I just don't what I'd do if I couldn't say "Dems Quads Beetches!" once in a while.

Obviously, politicians are a bunch of jopkes.

Not surprising at all, honestly.

We'll see what the Senate does, if anything.

I wonder what real world effect this would have. Many credit card companies already have walls in place to block gambling-related purchases. That's why most of us use Neteller and Firepay. It'd be crazy to think this legislation would affect those online banks located outside our borders.

Are they suggesting that internet service providers would somehow need to block my access to PokerStars or Full Tilt Poker? I'd like to seem them make that work!

This is feel-good legislation, at best.

Link to AP story.

I can't believe it passed 317-93. That's astonishing.

Anything that passes by that wide of a margin can have no real world effect.

Politicians only agree on things that don't matter.

Actually, an earlier article I read said that one of the provisions was to require internet providers to block access to these sites. Personally, I'm looking forward to Rep. Ortiz's response to my email asking him what the hell he was thinking. I'll let you know what the good Representative has to say...

re: Why horse racing is exempt.

It is NOT due to some "powerful lobby in the horse racing industry lining pockets on the House floor," it IS due to horse racing already being legal, the legitimate online tools of which (TVG, YouBet, etc) are US-based entities the legalization of which is determined at the state level.

The fundamental difference that the media neglects to make between online casinos and horse racing/lotteries is that the states have already made determinations as to the latter's legalities, and the offshore nature of the former prevents states from issuing the same determinations.

Except poker is legal in many states. So why isn't online poker left to the discretion of the states?

And don't pretend that the horse racing lobby hasn't been pushing this bill :-)

Horse racing lobbies should know that more online gamblers = more profit.

My state had two sponsors. Nice work idiots.

I wonder if anyone has posed this question:

"What is difference playing the lottery with 256 million : 1 odds vs. trying to hit a gutshot straight on the river at 11:1 odds (assume full table Hold Em' of course)". Hell a scratch off ticket offers only slightly better odds at ~4:1 just to push.

They ramble about the dangers of gambling yet promote their own tool of gambling addiction at every Circle K/Seven-11/Kwik-Stop.

Anyone got room for four in Canada?

This bill is not a priority in the Senate and I would be very surprised if it passes there. We have a bill like this in Ohio...regulating strip clubs. It comes up in the House all the time, passes like 98-1 (the one must be a REAL pervert) and then is never heard from again. It's something that the legislators can take back to their constituents and feel good about themselves even if it didn't pass.

And the thing about horse racing is that it is a multi-billion dollar AGRICULTURAL industry. It employs a heck of a lot more people if you consider the breeders all the way through to the vets. They have a muc hstronger lobby because all gambling does is make businesses rich. Horse racing is a livelihood.

Yeah Wippy, and it is really hard to find a waitress or dealer or entertainer or food service or get your room cleaned near a gambling establishment. It's not just businesses that profit from the gambling. They just don't do lobbying as well as they're equine counterparts.

Besides, how many politicians have money invested in horses? And how many have money invested in online poker (that is based overseas).

But you are right that the ONLINE gambling industry mainly profits a select few. Otis, of course, is one of the select few.

My biggest concern is the censoring of the internet via url blocks at the ISP level. ISP's shouldn't be in the censor business. AT&T doesn't block my phone calls to 876 numbers - same thing.

The bill would open the door to block a transfer from your Citibank account to Neteller, because that is essentially a gambling transaction.

BTW, here's this line from the text:

(B) information assisting in the placing of bets or wagers; or

(C) a communication, which entitles the recipient to receive money or credit as a result of bets or wagers, or for information assisting in the placing of bets or wagers;

Have a banner ad? Have a poker blog?? Are you giving any kind of information that might assist someone??

Actually Chilly, Neteller doesn't exist solely to support gambling establishments, nor is it a gambling enterprise on its own. Are you saying this bill will block transactions with any financial institution that has any contact with online gambling. That's gonna be tough to justify.

And TSS, that's a good point. I wonder where blogs like this will wind up if this stupid bill passes. We've already seen what the crazy politicians in Washington State have done.

I wouldn't get into a tizzy about the government requiring all ISPs to block access to Neteller, Firepay, or even the various poker sites. Why?

Because if they did, they would have to completely isolate the US from the rest of the computer world by blocking all lines in and out of the country. The nature of the internet is that if you can't take the fastest path somewhere, you'll find a way to take another path to get the information. Only other way they could even think about doing it would essentially trample on some of the other laws that are already in place in this country.

DeVelaine,

The law is about making all US banks refuse to pay into gambling sites and systems that support internet gambling like Netteller and Firepay. They aren't attacking this from a internet veiwpoint, they are doing it from a banking viewpoint.

I imagine that you might be able to set up a Swiss or Cayman bank account, and pay into Neteller with it and still manage to gamble illegally, but it's a lot of trouble to go through.

TSS: The bill actually insinuates that internet providers could be asked to block access. The monetary part of the bill is a lot more clear, but it's not the only part of the bill.