Poker Players Alliance Forums » Poker Players Alliance

Questions from Congresscritters

(4 posts)
  • Started 10 months ago by Big Jim Slade v2.0
  • Latest reply from TheEngineer

No tags yet.


  1. Big Jim Slade v2.0
    Moderator
    Visit User Profile

    This week I have spoken with several congressmen and Senators offices about poker issues. Here are some questions they had. I'm not sure I had the answers to these questions. If anyone wants to provide an answer, feel free to.

    1) What is the purpose in narrowing the bill in the Senate version?

    2) How does the legislation deal with children? With Addiction? With losing too much money?

    3) Are Republicans supporting the bill?

    4) Why are there more poker players today than in 2006?

    5) Is there a Ways and Means piece?

    6) Has Frank's bill been scored?

    7) How would our state gain revenue under this structure?

    8) What is the status of this Bill?

    9) How many cosponsors does the bill have?

    Posted 10 months ago #
  2. Skallagrim
    State Director & Moderator
    Visit User Profile

    Hi Big Jim, GREAT POST!

    I edited your post only by numbering your questions as that makes it a bit easier to respond and keep a discussion going. For what its worth, this is how I would answer the question you have listed:

    1) The Senate version has not been introduced, so its final language is still unsure. However, it is widely known that the bill planned by Senator Menendez is expected to concentrate on regulation of peer to peer games of skill. Under a bill like this, online slots and other typical casino games would not benefit from open legalization/regulation. This is actually good for us potentially as it allows the law to be more tailored to our specific conditions.

    2) Again, the Senate details are not yet out there, but it is clear that ANY legislation will require any site offering games in the US to use the latest reliable age verification software (better even than porn sites use). The statistics that are naturally kept by an online site (and never kept by a B&M site) allow for far better identification of problem gamers. Requiring the sites to look for this and offer help to prevent it is also something that would be in any legislation. The more reputable sites do this now through self exclusion and deposit limits that are only increased by some form of proof of ability to spend/risk the funds. Legislation will insure all sites are held to a similar standard.

    3) YES! Ron Paul of course, but many other Republicans are on our side. Check TE's Congressional Ratings Guide on this site to get an up to date list.

    4) Because the UIGEA was bad legislation, both in theory and in practice. But that does not mean that future enforcement of the UIGEA may not increase problems. - And actually, the technically correct answer to this question is "because poker is the best and most fun example the great American tradition of matching wits and skills for stakes."

    5) Nothing in Ways and Means as we speak, nor directly in the pipeline.

    6) ? Not sure what you mean by "scored" - I may guess the answer to your question is that it has not yet been specifically scheduled for further action. Tell me if my guess is wrong.

    7) State with income taxes can be sure their winning players are paying their taxes. States may choose to develop state licensed sites, and can of course tax them. Those are guaranteed pluses under any legislation. Other state sources of revenue are under consideration.

    8) Frank's is waiting to be marked up for hearing. Frank says this will occur this Fall at the latest. Menendez is expected to file his before the August recess.

    9) Frank's bill currently has 47 cosponsors, but that number is growing. TheEngineer will keep us up to date on the exact number.

    Hope that helps, and I hope will chime in with additional points!

    Skallagrim

    Posted 10 months ago #
  3. Big Jim Slade v2.0
    Moderator
    Visit User Profile

    About scoring the bill.... The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has to score the final text of a bill before it is voted on in the House. “Scoring” a bill means to analyze and give estimates of how much each provision of a bill is going to cost taxpayers.

    The meeting with Rep. Eric Cantor's (R-VA), the Republican Whip, office is where I heard the question. While it is obvious the bill will provide income rather than cost money overall, we did not have information on any actual scoring by CBO, even if it was positive or negative.

    Posted 10 months ago #
  4. TheEngineer
    State Director & Forum Admin
    Visit User Profile

    We now have 49 cosponsors for Frank's bill. Eight are new to supporting us. Nice!

    They are:

    Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO) ? to A
    Rep. Joe Courtney (D-CT) ? to A
    Rep. Walter Minnick (D-ID) ? to A
    Rep. John Adler (D-NJ) ? to A
    Rep. Michael McMahon (D-NY) ? to A
    Rep. Paul Tonko (D-NY) ? to A
    Rep. Steve Driehaus (D-OH) ? to A
    Rep. Thomas Perriello (D-VA) ? to A

    Posted 10 months ago #

Reply

You must log in to post.