Check out our brand new Local Poker Communities! Get updates and interact with poker players in your area.
Visit the United States Poker Community | Visit the California Poker Community | Read more about the Launch of P5s Local

Calling all Senate experts, the bill is now on the Senate calendar

Reply to Thread
  1. Razorbacker Razorbacker is offline

    Fort Smith, AR
    United States

    Posts: 169
    Joined: Feb 06

    Jul 14th, 2006 (7/14/2006 11:18am)

    but what does this mean?

    4. H.R.4411 : To prevent the use of certain payment instruments, credit cards, and fund transfers for unlawful Internet gambling, and for other purposes.
    Sponsor: Rep Leach, James A. [IA-2] (introduced 11/18/2005) Cosponsors (35)
    Committees: House Financial Services; House Judiciary
    House Reports: 109-412 Part 1, 109-412 Part 2
    Latest Major Action: 7/13/2006 Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 519.
  2. that_pope that_pope is offline la la la...I'm so sexy

    Tempe, AZ
    United States

    Posts: 9,818
    Joined: Apr 05

    Jul 14th, 2006 (7/14/2006 11:20am) in reply to Razorbacker

    Yeah, I don't do politics or government, sorry.
  3. Razorbacker Razorbacker is offline

    Fort Smith, AR
    United States

    Posts: 169
    Joined: Feb 06

    Jul 14th, 2006 (7/14/2006 12:23pm) in reply to Razorbacker

    This can't be good news. Here are Senator Harry Reid's comments on the bill.

    While Nevada lawmakers in the House sought to block an Internet gambling ban, Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said, "I'm going to vote to ban it (online wagering)."

    Here is the article.
    http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_ho...s/8447514.html
    Thread Starter
  4. Razorbacker Razorbacker is offline

    Fort Smith, AR
    United States

    Posts: 169
    Joined: Feb 06

    Jul 14th, 2006 (7/14/2006 12:47pm) in reply to Razorbacker

    As an update the Calendar No 519 is meaningless. It means it is on the calendar but the number itself means nothing as far as what order the bills are voted on.

    I am still very concerned about Reid's comments. People of Nevade need to start writing and calling him.
    Thread Starter
  5. cdmalgee cdmalgee is offline

    Lynchburg, VA
    United States

    Posts: 5,009
    Joined: Dec 05

    Jul 14th, 2006 (7/14/2006 12:59pm) in reply to Razorbacker

    Unfortunately - I'm in Goodlatte's district and he's got this up and going. The articles in Card Player have been very informative about the bill, and it really doesn't worry me as much as it had in the past - so if you can get into their archives, read what lawyers have said about the bill and it should calm every one else's tummy as well.

    There is nothing you can tell a politician in Nevada that will get them to support a competitor of their state's #1 income source. Harry Reid is just protecting the interests of his voters and I can't blame him for doing so....Rep. Goodlatte on the other hand is just being an a******. (Everyone on here can decipher those stars).
  6. rocksockyea rocksockyea is offline

    Oxford, OH
    United States

    Posts: 976
    Joined: Apr 05

    Jul 14th, 2006 (7/14/2006 1:46pm) in reply to cdmalgee

    To the OP, the bill just passed by the House is part of the Republican party's strategy to keeping control of congress come November. The online gambling prohibition bill is part of 10 bills that the Republicans will try to pass, collectively named "American Values Agenda" which also includes efforts to ban flag-burning, gay marriage, etc.

    Unfortunately for us, the online gambling issue seems to be one of the few (if any, I haven't really studied all enough yet) on this American Values Agenda that is supported by both Republicans and Democrats, 100 of which voted for passage of the bill in the House.

    What is at the base of the push to ban online gambling is NOT, contrary to what most people think, about lost tax revenue. Rather, it is about the Republicans hoping to energize their conservative base by showing them "hey, we did something for your votes. We passed (in the House) a law to ban online gaming."

    Luckily for us poker players, this bill right now doesn't seem to be a big issue in the Senate, however Senator John Kyl (R-AZ) says he will aggresively push for it to be debated.

    Considering all this, if the bill gets debated in the full Senate (if it gets out of committee), it is likely the bill will pass, because Republicans will be all for it and unlike voting against abortion restrictions, I do not think it is worth it to the Democrats to fight passage, considering that it might be a strain on their voting records when they run for office in the future.

    Just my take on it.
  7. Gabovitch Gabovitch is offline

    Nashville, TN
    United States

    Posts: 1,627
    Joined: Apr 05

    Jul 14th, 2006 (7/14/2006 2:37pm) in reply to cdmalgee

    Your comments about Nevada reps are misinformed. Actually the casinos seem to be opposing this bill, presumably because they would like to eventually move into online gambling. I also think you are mistaken that online sites compete with brick and mortar casinons. Its certainly not true for poker. Online poker has brought lots of new players into the game and these people often go to casinos and play. The growth in poker rooms has been pretty impressive over the last few years and that has everything to do with online poker.
  8. scoobylee scoobylee is offline

    Marion, IA
    United States

    Posts: 24
    Joined: Dec 05

    Jul 14th, 2006 (7/14/2006 2:56pm) in reply to Gabovitch

    I think it is a lot like what happened in the 1980s with VCRs becoming widely available. At first, movie studios were alarmed as they were worried people would not want to venture out of their homes to watch movies. But what happened, is that as more movies became available on cassette, interest in movies overall increased dramatically, and people liked the experience of going to the theater to catch new releases.

    It is similar as to what is happening with online poker. At first the brick and mortar companies objected, as they see the loss in profits that could happen if more people stay home. But, as more and more people play poker online and then venture to the casino, they discover the 'casino experience' is different, and for the most part, more exciting then playing at home on the computer. Hopefully, the brick and mortar casinos are starting to come around and will push for regulation/legalization as they will not only be able to share in online profits, their regular casino operations will flourish as well.
Reply to Thread