort of manipulative behavior itself should be outlawed, but find me a single member of Congress that would vote to outlaw it. In a system where checks and balances are supposed to exist, they certaintly don't here.
To really piss off the Republicans(and wimpy dems) (Score:2)
Might I suggest games like "How many grams of heroin has this woman done in the last half hour" or "How many men has this 'virgin' slept with?"
kinda already is one: nakedpoker.com (Score:2)
Land of the free.... only if you're the ones in power.
Neteller? (Score:2)
Wow (Score:3, Interesting)
Not To Open A Can of Worms, But MMOG? (Score:5, Interesting)
Wall $treet (Score:2)
Would someone please code a flash game that looks like roulette, blackjack, slots etc that was actually an interface to some brokerage for short term investments?
Not so bad (Score:3, Informative)
This doesn't really matter all that much. It means that US banks and credit card companies can't process the transactions. Companies like Firepay [firepay.com] are off shore banks that can accept lawful deposits from US banks and then in turn handle gambling related transactions.
The law doesn't impose any penalties to gamblers so there's nothing illegal about taking any winnings by using the offshore banks to funnel those winnings back to a US account.
The problem is it's just harder now for the average player to make a deposit. I think in the long run this will be better for the above average players by keeping the degenerate gamblers out.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Erm, how is that good for above-average players? Degenerate gamblers are where we make our money!
The new 419... (Score:3, Funny)
d'oh (Score:2)
Just sell goods instead of Gambling (Score:2)
Really, move out of US and sell "happiness cards". The business works like this:
1) User searches a gambling site;
2) On a gambling site, the user has the option to buy "happiness cards", for 1 dollar + postage each;
3) For each "happiness card" bought, the user earns 1 playing bonus;
4) To legitimate the business, the "happiness cards" are really delivered to the user's given address.
Suggestions for "happiness car
Your policestate is comming along nicely (Score:2)
I'm an ok poker player (Score:3, Interesting)
Credit cards were already blocked (Score:5, Informative)
Also, it wasn't a surprise that the legislation PASSED - the Port Security bill was getting passed, period. What IS surprising is that Frist managed to attach this to it. Democrats were trying hard to attach relevant amendments, like a measure to increase security of the rail transit system. These amendments were all rejected, yet Frist manages to get his "pander to the religious right" amendment attached? The mind boggles.
Anyhow, there's a good analysis of the bill reposted here [twoplustwo.com], which includes:
Yawn (Score:5, Interesting)
Whatever. You can thank the boundaries of the Interstate Commerce Clause for defanging this beast. Expect gambling sites to set up bank accounts in each of the states where online gambling is legal under state law, and direct all traffic from gamblers in a state to servers in that state. This accounts for most if not all states.
All this law does is make internet gambling sites shell out a few (hundred) thousand dollars for server upgrades and a minor software patch. Yippee.
Re: (Score:3)
The supreme court has ruled that growing marijuana for personal use and consuming it effects interstate commerce. Judges involved commented that it sets a precedent which basical
The Congress Has Balls (Score:3, Funny)
Too often governments fear bringing corporations down to size. There are a number of unethical industries that need to be nipped on the reproductive organs and it WILL mean a loss to the economy in terms of corporate valuations. Lately banking, telecommunications, and oil firms are just taking individuals and countries for a ride. The only ones who can stop it (the Governments) are the very same ones that profit in the back pocket from the illicit activity.
It takes a real man to lead a religion and not abuse his power. It takes a real government to lead a country and not abuse its power.
politics (Score:3, Insightful)
american congresscritters are not elected by british businessmen, so the heck with them. if it were american businessmen that stood to lose because of this, it would have never passed. but as it is, american businessmen can't start these sort of businesses because of laws pushed by said inbred social conservatives to begin with... inbred social conservatives usually from areas of the country with riverboat casinos. the hypocrisy of it all. it's potectionism of outdated gambling modes: las vegas, atlantic city: they serve to lose from online gambling
so this isn't about morality after all in the end folks, it's about business, and this whole bill is a giant stinking turd of protectionism. protecting us all right into luddite obsolescence, where british companies will profit from what american compnies should be profitting from in the first place!
why don't we just shorcircuit this entire retarded effort by the congresscritters and just become amish. then we will be protected from the evils of electricity too. let the british profit from evil electricity insted. pffft
Gambling Illegal... (Score:3, Interesting)
Seriously, the law won't actually do anything to stop gambling, but it will acomplish two very important things:
1. You can know that your elected representatives are "doing something" about gambling! It is very, very, very important that your elected officials are seen as "doing something" about a "problem".
2. The laws are probably written loosly and vaugly enough to allow the government to arbitrarily punish any credit card company they want. This is good for politicians, as credit card companies have a lot of money to give to political campaigns in exchange for protection.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The companies sell you a t-shirt. The cc companies can process that payment. It just so happens that a promo is going on that gives the user 100 free 'tokens' when they purchase a shirt.
Mike Coles
'bluelip'
Re:I Feel so much safer (Score:4, Insightful)
Another free shirt?
Pass.
Re:I Feel so much safer (Score:5, Informative)
Why not just do what they do with Pachinko [wikipedia.org] in Japan?
You buy some tokens, you play with the tokens to win more tokens, you spend those tokens to buy a thing - a special, completely worthless thing, that can only be bought at the game parlor. You go outside, turn the corner, and sell the thing to a shop which is bizarrely interested in the thing, and is more than happy to buy it from you. At the end of the day, this shop then sells these special things back to the Pachinko parlor, who restocks them.
Re:I Feel so much safer (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, the issues are:
That the government is not my mommy; ethically the government has no right to say what I can do with my own money until I directly use that money to hurt another citizen or it is extremely clear that I intend to do so; legally the government has no right to say anything at all with regard to gambling, because I never gave it any such right, nor have I authorized anyone to do so for me. The government is out of control, operating illegitimately, unconstitutionally, unethically, and "compliance enforcement" is in fact coercion backed by enormous, life-ruining power.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Hmmm, let me guess: the Libertarian project to 'take over' a state by getting masses of Libertarians to move there and vote as a bloc, has failed. Your new secret plan is to take over the prison system by convincing all of the Libertarians to break laws willy-nilly and get incarcerated. I doubt that you will be able to actually 'take over' the prisons (they won't let you take your guns to prison with you), but the LP could become the
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
But I bet the US Postal Inspectors would be more than happy to intercept any check any offshore Internet casino might send you.
Re:I Feel so much safer (Score:4, Funny)
Re:It works in japan.... (Score:4, Insightful)
The Pachinko parlors don't use items that you'll ever find in a catalog (no one's that stupid), they'll either use odd lots, where the items are all defective in some similar way, or buy the entire run of some item that flopped commercially, or I guess they could even do custom orders with an exclusive contract, but that's pricey.
As for having them fabricated yourself, oddly-shaped cast plastic doo-dads come from expensive molds, so you'd have to make thousands of dollars worth of fakes or there'd be no point. Stealing thousands of dollars from a business almost certainly connected with organized crime is perhaps not the safest way to make a living.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sounds like an ideal opportunity for organised crime.
Fine with me. The mob knows how to run things when it comes to gambling. Vegas was great under them. Just don't over extend your credit. ;-)
Mr. Joe Average could show up and get treated like royalty. My dad used to get comps walking into a casino just to use the rest room. The cocktail waitresses were TOTAL whores. It was great. :)
Then the soulless hotel corps took over, and I would not be suprised if they start charging you for the air you breathe
How to Stop It (Score:3, Informative)