Details released for Barney Frank's new online gambling bill

[GGW Laurie]

I too!



And no, I'm not a man-whore.

uh huh, sure Win, i believe you.........I do believe there is alot of money out there that could be brought into the U.S economy in taxes and alot of good things could be done with this..........Barney Frank.............laurie

[winbig]

Reps. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, and Peter King, R-N.Y., unveiled legislation Wednesday that would enable Americans to legally gamble online.

"The government should not interfere with people's liberty unless there is a good reason," Frank said. "This is, I believe, the single biggest example of an intrusion into the principle that people should be free to do things on the Internet. It's clearly the case that gambling is an activity that can be done offline but not online."

The law currently prohibits credit card companies and banks from processing bets placed on online gambling Web sites.

The legislation will repeal language passed in 2006 and signed into law by President Bush that made it illegal for banks and credit card companies to process bets made on the Internet.

Opponents argue that this will serve as a "clear danger to our youth" and encourage gambling addiction at a young age.

"If you put a computer in a teenager's bedroom, or in a student's dorm room at college, it's a temptation that many fall prey to," Rep. Spencer Bachus, R-Ala., said in a statement. "In fact, studies have shown that the earlier one begins gambling, the more likely it is he or she will become a compulsive problem gambler."

But Frank said his bill will include safeguards to prevent underage or compulsive gambling and other illegal activity.

"The notion that a society should prohibit something entirely because of the possibility that children will abuse it is a terrible blow to liberty," Frank said.

Among the safeguards in the bill is that any Internet gambling operator would be required to: ensure an individual placing a bet is of legal age (as defined by the law in the state or tribal area) and physically located in that jurisdiction, combats compulsive Internet gambling and money laundering, and protects privacy.

Frank added that he feels this will lift the burden off banks, which are compelled under the current legislation to regulate gambling activity.

The Poker Players Alliance, chaired by former New York Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, supports the bill. D'Amato said Wednesday in a press release that he is "grateful for Chairman Frank's leadership and will be activating our grassroots army made up of over one million members to help him drive legislation."

Michael Brodsky, head of Youbet.com, an online gambling Web site, praised Frank's bill.

"Banning Internet gambling has the same effect as the ban on alcohol had during Prohibition," Brodsky said. "It merely drives the activity underground, forgoes massive tax revenues and makes criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens.

"Chairman Frank's bill realities and would bring this underground activity into the light," he added.

You know it's going to pass when FAUX news doesn't come right out and slam the bill and compare Barney Frank to the devil

[littlebit]

Has anyone ever read if this bill includes online casinos on the whole or only poker rooms ? I keep seeing his comments about online poker, poker rooms but never really a statement it would be for online gambling in general. I know that sportsbooks would be excluded.

[winbig]

Has anyone ever read if this bill includes online casinos on the whole or only poker rooms ? I keep seeing his comments about online poker, poker rooms but never really a statement it would be for online gambling in general. I know that sportsbooks would be excluded.

I'm pretty sure that this bill includes both poker rooms and casinos

[jetset]

The way I read it, it includes both online casinos and poker rooms, but specifically excludes sportsbetting - obviously to reduce the venom of opposers like the national sports leagues.

And the PPA seems happy with it, pledging that their members will help promote the bill to politicians - probably through another "contact your representative" campaign, lobbying and personal political contacts.

The proposed bill looks to have tried to address most political concerns, with strong vetting of potential operators and demands for strict oversight, requirements for systems to safeguard the vulnerable and underaged and anti-money laundering measures.

It also tries to put the minds of the individual states at ease by including stipulations designed to reassure them that as a federal act it does nothing to challenge their autonomy of decision on Internet gambling.

McDermott's companion bill could be a major revenue raiser as promised, suggesting a 2 percent levy on all deposits.

And the financial services sector will be pleased if the burden of UIGEA enforcement can be lifted from their shoulders (the Treasury will monitor the new law, aided by the AG on the enforcement and compliance side). The UIGEA is already causing major problems for the banks and for various state lotteries and horseracing bodies impacted by their 'legal' or 'illegal' decisions on transactions....as was predicted by many US experts.

It's going to be an interesting fight, and this bill seems well enough designed to present a good debating platform imo.

[littlebit]

The bills by Barney Frank and Jim McDermott include measures to tax online gambling sites two percent of gross revenue and to assure all winnings are taxed as income.

While much of the online casino industry considered this week a huge step forward, with the release of US legislation to license and regulate Internet gambling, there are some rumblings about the potential tax structure. The bills by Barney Frank and Jim McDermott include measures to tax online gambling sites two percent of gross revenue and to assure all winnings are taxed as income.

Industry officials say a similar giddy mood erupted when the United Kingdom agreed to regulate and license online gaming, only to find that Prime Minister Brown, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, established such a high tax rate that many operators refused to apply for licensing.

OCA gaming analyst Sherman Bradley says Internet casino owners had hoped taxation would be placed on profits, rather than total intake. Meanwhile, frequent online players wonder how the recording of their results will affect their personal taxes.

"A major reason people play online slots is because the payout is so advantageous to land casinos," says a long-time online gambling insider who insisted on anonymity. "Now, government gets involved, and jacks the cost of running Internet casinos up, to where the return on machines has to be lowered."

Bradley notes that at least online patrons won't have the misfortune of having to prove their losses, as they do with land casino gaming. Because all transactions will be preserved, there will be an accurate record of both losses and wins. At land casinos, big paydays are taxed, and then it's up to the player to prove losses.

"Bureaucrats will drain the excitement from the games, taking so much money for tax that players will leave the sites," says online regular patron Tommy P. "After all, what's the worst return in all of gambling? The state-run games, like lotteries. Government gambling is the one type of gaming that truly fits the picture of evil, oppressive gaming beating down the average guy."

Published on May 9, 2009 by Tom Weston

http://www.onlinecasinoadvisory.com/...ness-42772.htm

[maxd]

"Bureaucrats will drain the excitement from the games, taking so much money for tax that players will leave the sites," says online regular patron Tommy P. "After all, what's the worst return in all of gambling? The state-run games, like lotteries. Government gambling is the one type of gaming that truly fits the picture of evil, oppressive gaming beating down the average guy."

Tommy P. needs to get a grip. Using the UK as an example of what the tax structure will look like is highly misleading because there Gordon Brown flatly stated that he was against online gambling and that he would jack up the tax in order to deter gambling activity in the first place.

Also, no one is saying anything about the government _running_ the casinos which is what they most certainly do in the case of state lotteries.

And finally this "evil, oppressive gaming beating down the average guy" stuff is just paranoid puffery. Show me the poor "average guy" who has been "beaten down" by "evil, oppressive gaming" and I'll show you someone who's lost their grip on reality.

[yameater]

You know, I think that's the first time I've seen Barney's tie on " straight"!

I've always liked this fellow. He gets things done.

[Mousey]

From the Atlanta Journal Constitution

Legalize Online Gambling
6:00 am May 15, 2009, by Bob Barr

In 2006, the Congress which was then still controlled by the Republican Party, passed legislation (then signed by President George W. Bush) that explictly restricted internet gambling. The “Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act” (UNIGEA) did this by prohibiting banks, credit card companies, and other financial institutions from processing or transferring gambling-related funds. While the 2006 law has made it virtually impossible ...

[Marcie Mac]

In LaLa land where I reside, we are having a special election comming up, one bill has to do with the lottery - now mind you we already have the lottery which was touted originally to help fund the schools, but now that we are virtually almost bankrupt, teachers are being laid off left and right, funding is all but disappearing, someone bonehead put this bill together:

LOTTERY MODERNIZATION ACT.
Allows the state lottery to be modernized to improve its performance with increased payouts, improved marketing, and effective management.
Requires the state to maintain ownership of the lottery and authorizes additional accountability measures. Protects funding levels for schools currently provided by lottery revenues. Increased lottery revenues will be used to address current budget deficit and reduce the need for additional tax increases and cuts to state programs.

Summary of Legislative Analyst’s Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact:
Impact on 2009–10 State Budget: Allows $5 billion of borrowing from future lottery profits to help balance the 2009–10 state budget.
Impact on Future State Budgets: Debt-service payments on the lottery borrowing and higher payments to education would likely make it more difficult to balance future state budgets. This impact would be lessened by potentially higher lottery profits. Additional lottery borrowing would be allowed.

Maybe I am so blond the hair dye has done something to my brain cells. You don't want me sitting in my den gambling on line in my jamies, in fear I become addicted, and will be contributing to the decline of morality. If I write my State Rep, and I have emailed him a LOT about legalizing On Line Gambling I just get canned responses that reflect Terrorists, Homeland Security, Money Laundering, Organized Crime.

But you want me to pass a bill so you can legally encourage me to gamble MORE so I can help you balance the budget (like I don't pay taxes up the wazoo as it is), and a LOT more, cause you are going to be immediately borrowing 5 million from money on lottery tickets I haven't even bought yet the day after the polls close.

Honestly, just from a common sense viewpoint, people are going to gamble on line, some how, some way if they like to gamble...period. There is a LOT of money, tax the dang thing and be done with it. The government gets money, the states would get money (and wouldn't be depending on me to get their hineys out of the hole a dollar at a time)

Enough of a rant my blood pressure is starting to go up.

Marcie