Tuesday, July 11, 2006

All In, With Few "Outs"

"Rule #1" of Heimlich blogging is out the window today. This post is unabashedly political. (I may have to downgrade the rule to a guideline, at this rate.) But I know many of my readers will take interest in this one.

This afternoon, the House of Representatives passed a bill to, in essence, ban online gambling. It passed by an overwhelming margin. (Here, incidentally, is how that vote broke down.)

Of course, just taxing it like any other "sin" wasn't an option for the majority of our elected officials. And of course, exemptions had to be carved out so that states could still separate their citizens from their money through the lottery.

If you live in a state with legalized gambling, this law is saying it's okay for you to gamble, so long as you don't do it in the privacy of your own home.

Perhaps most aggravating of all was the exemption also made for horse racing. Gotta let the states where that's big slide through. So essentially, this law is telling you that certain types of gambling are okay, while others are not. Somehow you can "lose your house with the click of a mouse" (to paraphrase the words of one congressman) playing online poker, but not betting on horses online? Idiocy. (Though only slightly more idiotic that the horse racing lobbyists who actually think that online poker players, restricted from their game, would actually turn to horse racing as an alternative.)

Only one obstacle remains before the U.S. Government forces you to fold your poker hands for good -- the Senate. The bad news: there's no reason to expect the bill would not pass there as easily as it did in the House. The good news: this issue has not been debated or prepped for voting in the Senate. There are only four weeks left before our "hard-working" senators take a one-month break until Labor Day, and then only another four weeks after that before they're out of session until the 2006 elections. Procedure dictates that if the bill is not passed before the end of the session in which the House approved it, the House vote is invalidated.

So bottom line: if you're against this law, you have to hope that the government does its typical job of not getting its shit together, and is unable to bring it to a vote in the eight working weeks remaining. Because if it doesn't come to vote, you have the chance to elect new congressmen for 2007 that won't try this crap again.

If it does come to vote? Well, then you'd better write to your senator if this is something you care about, and hope that they actually give a shit. (Unlikely as that may be.)

Otherwise, you're looking for this century's version of a speakeasy.

8 comments:

Dave(id) said...

Of course it passed, they know that horse racing and the lottery are filled with skill, strategy and years of experience. While poker on the other hand is based on pure luck :)

How they could allow horse racing is insane, but I believe it's based on a law allowing electronic transfers for intrastate betting back in the 80's. Not sure what's involved in over riding such a thing. Or maybe it's because the horses are US companies (?) and are paying taxes.

Guess I'll start hitting the local bingo parlor.

TheGirard said...

I hope the greyhound races are still ok.

c'mon Santa's Lil' helper!!!

Shocho said...

Seems that one of the biggest lobbying forces for the this bill is the "American Gaming Association," which of course means gaming you do in casinos and not online. This is all about brick-and-mortar (in the US) vs. online (out of the US). So tell your local casino to lay off the internet.

Why is it that the only way that conventional industries can find to combat online competition is to whine to the government? Lame.

GiromiDe said...

There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or a corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years , the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped ,or turned back, for their private benefit.

--Robert Heinlein

GiromiDe said...

Oh, and chances are SOMEONE will try to take this to the Supreme Court.

Michael J. Hercus said...

Actually, this bill was the watered down version that is impossible to enforce and will do absolutely nothing to deter online poker. This is a case of the US trying to enforce their law on non-US corporations (both the online gambling sites and the non-US banking institutions). That just doesn't work in the world today.

For those wanting to read more about this latest version of stupidity in DC, check out this article on Cardplayer...

http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_news/news_story/1157?class=PokerNews

Michael J. Hercus said...

Hmmm, The link didn't transfer when I posted. Here it is in two parts, just link them up manually if you're still interested.

http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_news/
news_story/1157?class=PokerNews

GiromiDe said...

As a matter of fact, although the proponents of the bill say that online gaming is destroying the moral fiber of society, the bill allows a state to house an online gaming site for its citizens.

And there you have it -- the biggest problem in a nutshell -- X is immoral and illegal unless the State has control of X or already has control of X. In this case, X is "gambling," but it could be anything, really.

And the motivation behind this makes me sick. I'm a God-fearing Christian, but the so-called God-fearing Christians driving opinion on the right these days make my blood boil. Leave the damn apples on the tree, guys! They're SUPPOSED to be THERE!