Legislation in the Senate pertaining to offshore wagering. Let's all get on the same page.

Search

Another Day, Another Dollar
Joined
Mar 1, 2002
Messages
42,730
Tokens
It is my understanding that the legislation currently awaiting vote by the US Senate is only to stop commerce companies from aiding in the transfer of monies to and from offshore sportsbooks, although often I have seen the words "ban online gambling" from posters. I do not think that the bill has any change in the state mandates concerning the legalities of wagering offshore by individuals. I also have seen some post that if the bill passes, they will not wager offshore any longer because it will be illegal.

Does the current bill in the Senate change anything about what we are doing offshore except limit the options we have to transfer monies?

Please share your thoughts as I think there are many confused as to what is really happening here and I may be in that group of confused.

Is the current bill proposed to the Senate only trying to halt transfers of money?

Is the current bill proposed to the Senate only trying to ban online gambling?

Is the current bill proposed to the Senate trying to do both of these things?

Thanks
 

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
71,780
Tokens
General good points, But as we are hearing it is highly unlikely they even VOTE on this "current" one this year.Kyl will draft a new one next year
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
4,477
Tokens
Each day that passes will make it that much more difficult for the sleazy politicians to pass anti-gambling bills.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
524
Tokens
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Is the current bill proposed to the Senate only trying to halt transfers of money? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes. The Bill that was passed by the House and sent to the Senate deals only with halting transfers TO off-shore books. It does not touch the issue of legality of placing a bet. They are careful not to step on State toes.

[This message was edited by hanover00 on October 23, 2003 at 05:07 PM.]
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
524
Tokens
Here's the text of the bill:

Unlawful Internet Gambling Funding Prohibition Act (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)


108th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 2143

AN ACT
To prevent the use of certain bank instruments for unlawful Internet gambling , and for other purposes.

HR 2143 EH


108th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 2143


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AN ACT
To prevent the use of certain bank instruments for unlawful Internet gambling , and for other purposes.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Unlawful Internet Gambling Funding Prohibition Act'.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Congress finds as follows:

(1) Internet gambling is primarily funded through personal use of bank instruments, including credit cards and wire transfers.

(2) The National Gambling Impact Study Commission in 1999 recommended the passage of legislation to prohibit wire transfers to Internet gambling sites or the banks which represent them.

(3) Internet gambling is a major cause of debt collection problems for insured depository institutions and the consumer credit industry.

(4) Internet gambling conducted through offshore jurisdictions has been identified by United States law enforcement officials as a significant money laundering vulnerability.

SEC. 3. POLICIES AND PROCEDURES REQUIRED TO PREVENT PAYMENTS FOR UNLAWFUL INTERNET GAMBLING .

(a) REGULATIONS- Before the end of the 6-month period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal functional regulators shall prescribe regulations requiring any designated payment system to establish policies and procedures reasonably designed to identify and prevent restricted transactions in any of the following ways:

(1) The establishment of policies and procedures that--

(A) allow the payment system and any person involved in the payment system to identify restricted transactions by means of codes in authorization messages or by other means; and

(B) block restricted transactions identified as a result of the policies and procedures developed pursuant to subparagraph (A).

(2) The establishment of policies and procedures that prevent the acceptance of the products or services of the payment system in connection with a restricted transaction.

(b) REQUIREMENTS FOR POLICIES AND PROCEDURES- In prescribing regulations pursuant to subsection (a), the Federal functional regulators shall--

(1) identify types of policies and procedures, including nonexclusive examples, which would be deemed to be `reasonably designed to identify' and `reasonably designed to block' or to `prevent the acceptance of the products or services' with respect to each type of transaction, such as, should credit card transactions be so designated, identifying transactions by a code or codes in the authorization message and denying authorization of a credit card transaction in response to an authorization message;

(2) to the extent practical, permit any participant in a payment system to choose among alternative means of identifying and blocking, or otherwise preventing the acceptance of the products or services of the payment system or participant in connection with, restricted transactions; and

(3) consider exempting restricted transactions from any requirement under subsection (a) if the Federal functional regulators find that it is not reasonably practical to identify and block, or otherwise prevent, such transactions.

(c) COMPLIANCE WITH PAYMENT SYSTEM POLICIES AND PROCEDURES- A creditor, credit card issuer, financial institution, operator of a terminal at which an electronic fund transfer may be initiated, money transmitting business, or international, national, regional, or local network utilized to effect a credit transaction, electronic fund transfer, or money transmitting service, or a participant in such network, meets the requirement of subsection (a) if--

(1) such person relies on and complies with the policies and procedures of a designated payment system of which it is a member or participant to--

(A) identify and block restricted transactions; or

(B) otherwise prevent the acceptance of the products or services of the payment system, member, or participant in connection with restricted transactions; and

(2) such policies and procedures of the designated payment system comply with the requirements of regulations prescribed under subsection (a).

(d) ENFORCEMENT-

(1) IN GENERAL- This section shall be enforced by the Federal functional regulators and the Federal Trade Commission under applicable law in the manner provided in section 505(a) of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.

(2) FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED- In considering any enforcement action under this subsection against any payment system, or any participant in a payment system that is a creditor, credit card issuer, financial institution, operator of a terminal at which an electronic fund transfer may be initiated, money transmitting business, or international, national, regional, or local network utilized to effect a credit transaction, electronic fund transfer, or money transmitting service, or a participant in such network, the Federal functional regulators and the Federal Trade Commission shall consider the following factors:

(A) The extent to which such person is extending credit or transmitting funds knowing the transaction is in connection with unlawful Internet gambling .

(B) The history of such person in extending credit or transmitting funds knowing the transaction is in connection with unlawful Internet gambling .

(C) The extent to which such person has established and is maintaining policies and procedures in compliance with regulations prescribed under this subsection.

(D) The feasibility that any specific remedy prescribed can be implemented by such person without substantial deviation from normal business practice.

(E) The costs and burdens the specific remedy will have on such person.

SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

For purposes of this Act, the following definitions shall apply:

(1) RESTRICTED TRANSACTION- The term `restricted transaction' means any transaction or transmittal to any person engaged in the business of betting or wagering, in connection with the participation of another person in unlawful Internet gambling , of--

(A) credit, or the proceeds of credit, extended to or on behalf of such other person (including credit extended through the use of a credit card);

(B) an electronic fund transfer or funds transmitted by or through a money transmitting business, or the proceeds of an electronic fund transfer or money transmitting service, from or on behalf of the other person;

(C) any check, draft, or similar instrument which is drawn by or on behalf of the other person and is drawn on or payable at or through any financial institution; or

(D) the proceeds of any other form of financial transaction as the Federal functional regulators may prescribe by regulation which involves a financial institution as a payor or financial intermediary on behalf of or for the benefit of the other person.

(2) BETS OR WAGERS- The term `bets or wagers'--

(A) means the staking or risking by any person of something of value upon the outcome of a contest of others, a sporting event, or a game subject to chance, upon an agreement or understanding that the person or another person will receive something of greater value than the amount staked or risked in the event of a certain outcome;

(B) includes the purchase of a chance or opportunity to win a lottery or other prize (which opportunity to win is predominantly subject to chance);

(C) includes any scheme of a type described in section 3702 of title 28, United States Code;

(D) includes any instructions or information pertaining to the establishment or movement of funds in an account by the bettor or customer with the business of betting or wagering; and

(E) does not include--

(i) any activity governed by the securities laws (as that term is defined in section 3(a)(47) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) for the purchase or sale of securities (as that term is defined in section 3(a)(10) of such Act);

(ii) any transaction conducted on or subject to the rules of a registered entity or exempt board of trade pursuant to the Commodity Exchange Act;

(iii) any over-the-counter derivative instrument;

(iv) any other transaction that--

(I) is excluded or exempt from regulation under the Commodity Exchange Act; or

(II) is exempt from State gaming or bucket shop laws under section 12(e) of the Commodity Exchange Act or section 28(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;

(v) any contract of indemnity or guarantee;

(vi) any contract for insurance;

(vii) any deposit or other transaction with a depository institution (as defined in section 3(c) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act);

(viii) any participation in a simulation sports game or an educational game or contest that--

(I) is not dependent solely on the outcome of any single sporting event or nonparticipant's singular individual performance in any single sporting event;

(II) has an outcome that reflects the relative knowledge and skill of the participants with such outcome determined predominantly by accumulated statistical results of sporting events; and

(III) offers a prize or award to a participant that is established in advance of the game or contest and is not determined by the number of participants or the amount of any fees paid by those participants; and

(ix) any lawful transaction with a business licensed or authorized by a State.

(3) DESIGNATED PAYMENT SYSTEM DEFINED- The term `designated payment system' means any system utilized by any creditor, credit card issuer, financial institution, operator of a terminal at which an electronic fund transfer may be initiated, money transmitting business, or international, national, regional, or local network utilized to effect a credit transaction, electronic fund transfer, or money transmitting service, or any participant in such network, that the Federal functional regulators determine, by regulation or order, could be utilized in connection with, or to facilitate, any restricted transaction.

(4) FEDERAL FUNCTIONAL REGULATOR- The term `Federal functional regulator' has the same meaning as in section 509(2) of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.

(5) INTERNET- The term `Internet' means the international computer network of interoperable packet switched data networks.

(6) UNLAWFUL INTERNET GAMBLING - The term `unlawful Internet gambling' means to place, receive, or otherwise transmit a bet or wager by any means which involves the use, at least in part, of the Internet where such bet or wager is unlawful under any applicable Federal or State law in the State in which the bet or wager is initiated, received, or otherwise made.

(7) OTHER TERMS-

(A) CREDIT; CREDITOR; AND CREDIT CARD- The terms `credit', `creditor', and `credit card' have the meanings given such terms in section 103 of the Truth in Lending Act.

(B) ELECTRONIC FUND TRANSFER- The term `electronic fund transfer'--

(i) has the meaning given such term in section 903 of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act; and

(ii) includes any fund transfer covered by Article 4A of the Uniform Commercial Code, as in effect in any State.

(C) FINANCIAL INSTITUTION- The term `financial institution'--

(i) has the meaning given such term in section 903 of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act; and

(ii) includes any financial institution, as defined in section 509(3) of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.

(D) MONEY TRANSMITTING BUSINESS AND MONEY TRANSMITTING SERVICE- The terms `money transmitting business' and `money transmitting service' have the meanings given such terms in section 5330(d) of title 31, United States Code.

SEC. 5. COMMON SENSE RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

No provision of this Act shall be construed as altering, limiting, extending, changing the status of, or otherwise affecting any law relating to, affecting, or regulating gambling within the United States.
Passed the House of Representatives June 10, 2003.

Attest:

Clerk.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT GO TO
Next Hit Forward New Bills Search
Prev Hit Back HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Help
Contents Display

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

Another Day, Another Dollar
Joined
Mar 1, 2002
Messages
42,730
Tokens
Thanks hanover00.

I hope this helps those who think that there is a need to stop gambling just because of this Bill. Even if this Bill is passed, there is no more of a penalty for gambling than there is currently.

icon_cool.gif
 

Old Fart
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,395
Tokens
General
The "penalty" for gambling that is currentlyineffect is left entirely to the individual state? Would you agree with that?
 

Another Day, Another Dollar
Joined
Mar 1, 2002
Messages
42,730
Tokens
OMT,

What does your gut tell you about the future of online wagering?
 

Old Fart
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,395
Tokens
You know, I can't remember a topic in this country that has been talked SO MUCH and yet so little done on the Federal scene.
I truly believe, that if we had not experience 9/11 and the following idea that this money could be funding terrorist, we would here very little these days. Like Sims and others, I think each day that passes without legislation is a plus and that ONE day down the road it will be legal just as going to the liquor store to buy liquor is today. We will have responsible bookmakers on-line with a liscence paid to the goverments. Just as the Liquor folks pay a tax. I hope anyway!
 

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
71,780
Tokens
OMT...I used to think I worry alot about this and if it will pass but you my friend beat me on the worrying
icon_wink.gif
 

Old Fart
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,395
Tokens
Well Dante,
I look more forward to wagering a few bucks on games than anything else in my life. I feel as if I am hurting NO ONE! Yet, it upsets me DEEPLY when the government says "NO" without good reason. And to be honest one has reason to fear the government. That is why I want to be sure and report ANY winnings. For if I don't that is just one more reason they can give lip service as a reason to ban it. People ain't paying their taxes! Oh will the conservative assholes yell about that! So I want to protect my one great pleasure and therefore I worry.
 

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
71,780
Tokens
I hear you OMT...but no sense worrying you only suffer twice that way
icon_wink.gif
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,108,527
Messages
13,452,286
Members
99,418
Latest member
TennisMonger
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com