[smoore]

but it doesn't seem to have any teeth.

A bill passed in congress tonight (port security) that had some internet gambling language tacked on to it this afternoon. From what I gather, it restricts transactions with gambling operators and mandates ISPs remove gambling sites and links to gambling sites once notified by the FED.

Apparently there is no actual language saying playing poker online is illegal. I haven't read it, I'll take the others' word for it. Lots of discussion in the 2+2 Legislation forum.

[shadesofgrey]

Originally Posted by smoore

but it doesn't seem to have any teeth.

A bill passed in congress tonight (port security) that had some internet gambling language tacked on to it this afternoon. From what I gather, it restricts transactions with gambling operators and mandates ISPs remove gambling sites and links to gambling sites once notified by the FED.

Apparently there is no actual language saying playing poker online is illegal. I haven't read it, I'll take the others' word for it. Lots of discussion in the 2+2 Legislation forum.

i dont read 2+2....

i've been watching this bill for a while..... i offer no insight to the legalese spoken in the bill, i'm not a lawyer.... But i think WA is a model (TEST)state for federal implementation. i've said it before on CT.

its coming... i dont think enough people fight for the rights of online poker, and if we dont, we'll be lumped together with money launderers, terrorists, and CEOs fleeing the USA.

the USA policy for online action is retarded. horse racing is exempt??!!?? so online poker has to go off shores?!!? nuff said. WTF is that?

[smoore]

Originally Posted by shadesofgrey

i dont read 2+2....

It's a friggin' "the sky is falling!" madhouse today.

[shadesofgrey]

Originally Posted by smoore

It's a friggin' "the sky is falling!" madhouse today.

chicken little is correct. online poker skys are going

american/cuban as i am, the USA is losing effort behind its forward thinking economy. why does online poker have to reside offshore? and horse / dog(?) racing exist legally in the USA land?

guess i dont have enough money nor lobbying power to deal with it... other that the PPA

[Poboy]

http://www.rules.house.gov/109_2nd/t...43_portscr.pdf

It's a federal crime to fund your online account.


Way to go Republicans.

[bigjohn]

Maybe its time to pull my $$ out from all online accts and Neteller... Not because of the bill, but because of the feared backlash from the poker sites ...

[DrBullMoose]

This "law" will have a ripple effect and create more back room poker games at bars and clubs. The local bookie will get an increase in business as well.

People aren't going to stop gambling because of this new lgislation. They are just going to find a different place to do it.

What a joke our government has become. We are at war, on many different fronts and this government decides to hammer on internet poker.

[cappicola]

Originally Posted by smoore

Re: Well, It passed....

When I saw your thread title I thought the thread was going to be about a kidney stone.....

[bolgenmod]

Originally Posted by smoore

It's a friggin' "the sky is falling!" madhouse today.

If it weren't for the fact that the bill might actually have an effect on online poker, the 2+2 ruckus might have been amusing. There was a HUGE thread in the legislation forum sweating the CSPAN coverage of the debate, and every fifteen posts or so someone would post WHAT IS GOING ON or something similar. And of course the 2+2ers would then flame that person ("Read the thread moran"). Then there were the "should I withdraw my bankroll right away?" posts and the "now I have to get a job" posts. Madhouse indeed.

But the absolute best posts were the comments from people watching CSPAN. Of course, some of our legislators are women, so everytime a woman got to speak, there would be a couple of "I'd hit it" and "no way" posts. As someone pointed out, it seemed for a minute as if one was back in the TV forum where the relative hotness of female players seems to be more important than their relative skill. Very amusing.

But from what I can tell, smoore is correct -- the bill (which is an amendment to the Ports bill) is pretty vague. And the provisions of the bill that would really affect us (like the ban on bank transactions with gambling sites) have to be clarified. The few very knowledgeable 2+2 posters think that this may or may not affect Neteller and such sites, but until the enforcement mechanism is actually formulated, it is useless to panic. I am no lawyer (or big-time internet player for that matter), but I think it is best to just wait and see.

[littlebu]

Yeah this sucks real bad. I've been contemplating what to do with my online bankroll all morning. I wish we knew everything as far as withdrawls are concerned. Most everything I have been reading the last few weeks seems to be mostly about deposits.