1. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies .This website or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning and required to achieve the purposes illustrated in the cookie policy.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Dismiss Notice
  3. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
Dismiss Notice

Poll:Best Screenshot of the Month?



Candidates Revealed...Cast your vote!.
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

UIGEA new positive bill just passed

Discussion in 'Casino Industry Discussion' started by GaryWatson, Sep 16, 2008.

    Sep 16, 2008
  1. GaryWatson

    GaryWatson Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Marketing Consultant
    Location:
    Europe
    In the last few minutes, the HR 6870 bill has been voted in.

    You must register/login in order to see the link.

    Sounds like US players could be on their way back. I wont hold my breath but this appears to be a mega development
     
    15 people like this.
  2. Sep 17, 2008
  3. RobWin

    RobWin closed account

    Occupation:
    Who knows?
    Location:
    A Vault!
    The thing that concerns me though is the fact they did not mention the ever elusive DOJ...it only states that it blocks the US Treasury or Federal Reserve from legally enforcing any UIGEA regulation…it did not say or address the DOJ enforcing any UIGEA regulation or not...WHY ?? :mad:
     
  4. Sep 17, 2008
  5. winbig

    winbig Keep winning this amount.

    Occupation:
    Bum
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    If the banks aren't doing anything illegal, then the DoJ doesn't have a leg to stand on :)
     
  6. Sep 17, 2008
  7. RobWin

    RobWin closed account

    Occupation:
    Who knows?
    Location:
    A Vault!
    It's not the banks I am concerned about but the folks or the owners of the casinos that keep getting f**k*d with by the DOJ..:mad: remember it only states that it blocks the US Treasury or Federal Reserve from legally enforcing any UIGEA regulation…it did not say or address the DOJ enforcing any UIGEA regulation or not
     
  8. Sep 17, 2008
  9. Westland Bowl

    Westland Bowl Tin Foil Hat Club Member CAG PABnonaccred

    Occupation:
    not applicable
    Location:
    America
    HR 6870 PASSES!

    By a 30-19 vote, HR 6870 passes! This new groundbreaking development in the UIGEA saga may now be transferred onto the floor of the House of Representatives. Here's the link for details:

    You must register/login in order to see the link.
     
    3 people like this.
  10. Sep 17, 2008
  11. catrina m

    catrina m Senior Member PABaccred

    Occupation:
    service
    Location:
    US of A
    Any step to abolish the dark cloud hanging over US gamblers is a step forward.

    The US is a huge market of regular depositors. I would love to play at some of the casino's I see here but am prohibited from playing.

    The ban affected me, but not much. I am neither high stakes or a big winner so little attention was paid to my transactions.

    I see it benefitting poker the most.

    Poker is on ESPN, its legit.

    If you tried to ban the US atheletes from the olympics because our GOV wasn't getting the major cut it would be the same as banning our world class poker players from competition.
     
  12. Sep 17, 2008
  13. GGW Laurie

    GGW Laurie Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Self Employed
    Location:
    In the Beautiful South !!
    agreed:thumbsup: but the DOJ are some sneaky lil mo fo's, so nothing would shock me...................
     
  14. Sep 17, 2008
  15. GamTrak

    GamTrak Banned User - flamming - too anoyaing PABaccred

    Occupation:
    Self employed - GamTrak LLC
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Every US citizen that feel we should have the right to gamble online needs to be involved in watching just WHO is trying to prevent it and like McCain said "Make them famous" and replace them.

    Instead of our congress worrying about important stuff like our 401K's, savings, crooked CEO's/Investors/Banks, economy and our infrastructure THEY are wasting time and effort on laws to take away more of our rights and doing corporate welfare prettied up as a bail out!!!

    The fact that they want to ban online gambling with their fake a$$ moral reasoning, which could bring in a bunch of TAX revenue to the USA and boost our economy is idiotic and totally irresponsible.

    The DOJ is a joke that has failed us miserably IMO and needs to stop harrassing sportsbetting folks until we get the industry regulated.
     
    4 people like this.
  16. Sep 17, 2008
  17. lots0

    lots0 Banned User - troll posts - flaming PABnonaccred

    Occupation:
    I do nothing productive
    Location:
    Hell on Earth
    Best damn news I've heard in quite a while.... :thumbsup:

    It is only a baby step in the right direction.... But it is in the right direction.

    We still have to go to the floor for a full vote and then if passed by the full House it will go on to the Senate... and then the president. SO contact your elected officials and tell them how you feel... It does make a difference!

    I think after what has been going on the last couple of days I hope those assholes in Washington are starting to get the fact that their meddling in our personal and PRIVATE business causes nothing but trouble...

    I think we should have a Constitutional Amendment where we hire a very large man to publicly paddle (with a large ands scary looking wooden paddle like they used to use in Schools) any elected politician that gets the bright idea to legislate morals and behavior.... Bend over and grab your ankles Ms. Speaker, you need an attitude adjustment...
     
    5 people like this.
  18. Nov 7, 2008
  19. jetset

    jetset Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Senior Partner, InfoPowa News Service
    Location:
    Earth
    Update on UIGEA regulations

    Casinomeister News

    U.S. OFFICIALS RACE TO FINALISE UIGEA REGS (Update)

    With the Republican Bush administration on the way out, Treasury officials race to avoid a midnight drop

    Achieving wide coverage across the stock markets and business sites as the week ended was a Dow Jones business report that the controversial regulations supporting the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act have been finalised. The news comes after widespread political and financial services criticism that the initial draft of the regulations lacked practicality and precision.

    The UIGEA prohibits financial transactions with 'illegal' online gambling companies, placing the burden of enforcement on the US financial services industry.

    According to the Dow Jones report, the US Treasury is trying to push the regulations through after months of difficult drafting in the hope of finalising the issue before the Bush administration leaves office at the end of the year.

    The Treasury Department forwarded the final regulations to the Office of Management and Budget on October 21, a necessary step towards implementation. The report describes the move as standard practice for outgoing administrations to finalise controversial regulations before leaving office, a practice known as a midnight drop.

    The UIGEA law as drafted by Congress in late 2006 includes exemptions for horse race betting, interstate online lotteries and betting on fantasy sports, and was passed as a last-minute attachment to an unrelated but essential security bill in the final hours of the Republican controlled Congress at the time.

    Since then the law has been responsible for hundreds of millions of dollars in losses to major listed companies forced to pull out of the US market, and has been the subject of thousands of column inches of media criticism, Congressional hearings, law suits, legislative proposals seeking to overturn or modify its provisions and general widespread criticism from a diversity of interested parties.

    Federal Reserve managers have been among the many who have expressed reservations about the implementation of the Act and the difficulties of drafting effective regulations to support it.

    The Dow Jones report notes that draft rules published by the Treasury in October 2007 don't define what would be considered an illegal transaction, and there has been much confusion as to what types of online gambling would be rendered illegal.

    Banks have warned they may block all online gambling transactions rather than try to determine which ones are illegal. An official from the Federal Reserve testified before Congress in April that the draft regulations created considerable uncertainty.

    One organisation vehemently opposed to pushing the regulations through in this manner is the Poker Players Alliance. Executive Director John Pappas told Dow Jones: "It's really remarkable that this administration would try to push this out given the burden it would place on financial institutions at this time of financial crisis."

    Pappas is meeting Friday with officials from the Office of Management and Budget, whose job it is to formally implement the regulations, in a last ditch effort to prevent them from being put on the books.He wants officials to wait until President-elect Barack Obama's administration takes office in January to allow for a thorough review of the potential impact of the rules.

    A Treasury spokeswoman did not return phone calls seeking comment by Dow Jones.
     
    9 people like this.
  20. Nov 7, 2008
  21. chuchu59

    chuchu59 gambling addict CAG PABnonaccred

    Occupation:
    EXECUTIVE
    Location:
    SOMEWHERE IN ASIA
    Midnight drop? Controversial? Then it should be thoroughly debated first. This was pushed thru as an attachment to the Safe Port Act which had nothing to do with online gaming. What hidden agenda have they got to hurry this one up?
     
  22. Nov 7, 2008
  23. jetset

    jetset Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Senior Partner, InfoPowa News Service
    Location:
    Earth
    Absolutely....but then this imo typifies the arrogant, bull-headed attitude of government officials allowed to run rampant under the Bush administration for the past 8 years.

    This has been an extremely hot potato handed to them by an inadequately focused Congress that did not have an opportunity to even read the bill, let alone properly consider all of its implications.

    I think Treasury et al will just be happy to get rid of the damned thing and let the financial institutions who are required to enforce it deal with the hangovers.

    This really sucks in my opinion.
     
  24. Nov 7, 2008
  25. winbig

    winbig Keep winning this amount.

    Occupation:
    Bum
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    This is bullshit. As if our banks weren't in enough trouble already. What are they trying to do, pave the way for another $850B bailout? There's no friggin way they can keep a leash on who's sending who money and where it's going, on top of this madhouse that's already going on. :mad:

    Even if Bush does sign this into law, there's going to be so much criticism over it, I think Obama will have no choice to repeal it.
     
  26. Nov 7, 2008
  27. Mousey

    Mousey Ueber Meister Mouse CAG

    Occupation:
    Pencil Pusher
    Location:
    Up$hitCreek
    I thought they might try to do this-- even though the UIGEA is an illogical piece of crap, and the banks surely need to manage where I spend my money (like they took care of themselves so damn well)... :rolleyes: I'm so sick of all this protectionist, self righteous, anti-online gambling crap I could just ... :puke:

    Thanks for the nauseating news, Jetset. ;)
     
    1 person likes this.
  28. Nov 8, 2008
  29. jetset

    jetset Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Senior Partner, InfoPowa News Service
    Location:
    Earth
    CNET News published an interesting guest article on this on October 31st:

    THE MIDNIGHT REGULATION RUSH IN ON!

    Republican elder statesman underlines the dangers of rushed UIGEA regulations

    CNet News published a guest column at the end of October 2008 which is of considerable interest to the online gambling industry. Authored by Republican economist and elder statesman Dick Armey of the FreedomWorks advocacy group, it presents a chilling picture of government overreach and the consequences to Net Neutrality.

    In the article, titled "The Midnight Regulation Rush is On!", Armey alerts readers to the actions of US Treasury officials in "quietly pushing through new rules that potentially will have devastating consequences for privacy and e-commerce.

    "It's an understatement to say the Internet has done more to shape society over the last 10 years than any other technological innovation, transforming communications, business, and entertainment. The benefits generated by the technological revolution easily parallel those of the earlier industrial revolution. What's important is that this explosion in growth occurred in an era relatively free of government interference. Unfortunately, that may not remain the case," Armey writes, cautioning that the Treasury Department should be cautious in its Internet gambling rules.

    Setting the scene, he goes on to opine that regulatory incursions onto the Internet are becoming more frequent, threatening the open dynamic that has generated so much for consumers.

    "Without vigilance, we face the prospect of turning the Internet into something akin to an electronic version of the Post Office rather than the engine of growth it has become," he says.

    "This can be seen in Congress' attempt to eliminate unlawful Internet gambling. Not only does the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 raise serious questions about privacy, but its vague definitions and poorly defined goals force banks and payment centers into a tight position.

    "[The financial institutions] are now required to serve as an arm of the government, monitoring private Internet transactions, and blocking those that are "illegal," Armey writes.

    "The problem is that the legislation never defined "unlawful Internet gambling," leaving banks and payment centers to sort out that thorny issue for themselves. This generates a great deal of confusion, leaving consumers and Internet users facing the real prospect of perfectly legal activities being blocked simply due to uncertainty and caution on the part of banks and payment centers. For those processing these transactions, the ambiguity is compounded by compliance costs and the paperwork burden."

    Despite these worrying concerns surrounding the legislation, the Treasury Department is drafting a final rule it hopes to release in November to put the program in motion, Armey informs. This was confirmed last week by the news that Treasury officials had submitted the UIGEA regulations to the government's Office of Management and Budget for a 60 day review prior to implementation.

    But some in Congress are well aware of the burdens and complexities associated with this vague rule, he says, pointing to the House Financial Services Committee legislation introduced by Democrat Rep. Barney Frank that offers a simple solution.

    Armey feels that Franks's Payments System Protection Act makes clear that the law can be enforced against sports betting, which the courts already have defined as illegal. But it also requires regulators to define exactly what "unlawful Internet gambling" is prior to issuing broader regulations. This would substantially reduce the uncertainty and compliance costs for banks and payment centers. The Senate recently followed suit with its own attempt to clarify the ambiguities in the 2006 Act.

    But Armey sounds a wider warning: "Beyond correcting the economic burdens of the law, however, Americans ought to be concerned about the larger questions of the law's impact on privacy and Internet freedom for the future.

    "Once the federal government begins implementing guidelines for various types of online [financial] transactions, what is to prevent it from becoming more involved in every activity on the Internet?," he asks.

    "The Founding Fathers took great care constructing a government that would protect our endowed rights and liberties, not restrict and monitor them. Americans don't want the government monitoring their private transactions, online or offline," he asserts.

    Armey goes on to illustrate how the Internet has proved to be a powerful and valuable force in the US economy.

    "Annual e-commerce retail sales in the United States reached $107 billion in 2006, a 22 percent jump over the previous year. Restrictive government mandates would only restrain such growth, not encourage it. Each new mandate also brings further government encroachment upon the rights and liberties guaranteed by the Constitution. It is precisely because it developed relatively free from government oversight that the Internet has become such a dynamic part of our economy," Armey argues.

    He ends with a caution for government officials: "Congress has acknowledged the potential downside of its foray onto the Internet with the 2006 Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, and is working to correct its overreach. The Treasury Department should follow this lead, and not rush forward with sweeping government mandates that threaten the future growth and innovation on the Internet."

    Armey is respected not only as an economist, but as a politician too. He was GOP house majority leader between1995-2003 and one of the architects of the "Republican Revolution" of the 'nineties which saw the Republican Party achieve majorities in both houses of Congress for the first time in 40 years.

    Read the full article here: You must register/login in order to see the link.
     
    4 people like this.
  30. Nov 8, 2008
  31. Westland Bowl

    Westland Bowl Tin Foil Hat Club Member CAG PABnonaccred

    Occupation:
    not applicable
    Location:
    America
    ^^Dick Armey makes some good logical arguments for leaving the Internet alone but so far, I don't see Treasury officials saying, "Armey makes some good points so why don't we pull those proposed regulations and leave online gambling alone." I just don't know how much "pull" Armey has with not being in Congress anymore.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2008
  32. Nov 8, 2008
  33. Stovetopp

    Stovetopp Senior Member MM

    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    On the Beach
    Do you folks really believe these moral authority folks gives a rats ass about our online gambling?

    It has to do with MONEY (campaign contribution and raw cash under the table )from the local gambling industry, Las Vegas, Biloxi, AC , etc the lotteries horse racing ,dog racing and on and on to the politicans. What motivation would a politican have form sneaking in a bill attached to another bill which had to pass?....
    Very few folks in congress do anything for "we the people" It all depends on how much monies the lobbyist are willing to give Its that simple! Bastards!!!
     
  34. Nov 8, 2008
  35. lots0

    lots0 Banned User - troll posts - flaming PABnonaccred

    Occupation:
    I do nothing productive
    Location:
    Hell on Earth
    Not only does Dick Armey not have any political pull, but all he is doing is defending the Republican policies that got us into this Depression.

    If political pull were gunpowder, the Republicans would not have enough to blow out the brains of an ant...
     
  36. Nov 9, 2008
  37. jetset

    jetset Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Senior Partner, InfoPowa News Service
    Location:
    Earth

    I believe that is a perception held not just in the United States but in other Western countries, where our cultures have brought us up to expect a higher standard of conduct and morals from our politicians than we actually receive.

    There has been extensive reportage on how the activities of lobbyists, corporate manipulators, ethnic bodies and politicians shape legislation that is not always fair and equitable (take the carve-outs of horse racing and state lotteries from anti-online gambling laws as a glaring example) or "for the people."

    Mandatory disclosures of political donations and lobbying expenditure show millions if not billions in play, and (legal) campaign contributions to politicians at both state and federal level appear to have no limits - leading to skewed laws that often seem blatantly commercially protective of some types of gambling at the cost of others or competitors.

    Where "for the people" is rolled out at election time or as just a convenient vehicle to window dress something that has a far more base and self-interested agenda.

    I think there's more than a little cynicism in the public's attitude toward politicians, and it's not unjustified - we see a microcosm of that right here in the political rants forum.

    That widespread voter cynicism appears to concern at least some politicians, and has been referred to recently by both UK and US politicians promising better governance.

    In the US, I think one of the expectations folks have for the president-elect is a higher standard, and we can only hope that is one of his many challenges where he will succeed.

    As for Armery, putting aside political partisanship for a moment, I think his thoughts are well expressed and certainly resonate with me - these latest developments have the markings of a less-than-efficient bureaucratic urgency to get the thing done and dusted with as little further debate as possible.

    And Net Neutrality is definitely impacted by this sort of ill-considered and questionably passed law.
     
    2 people like this.
  38. Nov 9, 2008
  39. jetset

    jetset Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Senior Partner, InfoPowa News Service
    Location:
    Earth
    A little more relevant reading on this topic:

    You must register/login in order to see the link.
     
    2 people like this.

Share This Page