642162 items (4117 unread) in 38 feeds
Blogs
(33 unread)
GoogleBlogSearch
(4011 unread)
Forums
(73 unread)
That’s the word Annie put out about 10:30 pm last night, via twitter:
AnnieDuke Heading to DC tomorrow. Testifying Wednesday at 2pm in front of Chairman Frank’s Committee on his new legislation to regulate online gaming.
about 4 hours ago via web
Apparently it’s the real deal taking shape in DC. Annie, of course, has been in this position before and delivered admirably … and that was before she had faced off several times in front of Donald Trump in the Apprentice board room.
Still unclear how far the current package of poker-related bills can go this year. (Frank Bill, McDermott Bill, and think one other in the Senate but have lost track.) Not to be a doubter nor pose as a political Joe Navarro, but it doesn’t look promising in what’s sure to be a contentious election season when the three most powerful Dems in America (Obama, Reid, Pelosi) are kinda speaking volumes with their silence on the awesomeness — nay, the righteousness — of internet gambling.
Maybe that’s what this week’s hearing is all about?
With Annie testifying in DC, her brother Howard Lederer stepping out in a new way, and their good friend Andy Bloch taking the lead for poker engaging a wider community concerned with internet freedoms as a whole, you can tell — or at least it seems — that poker political forces have shifted gears.
Watch the hearing at the House Financial Committee site
UPDATE: A series of roll call votes will delay the hearing until at least 2:15pm.
This afternoon, Barney Frank’s House Financial Services Committee will hold a hearing scheduled for 2pm to discuss HR 2267, a bill to license and regulate online gambling.
Five witnesses are expected to testify at today’s hearing (with links to ther opening testimony):
Ed Williams – President/CEO of Discovery Federal Credit Union (on behalf of the Credit Union National Association)
Tom Malkasian – Vice Chairman and Director of Strategic Planning, Commerce Casino
The Honorable Lynn Malerba – Tribal Chairwoman, Mohegan Tribe of Connecticut
Michael K. Fagan – Law Enforcement/Anti-Terrorism Consultant
Annie Duke – Testifying on behalf of the Poker Players Alliance
Watch the archived hearing here
Wednesday’s hearing on HR 2267, which would regulate and license Internet gambling, brought out strong opinions from both sides in over two hours of testimony in front of the House Financial Services Committee. The next step in the legislative process is a mark-up of the bill, tentatively planned for next week where members of the Committee can add amendments to the legislation, with a vote to move the bill out of Committee and have the full House of Representatives vote on the legislation later this year. A couple of items from the hearing:
Bachus v Duke on Ultimate Bet scandalOne of the more contentious moments of the hearing was when Ranking Member Spencer Bachus (R-AL) entered into evidence a two-year old article from MSNBC.com discussing the Ultimate Bet superuser scandal. That article stated that over $75 million had been stolen from its players. Duke corrected Bachus, stating that the figure was $22 million, and the entire amount was refunded to its players. Duke also stated that the scandal was a reason why regulation would be beneficial to those who play online poker so that justice could be served for the parties responsible for the scandal.
Disagreement among opponentsAnother point brought up during the hearing was while anti-terrorism/money laundering consultant Michael K. Fagan, a former US attorney, was against all forms of Internet gambling. Meanwhile, California cardroom executive Tom Malkasian was also against the legislation, but he and his coalition of California cardrooms and Native American casinos have been pushing hard for intrastate gambling in California. Another Native American executive, The Honorable Lynn Malerba of the Mohegan Tribe of Connecticut was for the legislation, but the tribes had to be on a level playing field. Rep. Joe Baca (D-CA), who is against the legislation, got into a war of words with Malerba, stating the legislation could threaten the sovereignty of Native American casinos.
You can watch the hearing at the link above, and read the press release from the PPA regarding the hearing:
House Financial Services Committee Holds Hearing on Internet Poker Bill
Poker Professional Annie Duke Testifies on Behalf of PPA
Washington, DC (July 21, 2010) The Poker Players Alliance (PPA), the leading poker grassroots advocacy group with more than one million members nationwide, thanked Chairman Frank for holding a hearing in the House Financial Services Committee on H.R. 2267, the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, paving the way to a markup and successful vote on H.R. 2267 before the August recess.
H.R. 2267 establishes the needed licensing and regulatory framework for the United States to exercise appropriate control and oversight over Internet poker and other forms of Internet gaming. Testifying in support of the legislation were professional poker player Annie Duke, Ed Williams, President and Chief Executive Officer, Discovery Federal Credit Union and The Honorable Lynn Malerba, Tribal Chairwoman, Mohegan Tribe of Connecticut. This legislation is further supported by a diverse network of organizations including the American business community and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
“This Committee and this Congress should not tolerate laws that seek to prevent responsible adults from playing a game we find stimulating, challenging and entertaining. H.R. 2267 provides this freedom in a safe and regulated environment and I urge everyone on this Committee to support this common sense policy. However you might feel about gambling on the Internet, I would suggest that gambling with freedom is far more risky,” said Duke.
“The testimony we heard today underscores the challenges faced by the Federal government due to the unclear definition of what now constitutes unlawful Internet gambling and the glaring lack of protections for consumers,” said PPA Executive Director John Pappas. “Frankly, our opponents can’t offer a consistent argument on this issue. Former U.S. Attorney Michael Fagan wants to go as far as banning Internet gambling outright, and Tom Malkasian of Commerce Casino supports licensing and regulation – just not a competitive marketplace. It seems that our opponents don’t even agree with each other here,” continued Pappas.
“As interest in and awareness of licensing and regulating online poker grows among members of Congress and the Administration – and with it the consumer protection and tax revenue benefits that accompany licensing and regulation – the PPA is ready and eager to work with policymakers to continue moving this legislation through the process,” concluded Pappas.
About The Poker Players Alliance
The Poker Players Alliance (www.theppa.org) is a nonprofit membership organization comprised of over 1,000,000 online and offline poker players and enthusiasts from around the United States who have joined together to speak with one voice to promote the game and to protect poker players’ rights.
Thursday morning at the Rio, Andy Bloch was part of a panel at Netroots Nation titled Internet Freedom: Protecting Rights in the Digital Realm. Many in the poker community have heard Bloch’s points about how the government is infringing on the freedom of poker players (UIGEA), but to most in the audience, it was new information to them.
Andy Bloch talking poker and Internet freedom (Photo by BJ Nemeth)
Bloch stated three reasons why they should care, even if they’re not an online poker player: Basic freedom, the implications and side effects a ban on Internet gambling would have and how it could move to other areas of the Internet, and that people need to be organized and actively defend their rights. Bloch related a story about how he was playing a $1 SNG online (not mentioning Full Tilt Poker, but he was wearing a PPA patch) with an individual who was visually impaired. He stated that the person he was talking to, and others like him, would not be able to play in a brick and mortar casino. He also described how the UIGEA was passed in the middle of the night in 2006, attached to a must-pass bill. At the time, the PPA and poker community weren’t as mobilized as they are today in the effort to regulate Internet gambling.
The other two individuals on the panel, James Rucker of ColorofChange.org discussing net neutrality and Amelia Donoley of the Center for Media Justice discussing how Internet freedom affects migrant and Latino communities. Most of the audience questions (which were difficult to hear on the video) appeared to be geared toward the net neutrality issue, with the fear that big corporations would control the flow of the Internet, forcing out smaller companies and non-profit groups. Andy stated that there are big corporations supporting net neutrality, as well as to help regulate online poker.
At the end of the panel, each panelist had one final opportunity to promote their efforts. Bloch brought out a poker chip with a bar code to enter into a drawing for an Ipad. The other two panelists seemed impressed with his offering as they each picked up a chip. To watch the hearing, it’s available below:
The attempt to regulate and license Internet gambling tries to move another step forward on Tuesday with the markup of HR 2267 in the House Financial Services Subcommittee. The markup is scheduled to start at 10am ET, with HR 2267 currently listed third on the list of seven bills.
The last time a bill regarding Internet gambling made it to a markup vote in the Committee (2008), it “lost” by a vote of 32-32. Doing a little bit of research by using the PPA Congressional Ratings website, the 2008 markup vote, and previous hearings, there are currently 34 Yeas, 21 Nays, and 16 Undecided on the bill.
Democratic Yeas – Frank, Kanjorski, Gutierrez, Velazquez, Watt, Ackerman, Sherman, Moore (KS), Capuono, Hinojosa, Clay, McCarthy, Lynch, Green, Cleaver, Bean, Moore (WI), Hodes, Ellison, Klein, Wilson, Perlmutter, Donnelly, Foster, Carson, Childers, Minnick, Adler, Dreihaus, Himes, Maffei
Republican Yeas – King, Paul, Lance, Campbell, Lee
Democratic Nays – Meeks, Baca, Miller, Scott
Republican Nays – Bachus, Castle, Royce, Lucas, Manzullo, Jones, Miller, Capito, Hensarling, Garrett, Barrett, Neugebauer, Price, McHenry, Putnam, Bachmann, Marchant
Those listed as undecided include those who voted against the bill in 2008, but have either signed on as a co-sponsor to HR 2267 or sent a letter in support of Internet poker.
Democratic Undecided – Waters, Maloney, Speier, Kilroy, Kosmas, Grayson, Peters
Republican Undecided – Biggert, Gerlach, Campbell, McCotter, McCarthy, Posey, Jenkins, Paulsen
To add your voice of support of online poker, check out www.standupforpoker.com and call, write or Tweet your local member of Congress.
The battle over Barney Frank’s HR 2267 is heating up, and he seems to have found allies in sensible albeit unusual places. Specifically, supporting efforts to dismantle – or at least rebuke and revise – the UIGEA are the Heartland Institute, Americans for Tax Reform, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and Dick Armey’s FreedomWorks.
A letter they all sent to Congressional members yesterday:
July 25, 2010
Dear Member:
In the next few days, you will consider legislation that would modify the regulation of Internet gambling. We have a variety of opinions about the specifics of the bill but, as representatives and employees free market organizations, we all strongly believe that the current government regulations intended to prohibit Internet gambling are destructive, burdensome, and unfair.
The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, and the Wire Act all need review and revision. The legislation you are about to consider about would make some necessary revisions particularly to the burdensome, silly, and destructive regulations contained within UIEGA.
Certainly, other approaches need to be tried. The ideas contained in the bill you are about to consider are certainly worth your careful consideration and attention.
Yours truly,
Eli Lehrer
Senior Fellow
The Heartland Institute
Grover Norqist
President
Americans for Tax Reform
Wayne Brough
Chief Economist
FreedomWorks
Michelle Minton
Director of Insurance Studies
Competitive Enterprise Institute
Yep, it was bound to happen, but perhaps the bounds didn't have to be broken so fast. In the form of taxes collected from gaming revenue, in the fiscal year that ended on June 30, Pennsylvania has now beaten Las Vegas by almost 35 percent... $1.1 billion vs. $831 million. Even Indiana (which much of Chicago visits, primarily the Harrah's Horseshoe in Hammond, IN.) beat out our fine neon city at $878 million in tax revenue. Even in this economy, gambling is here to stay. It's just that tourists would rather stay in their backyard than visit Las Vegas.
With the markup of HR 2267 scheduled during the House Financial Services Committee today, Greg Raymer appeared on Fox Business to discuss regulating and licensing Internet poker. Video of Raymer’s appearance now appears below:
Watch the latest video at video.foxbusiness.com
1,052 runners turned out last Sunday for the ChampionChip at bwin Poker, which is one of bwin's premier weekly poker tournaments. With plenty of satellites to gain entry at a fraction of the $200 buy-in, players of all bankrolls can take a shot on Sundays at a big score in the ChampionChip, with the winner taking down more than $30,000 in prize money.
While much of the final table in the ChampionChip on July 25th were new names, simpson555 was definitely no stranger, having notched some very impressive wins in multiple bwin tournaments over the last few years, including a win in the $100K Guaranteed back in January 2010. He'd put that experience to good use in the ChampionChip on Sunday, powering to victory and collecting $32,444 for 1st place. AcesKinom would have to settle for a runner-up finish worth $22,540, with Pokerccini_ taking 3rd for $16,136.
Below are the results for the top ten finishers, along with their prize money:
1. simpson555 - $32,444
2. AcesKinom - $22,540
3. Pokerccini_ - $16,137
4. varvaros0587 - $11,953
5. -Rabauke- - $8,837
6. Bergman86 - $6,557
7. Yclept - $5,293
8. professorone - $4,132
9. codmeharly12 - $3,219
10. be5en - $2,527
The markup hearing of the House Financial Services Subcommittee started shortly after 10am. The schedule is to discuss HR 2267 until 11am ET, then take a one-hour break. The Committee will return at 12pm for more discussion with a vote scheduled by 2pm ET.
You can watch it all going down here, assuming there aren’t shenanigans in play to delay matters further. And because there’s always a chance I don’t know WTF I’m talking about, Pokerati has deployed a Beltway team to not only keep us posted on today’s developments from the Hill, but also to provide a primer on what’s really in play today for the future of internet gambling and/or poker in America.
You can follow reports from the Hill today on Twitter with @Scarlet_LV, and below is more about what she’s walking into.
HR 2267 Markup
A special report for Pokerati by @Scarlet_LV
photos by James Berglie / Be Photography
If all goes well, the House Financial Services Committee will decide today the fate of HR 2267, which seems to be the keystone for any new laws that stand to eliminate burdens of the UIGEA and establish a framework for the future of licensed and regulated online poker in the United States.
Today’s hearing is a “mark-up”, where the full committee debates amendments to a bill, and votes on a motion to send the bill to the House floor with recommendations on the amendments to consider for a decisive vote. Make sense?
I’m pretty sure that’s how it works — but I never would’ve expected two weeks ago when dealing the WSOP that I’d be on Capitol Hill watching a different (but not too different) game with so much riding on the deals being cut. For more explanation, see house rules and parliamentary procedures here and here.
H.R. 2267 Internet Gambling Regulation and Consumer Protection, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act.
To amend title 31, United States Code, to provide for the licensing of Internet gambling activities by the Secretary of the Treasury, to provide for consumer protections on the Internet, to enforce the tax code, and for other purposes.
Having attended last week’s meeting, I met this week with people who could fill me in on the amendments the Committee will be discussing today. Though more or fewer are possible, here’s what most expect:
With these potential amendments, you get a sense of the driving forces currently behind the bill, and the key players. These became apparent during last week’s hearing — which sources tell me was rather unusual for a bill like HR 2267 to get a second hearing like that — as testimony from Members and witnesses helped shape matters that will be in play today.
As the mark-up proceeds, here are the different Members and groups claiming a stake in this piece of legislation.
Rep. Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts)
House Financial Services Committee Chairman, Sponsor of H.R. 2267
Representing: personal freedom, sensible finance
H.R. 2267 Position: In favor. Says this bill will relieve the burden on banks and notes that the US Chamber of Commerce is likewise supportive.
Washington, D.C. – July 21st: Congressman BARNEY FRANK chairs the House Financial Services committee, discussing the “Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection and Enforcement Act.”
(Credit Image: © James Berglie)
“Unwise choices is (sic) part of freedom.”
“It is the death of freedom, if you say that because some minority of adults will abuse something you prohibit it.”
“Opposition to this bill consists of partly of people that think that gambling is terrible and partly of people think that it is so wonderful that they don’t want anyone else to compete with them in offering it.”
Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Alabama)
House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member
Representing: anti-gambling, family values and protection of minors; protection of America from unwise financial decisions
H.R. 2267 Position: Against
Washington, D.C. – July 21st: Congressman SPENCER BACHUS speaks at the House Financial Services committee, discussing the “Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection and Enforcement Act.”
(Credit Image: © James Berglie)
“After all the talk here about shutting down casinos on Wall Street, it makes no sense to me why we would be taking steps to open casinos in every home, dorm room, library, ipod, blackberry, ipad, and computer in America.”
After citing Obama’s legislation to protect Americans from “unwise financial decisions and predatory practice”, he expressed the irony he finds in discussing “the merits of a bill that will fleece Americans by reversing current restrictions on internet gambling.” He believes that gambling is perhaps the “ultimate example” of an unwise and harmful financial choice made by Americans.
Claims the revenue from internet gambling will not match the estimates, and in any case, the revenue would benefit at the expense of the vulnerable (addicts, children).
Rep. Brad Sherman (D-California)Representing: denying licensing to current operators, perhaps tribal and California brick and mortars
H.R. 2267 Position: On the fence; modifications need to be made
Rep. Sherman quotes himself as saying in the past “you have had to leave your house to lose your house” but that he is reconsidering his stance. He makes a interesting point that two reasons that some are making to support the bill are contradictory. The first is that the technology available is too weak to be able to prevent what is already going on, and therefore we should tax it and benefit; the second is that the technology is strong enough to provide protection from minors.
Sherman seems to be willing to support this such that the current internet sites operating not be allowed to license under the premise they are currently operating outside the law.
Rep. John Campbell (R-California)Representing: personal freedom, consumer protection, internet gaming for economic growth
H.R. 2267 Position: In favor
“You know, I don’t gamble, and I don’t particularly like it; in poker, I always forget what’s a straight and a flush …. ….but freedom is not about legislating what I like to do and making illegal what I don’t.” Likens people gambling online now to people enjoying liquor during Prohibition. He supports the concept of consumer protection, and using the online gaming as a revenue stream for the US rather than other countries benefiting.
Rep. Joe Baca (D-California)Representing: protection of Californian interests – brick and mortars and tribal casinos, protect American jobs
H.R. 2267 Position: Against
Rep. Baca is primarily concerned that the passing of this bill will cost jobs in the state of California and in the US, and violate tribal sovereignty rights. He believes that the safeguards stated in this bill will do nothing to protect from fraud or problem gaming. Baca states he is uncomfortable with the accessibility that internet gaming gives to children and problem gamblers.
Editor’s Note: Check back … the hearing is going on, and we’ve still got some updates on this post coming.
Scarlet Robinson is a Las Vegas poker dealer who tweets her adventures in and out of poker @Scarlet_LV.A press release from the PPA regarding the passage of HR 2267 from the House Financial Services Committee by a vote of 41-22.
PPA Praises Passage of H.R. 2267, Internet Gambling Regulation Bill
Washington, DC (July 28, 2010) –The Poker Players Alliance (PPA), the leading poker grassroots advocacy group with more than one million members nationwide, today applauded passage of H.R. 2267, the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, by the House Financial Services Committee. The bipartisan 41-22 vote demonstrates that sensible regulation of Internet gaming is gaining support in Congress while prohibition continues to fail.
“The fact is, online poker is not going away. Congress has a choice – it can license and regulate it to provide government oversight and consumer protections, or our lawmakers can stick their heads in the sand, ignore it, and leave consumers to play on non-U.S. regulated websites in all 50 states,” said Former Senator Alfonse D’Amato, chairman of the PPA. “I’m glad the Financial Services Committee today overwhelmingly chose to act and protect Americans as well as preserve the fundamental freedoms of adults and the Internet.”
Sponsored by House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA), H.R. 2267 establishes a robust licensing and regulatory regime for online gaming in the United States, providing much needed oversight on this growing industry in order to protect consumers, children and problem gamblers. By using the most modern technologies and regulatory authority, this bill goes further than the ineffective Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) to keep children and problem gamblers off these sites, at the same time allowing for strong consumer protections for adult consumers who enjoy this recreational activity. Additionally, licensing and regulation presents an avenue for companies to return to the U.S., providing the economy with much needed jobs and tax revenue. The bill was further strengthened by several bipartisan amendments that provide even greater consumer protections
and strong enforcement against unlicensed operators, something that the current law (UIGEA) lacks completely.“We commend the lawmakers who helped make H.R. 2267 stronger through a variety of consumer protection mandates. In particular, we thank Representatives John Campbell (R-CA), Mary Jo Kilroy (D-OH), and Melissa Bean (D-IL) for their thoughtful additions to the bill and their interest in preserving the rights of adult poker players in their districts,” said John Pappas, PPA executive director.
While the bill has passed out of Committee, there is still much work to be done and areas of policy in this bill that must still be addressed. To be clear, despite the concerns of some of our members, nothing in the Committee-passed legislation precludes lawful Internet poker-only operators whom U.S. players know and trust today from the opportunity to operate under a regulated system. The PPA will work with House and Senate lawmakers to ensure that the final legislation produces the best regulated online gaming environment for the consumer. “This is a great day not only for poker players, but for proponents of Internet freedom and
individual liberty,” said D’Amato. “We thank Chairman Frank for his leadership on this bill, and look forward to working with him to bring this bill through the legislative process.”Key provisions of the bill include:
• Thorough vetting of potential licensees and creation of an OFAC-style list of illegal operators;
• Mandatory implementation of technologies to protect against underage gambling using the commercial and government databases used for online banking to verify age and identity
• Requirements for operators to set daily, weekly or monthly limits on deposits and losses to monitor and detect individuals with excessive gaming habits;
• High standards to thwart fraud, abuse and cheating to ensure fair games for customers;
• Regulation to prevent money laundering; and,
• Processes to prevent tax avoidanceAbout The Poker Players Alliance
The Poker Players Alliance (www.theppa.org) is a nonprofit membership organization comprised of over 1,000,000 online and offline poker players and enthusiasts from around the United States who have joined together to speak with one voice to promote the game and to protect poker players’ rights.
For an update about the murky waters of the American online gaming market, start with the Guide to HR2267 Markup day and check out a proper link dump of other bits and pieces including a spankworthy pic. Boobs (and Vicodin) makes political scribblings palatable. (Pokerati, Wicked Chops Poker)
And then read Shamus' take... House Financial Services Committee Passes H.R. 2267 (Hard-Boiled Poker)
And before we go, Milton Friedman sounds off on greed...2 Big Internet Gambling Companies to Merge (NY Times)
Party Gaming to Merge With Rival (The Guardian)
PartyGaming, Bwin Announce Merger (Wicked Chops Poker)
PartyGaming to Take Control of Bwin in $1.76 Billion Deal (Bloomberg)
Party Gaming stock shot up 20% in one trading day after the merger was announced. I hope you gobbled up shares a few weeks ago and made a nice profit off of this merger. (Financial Times)