No way, says Kyl

[jetset]

KYL COMES OUT SHOOTING

Arizona Senator opposes Barney Frank's bill to regulate and control online gambling in the US


Anti-online gambling Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona has wasted no time hitting back at recent attempts by Congressman Barney Frank to introduce legislation that would regulate and control online gambling (see previous InfoPowa reports)

The National Ledger.com has published an article authored by the Senator asserting that the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act will not be repealed. But the intention of the Frank bill is not to repeal, but to introduce regulation possibilities to the UIGEA.

Senator Kyl also seemed to be blurring the lines between online and offline gambling in his article, referring extensively to a recent major gambling ring bust in his home state that used Internet betting sites to place bets initiated on land.

Kyl also attacked the online poker sector, claiming that it encouraged gambling among the youth of America and citing the National Annenberg study of youthful gambling, which apparently claims that in recent years there has been a rising trend in youthful online gambling that is significant and worrying.

Using the Arizona Office of Problem Gambling Youth Survey last year as a reference, online observers were quick to point out that in a survey of more than 60 000 students in grades 8 through 12, the vast majority (92.4 percent) had never gambled on the Internet! And 30.6 percent of respondents had played the lottery or scratch tickets, indicating that the most addictive form of gambling among Arizona's youth is probably the state's own lottery!

[footdr]

Honorable Congressman Ron Paul,

I would like to thank you for your continued support of our Constitutional rights and freedom. To that end I hope you will support the efforts of Representative Frank in regard to legalizing and taxing internet gambling. I believe the moral aspect that Sentor Kyl proports is unfounded. I view him a hypocrite on this issue as he seems to direct his objections to gambling only to online gambling but not to gambling within the U.S. Specifically the Lottery, mortar and brick casinos and horse and dog racing. If he truly sees it as a moral issue why is he not proposing legislation to make ALL forms of gambling illegal. Surely Congress can see this hypocrisy. This issue is not one that adversely affects the citizens of this Country. However, the way in which Senator Kyls legislation was added to the Safe Ports Act of 2006, does affect every Citizen. If legislation can be passed by this means, the Citizens are not being properly represented. If our elected Representative are not allowed to debate and properly vote on all proposed legislation separately, then our rights provided by the Constitution are being violated.

Also, historical research shows that many of the Founding Fathers gambled. Not to say that in itself makes it right, but it does indicate that gambling has existed as a form of entertainment since the founding of this Country. I believe Citizens have a right to gamble I do not see it as a priviledge as many legislators believe. It is not harmful to others, nor does it intrude on the rights of others. Taxing the income from Gambling may be a right of the Government but prohibiting the act of Gambling is unconstitutional.

Thank you

[Auditor]

Kyl is a real American hero...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9QaxqfszfU

[sdaddy]

If I had any remaining doubt about whether to support Frank's bill, it was just eliminated when Kyl came out forcefully opposing it.

[sdaddy]

Our favorite Senator just got elected to the No. 2 Republican leadership position in the Senate. That's not going to make getting Frank's IGREA bill through Congress any easier.

Arizona Republic article

[Simmo!]

I'm surprised that someone who obviously has done something right to get to where he is doesn't recognise that the best way of protecting the youth or the public in general is not via (disguised attempts at) prohibition, but by sensible regulation and a channelling of revenues thus generated back into dealing with the root issue - "problem gambling" in general, not just one form thereof. Stopping someone gambling online doesn't deal with the mentality of a gambler, it simply re-channels it - it's common logic that says if you dam a river, the water doesn't just go away, it just finds a new channel or you let it through in a controlled manner. And the carveouts for lotteries and racing clearly blow away any argument based on the grounds of "family values".

It's a shame that many areas of global politics allow politicians to receive campaign funds from companies with a vested interest in proposals being championed by those politicians - maybe without those contributions somewhat forcing a stance, common sense would shine through in more areas of lawmaking.

It just doesn't seem constitutional, rational, or even logical to stop everyone from enjoying a passtime to protect the few, especially where the market is clearly very popular and widely deemed socially acceptable, poker in particular. Gambling is a huge market and it won't just go away. It requires a clear, sensible strategy to ensure it sits in a controlled and properly regulated environment. Witness all the rogues that have received a boost from the UIGEA levelling the playing field and the number of clear rip-offs we've witnessed via this forum as a result.

And while the UIGEA itself stopped short of making online gambling illegal in the US, it was a hastily arranged subset of an act that did so intend, which as far as I am aware is still on the table. I hope more and more senators see the sense in Frank's proposal before it goes even further beyond the realms of common sense.

[jetset]

Our favorite Senator just got elected to the No. 2 Republican leadership position in the Senate. That's not going to make getting Frank's IGREA bill through Congress any easier.

Arizona Republic article

I guess there may be some small comfort in the probability that the Republicans are unlikely to get back in power next year, but the venality of politics really sickens me - especially when it is continuously rewarded with further promotion as in this case.

I guess Kyl is no worse than the likes of Goodlatte and many others around the world when it comes to accepting funding in return for hypocritical, selective legislation that allows some online gambling but not others....but what bugs me is the moralising of these "leaders" that gambling is evil when they're grabbing the cash from the sports and horseracing factions and making exceptions.

Simmo's post is right on the money and is a logical approach....but imo the interference of all those vested interests and their big money is a major stumbling block to the right way to address the control of online gambling.

Edited to add an appeal to American players to continue supporting the efforts of Barney Frank and his co-sponsors on the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act (IGREA) I'm sure the emails, phone calls and letters to Congressman sent by so many of you have made a major contribution to building the co-sponsor rollcall to 44 as at this week.

[sdaddy]

I agree that the Republicans are not likely to retake control, but keep in mind that the minority party in the Senate still holds a lot of power, at least as far as blocking legislation. All it takes is 40 votes to filibuster a bill and stop it from coming to an up or down vote. If Frank's bill ever manages to make it to the Senate floor, I could certainly see Kyl using his new position to organize this maneuver.