Poker Players Alliance Forums » Poker Players Alliance

Congress to hold IHA Hearing and more

(3 posts)
  • Started 2 years ago by OldBookGuy
  • Latest reply from TheEngineer

No tags yet.


  1. OldBookGuy
    Member
    Visit User Profile

    From the news story:

    Top Thoroughbred racing figures -- including the trainer of Kentucky Derby winner Big Brown -- will answer questions next week in Washington on horse deaths, drugs and the industry's "special status" regarding gambling.

    The congressional subcommittee is waving a big federal stick to get racing's attention.

    "Given the unique benefits of the Interstate Horseracing Act to the racing industry, the hearing will play an oversight role in determining whether the special status of the sport under federal law is still warranted," according to the release announcing the hearing on June 19.

    Also covered will be medical treatment, steriods and more.

    Questions:

    1. Could this lead to opening the sport to International sites, legally?
    2. Can poker take advantage of this?

    Full story:

    http://www.majorwager.com/forums/mess-hall/168272-congress-hearing-horse-racing-set.html

    obg

    Posted 2 years ago #
  2. TheEngineer
    State Director & Forum Admin
    Visit User Profile

    Special Alert:

    The House Energy and Commerce Committee's subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection is holding a hearing on horse racing on June 19th at 10 am. The hearing will include discussion of the industry's UIGEA "carve out".

    Let's all email and call (no time for snail mail) Congress prior to the hearing to tell them that this carve out is not as strong as the industry thinks it is. Let's tell them that we expect to be part of any new deals that fix things for horseracing, while pointing out the hypocrisy of the current situation.

    Some points:

    * The carve-out isn't effective.
    * Banks will overblock many horseracing transactions under UIGEA, both because it's expedient and because a fatal flaw in the carve-out requires that horse racing transactions fully comply with IHA to be exempt...a determination banks aren't equipped or inclined to make.
    * The DoJ says online interstate horse race wagering violates the Wire Act. If banks ask the DoJ for clarification, that's what they'll be told.
    * Even though UIGEA says banks don't HAVE to block horse racing transactions, will banks choose to process these transactions if they've been told that the horseracing industry is violating the Wire Act and if the UIGEA regulations leave defining UIG totally up to banks?
    * Opponents of the horseracing carve-out in Congress will continue to attack it in hearings like next week's House hearing. They'll use it to expose the hypocrisy of federal online gaming law.
    * Once opponents of all gaming like Focus on the Family smell blood, they'll fight horseracing's exemption as well. Many in Congress would struggle trying to justify online horseracing while simultaneously opposing other gaming on "moral" grounds.
    * The Congressional coalition that helped horseracing pass its carve-out in 2006 no longer exists. The industry can't go back for a new carve-out. Federal law has to be updated, and horseracing will have to work with all of us if they want that to happen.

    Links:

    * The hearing: http://energycommerce.house.gov/membios/schedule.shtml (there will be an audio webcast)
    * The story: http://www.kentucky.com/216/story/431467.html
    * Congress: http://www.house.gov and http://www.senate.gov

    Posted 2 years ago #
  3. TheEngineer
    State Director & Forum Admin
    Visit User Profile

    I wrote a new letter for this matter. Here's the House version. Please let me know what you think:

    I am writing as a constituent, voter, and poker player to ask for your support. Specifically, I ask that you support legislation to repeal or amend the badly flawed Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA).

    As a proud poker player, I was outraged when online horse racing wagering was exempted from the provisions of UIGEA while games of skill like poker were not. I know many in Congress do not concur with this differential treatment, and I imagine they will continue to attack it. In fact, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection is holding a hearing on various aspects of the nation’s horse racing industry on June 19th, and discussion of horseracing’s UIGEA carve-out is on the agenda.

    I have no dislike for the horse industry. I simply expect to be treated equally and fairly. Now that it is clear that UIGEA is so badly flawed that even the horse racing exemption will fail to effectively protect the industry from the effects of UIGEA, I believe the opportunity to provide this fundamental fairness is here.

    UIGEA requires blocking of unlawful Internet gaming by financial institutions. However, neither UIGEA nor its regulations (as currently drafted) define unlawful Internet gaming. As a result, banks have been deputized to not only enforce this law, but also to define its scope. Unfortunately, the law penalizes banks severely if they err on the side of processing transactions later determined to be unlawful, but permits them to block legal transactions. As a result, banks can be expected to err strongly on the side of caution.

    Based on the UIGEA regulation comments banks and pari-mutuels made to the Treasury Department and to the Federal Reserve, and on recent media reports, it seems likely that many financial institutions will block online horseracing wagers for a variety of reasons. One reason is that many banks and credit card companies will simply block all online gaming transactions to ensure compliance with UIGEA. Another reason is that the UIGEA “carve out” verbiage appears to require horseracing transactions to fully comply with IHA to be exempt from UIGEA – a determination financial institutions are probably neither equipped nor inclined to make. And, probably the biggest reason for overblocking is the Justice Department’s position that all online interstate horse race wagering violates the Wire Act (particularly as the DoJ has shown no reluctance in arresting suspected Wire Act violators). The Justice Department’s position on the legality of horse race wagering could also significantly hinder the ability of financial institutions to develop processes to permit online horse race wagers.

    To help to rectify these problems, I ask that you support H.R. 5767 – recently introduced legislation that places a moratorium on the enactment of the badly flawed UIGEA regulations. I also encourage you to support HR 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act, and HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act. Both bills address the issue of determination of lawful vs. unlawful gaming, and both bills amend the Wire Act to clarify its scope. These bills also have rigorous safeguards against underage and compulsive gambling.

    Thank you for your consideration.

    -----------

    Here's the Senate version:

    I am writing as a constituent, voter, and poker player to ask for your support. Specifically, I ask that you introduce Senate legislation to repeal or amend the badly flawed Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA).

    As a proud poker player, I was outraged when online horse racing wagering was exempted from the provisions of UIGEA while games of skill like poker were not. I know many in Congress do not concur with this differential treatment, and I imagine they will continue to attack it. In fact, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection is holding a hearing on various aspects of the nation’s horse racing industry on June 19th, and discussion of horseracing’s UIGEA carve-out is on the agenda.

    I have no dislike for the horse industry. I simply expect to be treated equally and fairly. Now that it is clear that UIGEA is so badly flawed that even the horse racing exemption will fail to effectively protect the industry from the effects of UIGEA, I believe the opportunity to provide this fundamental fairness is here.

    UIGEA requires blocking of unlawful Internet gaming by financial institutions. However, neither UIGEA nor its regulations (as currently drafted) define unlawful Internet gaming. As a result, banks have been deputized to not only enforce this law, but also to define its scope. Unfortunately, the law penalizes banks severely if they err on the side of processing transactions later determined to be unlawful, but permits them to block legal transactions. As a result, banks can be expected to err strongly on the side of caution.

    Based on the UIGEA regulation comments banks and pari-mutuels made to the Treasury Department and to the Federal Reserve, and on recent media reports, it seems likely that many financial institutions will block online horseracing wagers for a variety of reasons. One reason is that many banks and credit card companies will simply block all online gaming transactions to ensure compliance with UIGEA. Another reason is that the UIGEA “carve out” verbiage appears to require horseracing transactions to fully comply with IHA to be exempt from UIGEA – a determination financial institutions are probably neither equipped nor inclined to make. And, probably the biggest reason for overblocking is the Justice Department’s position that all online interstate horse race wagering violates the Wire Act (particularly as the DoJ has shown no reluctance in arresting suspected Wire Act violators). The Justice Department’s position on the legality of horse race wagering could also significantly hinder the ability of financial institutions to develop processes to permit online horse race wagers.

    To help to rectify these problems, I ask that you sponsor H.R. 5767 – recently introduced House legislation that places a moratorium on the enactment of the badly flawed UIGEA regulations – in the Senate. I also encourage you to sponsor HR 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act, and HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act in the Senate. Both bills address the issue of determination of lawful vs. unlawful gaming, and both bills amend the Wire Act to clarify its scope. These bills also have rigorous safeguards against underage and compulsive gambling.

    Thank you for your consideration.

    Posted 2 years ago #

Reply

You must log in to post.