US House votes to kill Internet gambling

Jul 11, 2006, 4:07 pm (139 comments)

Online Gambling

Like with immigration, congress does the opposite of what the people want

The House passed legislation Tuesday that would prevent gamblers from using credit cards to bet online and could block access to gambling Web sites.

The legislation would clarify and update current law to spell out that most gambling is illegal online. But there would be exceptions - for state-run lotteries and horse racing - and passage isn't a safe bet in the Senate, where Republican leaders have not considered the measure a high priority.

The House voted 317-93 for the bill, which would allow authorities to work with Internet providers to block access to gambling Web sites.

Critics argued that regulating the $12 billion industry would be better than outlawing it. Said Rep. Barney Frank (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass., "Prohibition didn't work for alcohol. It won't work for gambling."

The American Gaming Association, the industry's largest lobby, has opposed online gambling in the past but recently backed a study of the feasibility of regulating it.

The Internet gambling industry is headquartered almost entirely outside the United States, though about half its customers live in the U.S.

Reps. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., and Jim Leach, R-Iowa sponsored the bill. They successfully beat back an amendment to strip out exemptions in the legislation for the horse racing industry and state lotteries.

Goodlatte called that "a poison pill amendment," aimed at defeating the larger bill.

Supporters of the measure argued that Internet betting can be addictive and can lead people to lose their savings.

Leach said the problem is particularly acute for young people who are frequently on the Internet. "Never before has it been so easy to lose so much money so quickly at such a young age," he said.

Rep. Shelley Berkley (news, bio, voting record), D-Nev., pushed for removal of the exemptions. She said it was unfair to allow online lotteries and Internet betting on horse racing to flourish while cracking down on other kinds of sports betting, casino games and card games like poker.

Supporters of Internet gambling agreed.

"They call it a prohibition. It's really Congress picking winners and losers," said Michael Bolcerek, president of the Poker Players Alliance, a San Francisco-based group that opposed the bill.

Congress has considered similar legislation in the past.

In 2000, disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff led a fierce campaign against it on behalf of an online lottery company. Supporters of the bill brought up that history Tuesday and suggested that a vote for the bill was a way to make a statement against Abramoff's influence.

However, the lottery exemption wasn't in the bill back in 2000. If it had been, Abramoff's client probably would have backed the bill. Online lotteries are exempted this time around at the behest of states.

Under the provision that relates to horse racing, betting operators would not be prohibited from any activity allowed under the Interstate Horseracing Act. That law was written in the 1970s to set up rules for interstate betting on racing. The industry successfully lobbied for legislation several years ago to clarify that horse racing over the Internet is allowed.

Greg Avioli, chief executive officer of the National Thoroughbred Racing Association, said the mention of horse racing in the bill is merely "a recognition of existing federal law."

Avioli said the racing industry has a strong future in the digital age and suggested the bill would send Internet gamblers to racing sites and away from the banned sites.

The Justice Department has taken a different view on the legality of Internet betting on horse races. In a World Trade Organization case involving Antigua, the department said online betting on horse racing remains illegal under the 1961 Wire Act despite the existence of the more recently passed, and updated, Interstate Horseracing Act.

The department hasn't actively enforced its stance.

Like the racing industry, professional sports leagues also like the bill. They argue that Web wagering could hurt the integrity of their sports.

Sen. Jon Kyl (news, bio, voting record), R-Ariz., is leading support for the ban in the Senate. The issue has not been debated in that chamber this year, and the measure hasn't been identified by Senate leaders as a top priority.

If the horse provision were stricken from the bill, there's a good chance the measure would run into objections from Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and others from racing states.

The bill is H.R.4411

AP

Tags for this story

Other popular tags

Comments

Tenaj's avatarTenaj

Madsons-of-bitches

cps10's avatarcps10

I am not sure that this will even come up in the Senate, and if it does, it won't pass. IMHO

Todd's avatarTodd

I am not sure that this will even come up in the Senate, and if it does, it won't pass. IMHO

Up until about a month ago I would agree with you.  Now I'm worried, because these things have a tendency to steamroll, and the person who made a comment in another thread about being a diversion from terrorism and immigration is correct.  With an election coming up, these politicians are looking for bills they can approve, to show that they are actually doing something useful.  This is sickening.

cps10's avatarcps10

I didn't think of it that way, Todd. But I think you could be right. I'm still not convinced that the Senate will even discuss it yet.

NBey6's avatarNBey6

I am not sure that this will even come up in the Senate, and if it does, it won't pass. IMHO

Up until about a month ago I would agree with you.  Now I'm worried, because these things have a tendency to steamroll, and the person who made a comment in another thread about being a diversion from terrorism and immigration is correct.  With an election coming up, these politicians are looking for bills they can approve, to show that they are actually doing something useful.  This is sickening.

I agree with Todd's comment and  I would like to add that whenever they push for something that the majority doesn't want, they are trying to move their agenda thru and usually something else is included in the bill that they aren't telling you!!!

Just remember, if they say left, they mean right and if they say stop, they mean go, if it should be good, it's bad and if it is wrong, it's right!!!

Just food for thought...........

weshar75's avatarweshar75

U.S. House of representives is full of a bunch of bastards who are trying to bastardize America into something pathetic.  I can see it now no more gambling no more playboy no more beer no more cigars no more red meat.  Hell they might as well give up their groceries while they are at it because they do not have any sacks to carry them in.-weshar75

DoubleDown

What's next ?

 Those who have fought and died for our right to have freedoms are becoming more and more irrelevant.

DD

cps10's avatarcps10

I Agree!

CalifDude

I think it will pass the Senate.  The same forces and lobbyists that got the bill to pass with such a big margin in the House are still on Capital Hill.  They know where the Senate is located!!

 

ducksafloat's avatarducksafloat

Ok, so we can go to the casinos and spend what we want, the race tracks and blah, blah, and we can shop on-line with what-ever transfer of funds we choose, but..............oh, no, on-line gambling...what a damper...i agree with Todd!

we don't know what they're going to do, nor how fast can they actually do it!  but as being in this lottery community, what can we do?  i have voted against computerized drawings, most of us probably have, but what can we do?

get it while we can i know, but any other ideas!  sensible ones i mean?

CARBOB

Yes, there are things everyone can do. Get all your friends and neighbors registered to vote. If your representatives are up for re-election, vote the sorry asses out. It's might be too late to stop them, but it will send a message to the Senate. Americans, for the last 30 years have not paid any attention what-so-ever to what their representatives are doing in Washington. That's why the sorry asses think and can, get away with anything. I doubt if 10% of them give a damn about individuals, it's their own agendas, they care about. They are right now talking about letting illegal immigrants draw Social Security.

DoubleDown

Next thing we know we will try to log on to LP and it will be blocked as a "gambling site"

Any website with the buzzword "lottery" is already blocked in many wireless hotspots. The next block will come from our ISPs.

As Hank Hill says:

 "Dammit Dale, the USA is going to hell in a hurry".

 

CalifDude

Ok, so we can go to the casinos and spend what we want, the race tracks and blah, blah, and we can shop on-line with what-ever transfer of funds we choose, but..............oh, no, on-line gambling...what a damper...i agree with Todd!

we don't know what they're going to do, nor how fast can they actually do it!  but as being in this lottery community, what can we do?  i have voted against computerized drawings, most of us probably have, but what can we do?

get it while we can i know, but any other ideas!  sensible ones i mean?

We will have to just bet our own states by buying tickets at the store.  We can all continue posting our picks here on LP for others to choose who is doing well in their state.  I don't like thinking that I can't bet Michigan Pick 3 any more, but if that is the law, I will abide by it.  I don't like paying tax on my winnings, but I have found that betting Pick 3 str/box here in California is the way to go.  If I think a number is going to hit, I play it str/box each way (usually a double, so 3-ways).  If it does hit straight, I get 3 or 6 very nice payouts and each ticket is under $600!!  No tax.

 

teacake58's avatarteacake58

for the people in these no lottery states it is bad we have to drive to another state or find a good bookie lol

Subscribe to this news story
Guest