US gaming probe rocks top banks

[eejit101]

From Times Online News

[Boobie Lover]

.

[Kurn]

"So I'm headed for the nearest foreign border,
Vancouver may be just my kind of town.
'cause we don't need the kind of law and order
that tends to keep a good man underground."

*My Uncle* - Gram Parsons

[Talking Poker]

I'm going to merge this with eejit's thread (same exact article, minus link)...

This is definitely not good news. I guess it's just a question of how bad this news is. I really wish the PPA would do less barking and more biting in their whole "let's get a carve out for poker" thing. That, or that some of the other countries being affected (Antigua, and now I guess the UK) will make some progress via the WTO. But I don't even know any more. It's beginning to feel hopeless.

I hate the DoJ so very, very much. I mean, aren't theie bigger problems in the world they should be focusing on???

[Kurn]

Later today (when I get less pissed off) I will draft a letter to my Congressman and both Senators expressing my anger at this absolute waste of government resources *and* infringement on personal liberty.

Then I'll start checking out "vacation" property in Nova Scotia.

[Talking Poker]

Post your letter here, please. I'm sure a number of us wouldn't mind cutting and pasting it, with your permission, of course.

[melioris]

01/20/09

[Talking Poker]

2 second later Edit: Gotcha.

[left68wing]

I still don't get it. 1/20/09?

[Kurn]

Do you really think Barrack Obama or HRC would change this? If your answer is yes, link me to any documentation that supports that position.

You are aware that the DOJ under Clinton tried to apply the Wire Act to online gambling. its just the industry wasn't that big back then.

[Kurn]

january 20, 2009 is the first day George W Bush will not be POTUS.

[melioris]

here is the first draft of my letter

send it


"I am writing concerning the recent activity of the DOJ in relation to online gambling. I am voting member of your constituency, insert other personal info that makes you sound normal here, and as a recreation I play poker online. It is unfathomable to me why the DOJ is pursuing online poker (interestingly, off track betting on horse racing is specifically exempted-thus eliminating any moral rational the DOJ may claim that this is a crusade against gambling) when there are far more significant, and clearly illegal, injustices that are condoned by the DOJ’s lack of attention.

I encourage you to investigate this reckless activity by the DOJ. If you are as rationale as your voting record suggests, I predict with you will agree with my position that the DOJ activity is asinine. Furthermore, I encourage you to support the regulation and taxation of those in the business of providing online poker rooms. It would be a reliable source of funding for the government in these challenging times. Interestingly, to the best of my knowledge, every legitimate online poker room supports the regulation and taxation of their business by the US government.

I am resisting the urge to rattle off why I think the DOJ’s actions in this matter are wrong. Instead I urge you to become informed of this issue and come to your own conclusions. Thank you for your time,"

[Kurn]

note edits.

Rational/rationale were reversed in your letter. Better to call the DOJ misguided than asinine despite what we really think.

[melioris]

thanks for the proofread.

[Kurn]

Its useful here to get a handle on the nature of the DOJ versus the legislative end.

The DOJ, regardless of what party has appointed its officers (Attorney General on down) is comprised of former prosecutors and other law enforcement types.

When people from these professions see *internet gambling*, they think *high-tech bookie* and that leads them to conclude *mob connections.*

That will not change regardless of which party is in the White House. DAs and cops will always think like DAs and cops.

The focus needs to be on the legislators that make up the House and Senate Judiciary committees. They need to be be directed towards thinking that the current path of the DOJ is revenue-negative, and that bringing these operations onshore will lead to a positive revenue stream.

[Boobie Lover]

I don't particularly understand what going after the DOJ is going to do since they are just pursuing action on laws that are already in place. Perhaps a couple quibbles about the laws in place would be better.

[Kurn]

The only way to "go after" the DOJ is to get Congress to pass a law that negates the one they're currently trying to enforce.

Besides, if the DOJ is asserting that NETeller, et al is guilty of aiding a "criminal activity" because internet gambling is in violation of the Wire Act, there is case law that refutes that assertion.

[lightfungus]

So should we be not cashing out until things blow over (fingers crossed) and should we not be reporting gambling wins/losses come this April?

[Kurn]

Unless you live in Washington State, it is not illegal to gamble online in the US. It is however, illegal to gamble online and not pay taxes. The only thing about this whole mess that concerns players is that it has become very difficult to deposit money in an online site. It is still relatively simple to withdraw money.

The UIGEA does not make it illegal for Americans to gamble online. It restricts financial institutions from transferring money to the site.

With respect to reporting income for tax purposes. No law change regarding the legality of playing alters the fact that your income is taxable. Income from illegal activity is still taxable in the US.

[melioris]

from some staffer of Herb-

Thank you for taking the time to contact me. I apologize
for the delay in my response. I value the correspondence I get
from people back home in Wisconsin, and I would like to take this
opportunity to address your concerns.

I appreciate hearing your thoughts on the prohibition of
Internet gambling. Each year Americans wager nearly six billion
dollars on bets and other gambling transactions conducted over the
Internet. Opponents of Internet gambling have raised concerns that
it is largely unregulated, fails to block access by children, and
provides outlets for organized crime and money laundering. On
the other hand, many people believe that Internet gambling is an
easily accessible and harmless form of entertainment.

On September 30, 2006, Congress passed H.R. 4954, the
"SAFE Port Act," which included a version of the "Internet
Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act" that was added
during conference committee consideration. As you may know,
this bill prohibits gambling businesses from accepting checks,
credit cards, electronic transfers and other forms of payments for
illegal Internet gambling transactions. Intrastate gambling and
intratribal Internet gambling operations that feature age and
location verification requirements in accordance with federal laws
are exempt from the Internet gambling ban.

I understand and appreciate your concerns with the manner
in which Internet gambling was addressed in the "SAFE Port Act."
The "SAFE Port Act" was signed into law by the President on
October 13, 2006. Should Congress revisit issues related to
Internet gambling, you can be assured I will keep your views in
mind.

Again, thank you for contacting me. I appreciate having
the benefit of your views.





Sincerely,


Herb Kohl
U.S. Senator

[lightfungus]

Thanks, pal. I guess.

[Dodoubled]

That letter looked like a Wikipedia article with an electronic signature.

Bah.