PR: Rep. Bachus Offers Misinformation in His Support of Ban on Internet Gambling

[Casinomeister]

Rep. Bachus Offers Misinformation in His Support of Ban on Internet Gambling

(Washington, D.C. – June 25, 2008) – The American Banker published an editorial yesterday, “Viewpoint: Blocking Web Gambling Rules Would Be Mistake,” by Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.) that uses incorrect information to argue for the continued prohibition of Internet gambling. Rep. Bachus’ opinion piece comes as the House Committee on Financial Services is scheduled to vote today on a bill, the Payments System Protection Act (H.R. 5767), that would prohibit the Department of the Treasury and Federal Reserve System from proposing, prescribing or implementing any regulations related to the current ban on Internet gambling, as required by the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA).

“It is unfortunate that Rep. Bachus is using scare tactics to argue for the continued prohibition of Internet gambling,” said Jeffrey Sandman, spokesman for the Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative. “The reality is that regulated Internet gambling, which is clearly working in the U.K. and other parts of the world, can utilize technology to offer strong consumer protections to combat underage and compulsive gambling in the U.S. Currently, prohibition leaves millions of Americans susceptible as they continue to gamble in an underground, uncontrolled marketplace without such guaranteed protections.”

UIGEA Has Not Lead to a Decrease in Internet Gambling

Statement: “Since the law was passed, gamblers and businesses engaged in Internet gambling have been deterred by the fear it would be enforced.”

Fact: Publicly traded foreign online operators left the U.S. market – privately held companies did not. The Global Betting and Gaming Consultants, a U.K. based organization that provides economic research on worldwide gambling activities, found that there was a short-term dip in Internet gambling in North America right after the law was passed due to the consequences of the regulated companies pulling out, leaving the market to unregulated ones. Over the past year, online gambling has increased by 10 percent. Millions of Americans continue to gamble online, despite the attempt to prohibit Internet gambling.

Leading Financial Institutions Do Not Support UIGEA

Statement: “The law (UIGEA) passed with the support of a broad coalition that included…the American Bankers Association…”

Fact: Representatives from the American Bankers Association, Financial Services Roundtable, Wells Fargo & Co. and Credit Union National Association unanimously opposed regulations proposed to implement UIGEA in testimony to the House Committee on Financial Service’s Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology on April 2, 2008. They all questioned the fundamental approach taken by Congress in enacting legislation to force financial institutions to police online gambling.

“The UIGEA and the Proposed Rule do not provide a rational path towards halting unlawful Internet gambling,” said Wayne Abernathy, American Bankers Association’s executive vice president of financial institutions policy and regulatory affairs. “The path leads to an increased cost and administrative burden to the banks and an erosion in the performance of the payments system, but it will not result in stopping illegal Internet gambling transactions. Imposing this enormous unfunded law enforcement mandate on banks in place of the government’s law enforcement agencies is not likely to be a successful public policy.”

Regulation Does Not Lead to Increase in Problem Gambling

Statement: Internet gambling lure young people who “by the tens of thousands are becoming compulsive, addicted gamblers.”

Fact: A report released in September 2007 by the U.K. Gambling Commission, which regulates Internet gambling in Britain, reveals that the prevalence of problem gambling has not increased over the last eight years despite the advent of Internet gambling. The British Gambling Prevalence Survey 2007 found that the rates of problem gambling were 0.6 percent and 0.5 percent of the gambling population, the same percentage of problem gamblers as reported in the last gambling participation survey conducted in 1999.

Internet Gambling Can be Effectively Regulated to Protect Consumers

Statement: “The UIGEA was necessary because enforcement tools were so inadequate.”

Fact: Top experts have testified before Congress that a regulatory framework for Internet gambling would protect consumers and ensure the integrity of Internet gambling financial transactions. Leaders in the fields of internet payment processing, identity identification and online safety described how existing systems and technology have proven successful in combating underage and compulsive gambling and protecting against money laundering, fraud and identity theft.

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) introduced the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act (H.R. 2046) last year, which establishes a regulatory and enforcement framework for licensed gambling operators to accept bets and wagers from individuals in the U.S. It would include a number of built-in consumer protections, including safeguards against compulsive and underage gambling, money laundering, fraud and identity theft. States would also have the right to control what, if any, level of Internet gambling is permissible within their borders and could apply additional taxes and restrictions.


About Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative

The Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative promotes the freedom of individuals to gamble online with the proper safeguards to protect consumers and ensure the integrity of financial transactions. For more information on the Initiative, please visit www.safeandsecureig.org. The Web site provides a means by which individuals can register support for regulated Internet gambling with their elected representatives.

[Auditor]

JTodd goes off on Bachus in this weeks show:

http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/...tml#post241830

[Mousey]

Im fully convinced that 99.9% of our elected dunderheads have NO freakin' clue as to the UIGEA except hearsay. They've been told it will stop people from gambling online, so they vote to keep it, having no understanding that it (UIGEA) is totally uninforceable (and makes no sense) as it is written.

(Yes, I am so mad about this I could spit! )

Bachus is from Alabama and I'm ashamed. (And NO I never ever voted for the sanctimonious nitwit.)

[Mousey]

Nevermind... I'm so mad I'm spitting and sputtering and double posting.......

[lauriejim]

can you imagine the revenue the goverment could collect on, taxes, ect. if it was to ever pass. i hate the fact of wasting money(taxes) overseas or to buy a 600.00 toilet seat or what ever that outlandish item was awhile back, so much waste in the goverment, this would be the perfect way to bring in more money for the goverment , and maybe could be put to good use, just seems like an ass backwards approach to me by our goverment. i would gladly pay taxes on any online winnings , but how many out there wouldnt?.........laurie

[BigJock]

Originally Posted by Mousey

Nevermind... I'm so mad I'm spitting and sputtering and double posting.......

Don't be mad... You shouldn't get your hopes up. They will never reverse it until the US market is ready to step in. Also we are heading into a biblical period in this point in time. They are preparing us for something big IMHO. Enjoy the little access we do have to Online Gaming. But this government is "NOT" about to reverse this bill. Not even if the democrats takes office.

[NASHVEGAS]

Originally Posted by lauriejim

can you imagine the revenue the goverment could collect on, taxes, ect. if it was to ever pass. i hate the fact of wasting money(taxes) overseas or to buy a 600.00 toilet seat or what ever that outlandish item was awhile back, so much waste in the goverment, this would be the perfect way to bring in more money for the goverment , and maybe could be put to good use, just seems like an ass backwards approach to me by our goverment. i would gladly pay taxes on any online winnings, but how many out there wouldnt?.........laurie

All winnings are to be declared as income period and if you itemize your deductions, losses can be an itemized deduction in determining your AGI. (Disclaimer: I am not an accountant or tax advisor so seek your own advice). Somewhat irrelevant anyway as 90+ percent (Almost 100%) gamble until there entire bankroll is depleted (you love some of the casinos I just read but they love you even more, rest assured)....That said, whether you have been in compliance or not with Uncle Sam, the source of revenues via taxation that Regulation would create would be from the casinos and further sources of revenue via the trickle down economic multiplier effect.

[Auditor]

Originally Posted by lauriejim

can you imagine the revenue the government could collect on, taxes, ect. if it was to ever pass. i hate the fact of wasting money(taxes) overseas or to buy a 600.00 toilet seat or what ever that outlandish item was awhile back, so much waste in the government, this would be the perfect way to bring in more money for the government , and maybe could be put to good use, just seems like an ass backwards approach to me by our government. i would gladly pay taxes on any online winnings , but how many out there wouldnt?.........laurie

"ass backwards" appears to be what our government is best at!

[footdr]

This is only one example of why our Congress basically accomplished NOTHING!

One just needs to go to THOMAS.com or the Congressional website and view what our Congress has actually accomplished this session. Not much noteworthy there.

It is obvious that those members of the committee that voted "no" do not have a clue what is going on. I suggest that we all let them know now. Via email or phone call.

Banks cannot uniformly or fairly enforce this law as written. It should have never been passed until it was researched and included guidelines for enforcement.

This is why our appeals courts are overloaded. These morons pass laws that do not clearly set forth guidelines for the courts and in this case, guidelines for the banks.

Exactly what are we paying these clowns for?

God help the next elected President!!!!(and the American Citizens)

[lots0]

People put too much emphasis on the President... It is the Congress that NEEDS to be entirely replaced.

We have Senators and Congress people that have been in power for decades... FOR DECADES 20, 30 to 49 years... (yup 49 years Senator R. Byrd)

These entrenched congress people are the folks in the pockets of big oil, foreign governments(China, Saudi Arabia etc) and the other special interests that have money to Lobby{bribe} the congress with.

You wanna fix the USA? Throw elected officials out of office after two terms... Period, no exceptions.

The people want term limits on all elected officials, they voted overwhelmingly in favor of term limits every time term limits have been put up to a vote of the people... However, the entrenched elected officials that have stayed in power for decades defeated the term limit laws and stayed in power...

You wanna fix the USA? Get rid of the ALL elected officials after two terms.