Senator eyes compromise on Internet gaming bill

Search

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,361
Tokens
National Association of Federal Credit Unions Online http://www.nafcunet.org/Template.cfm?Section=News&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=20782

Senator eyes compromise on Internet gaming bill

Aug. 4, 2006—The House-passed bill to stop Internet gambling has had a hold placed on it in the Senate, but one lawmaker said he may find a way to modify the package in order to make it more palatable.
Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., reported the hold to a Hill publication and said he is open to revising it in order to get action on it following the August recess (National Journal’s CongressDaily, Aug. 3). One modification he’s considering would remove language amending the 1961 Wire Act, which bars the use of wire transmissions for bets across state and foreign lines. The revision would bar the use of all new technology for this purpose.
As approved July 11, the bill, H.R. 4411, prohibits betting establishments from accepting wagers online via credit card; electronic funds transfer or transmittal; check, draft or other instrument drawn or payable through any financial institution; or proceeds from any other transaction as determined in implementing rules.
In provisions backed by NAFCU, the bill calls on Treasury and the Federal Reserve System to write implementing rules. It also leaves enforcement over financial institutions, such as credit unions, to their primary federal regulators, such as NCUA.
The measure would permit Treasury and the Fed to exempt certain transactions—including those made by check, automated clearinghouse and other modes—if it's not “reasonably practical” to discern if they're being used for Internet gambling.
Additionally, H.R. 4411 would allow the Justice Department to get court orders to freeze financial institution accounts held by gambling businesses and protects institutions from lawsuits arising from such activity
The House cleared the bill on a vote of 317-93.
 

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,361
Tokens
Fishhead said:
Is this KYL sane?
Don't know, but he's the same guy who introduced this bill over ten years ago. He's been on a quixotic mission ever since.
 

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,361
Tokens
JAYBIRD0711 said:
It sure seems like he would have more important things to worry about.
He's just pandering to his political base.
 

"Life is 6 to 5 Against"
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
352
Tokens
kwalder said:
National Association of Federal Credit Unions Online http://www.nafcunet.org/Template.cfm?Section=News&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=20782

Senator eyes compromise on Internet gaming bill

Aug. 4, 2006—The House-passed bill to stop Internet gambling has had a hold placed on it in the Senate, but one lawmaker said he may find a way to modify the package in order to make it more palatable.
Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., reported the hold to a Hill publication and said he is open to revising it in order to get action on it following the August recess (National Journal’s CongressDaily, Aug. 3). One modification he’s considering would remove language amending the 1961 Wire Act, which bars the use of wire transmissions for bets across state and foreign lines. The revision would bar the use of all new technology for this purpose.
As approved July 11, the bill, H.R. 4411, prohibits betting establishments from accepting wagers online via credit card; electronic funds transfer or transmittal; check, draft or other instrument drawn or payable through any financial institution; or proceeds from any other transaction as determined in implementing rules.
In provisions backed by NAFCU, the bill calls on Treasury and the Federal Reserve System to write implementing rules. It also leaves enforcement over financial institutions, such as credit unions, to their primary federal regulators, such as NCUA.
The measure would permit Treasury and the Fed to exempt certain transactions—including those made by check, automated clearinghouse and other modes—if it's not “reasonably practical” to discern if they're being used for Internet gambling.
Additionally, H.R. 4411 would allow the Justice Department to get court orders to freeze financial institution accounts held by gambling businesses and protects institutions from lawsuits arising from such activity
The House cleared the bill on a vote of 317-93.


Whats your read on this, kwalder? Help us, hurt us or no effect?
 

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
71,780
Tokens
One modification he’s considering would remove language amending the 1961 Wire Act, which bars the use of wire transmissions for bets across state and foreign lines. The revision would bar the use of all new technology for this purpose.

so does this mean if they pass this that way its Legal to PHONE in your bets but not the Internet?:icon_conf :icon_conf
 

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,361
Tokens
Dante said:
so does this mean if they pass this that way its Legal to PHONE in your bets but not the Internet?:icon_conf :icon_conf
No, they're just trying to extend the bill's coverage to the use of wireless devices.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
4,574
Tokens
Sounds to me as if they want the Fed and Treasury to write policy which will limit banks and financial institutions responsibility to enforce the money transfers. By doing this they ease the pressure coming from the banking industry to police the money flows...the Feds greatest asset or weapon to stop what they see as a problem with internet gambling.
 

New member
Joined
Nov 18, 2005
Messages
520
Tokens
Neteller would be banned from americans for sure as every gambling site has their banner pasted on their site.
 

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
71,780
Tokens
kwalder said:
No, they're just trying to extend the bill's coverage to the use of wireless devices.
but they are not amending the wireact.. so what good will it do?
 

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,361
Tokens
Vegas Player 777 said:
Whats your read on this, kwalder? Help us, hurt us or no effect?
Kyl will make tweaks to the Senate version to provide it with the best chance of passing in the very short time remaining this year. This includes:


"The revision would bar the use of all new technology for this purpose."

- responds to potential arguments that the bill does not address making bets with other devices that do not communicate via the internet.


"In provisions backed by NAFCU, the bill calls on Treasury and the Federal Reserve System to write implementing rules. It also leaves enforcement over financial institutions, such as credit unions, to their primary federal regulators, such as NCUA."

- Shifts burden of establishing and interpreting compliance guidelines away from the DOJ to existing respective federal regulatory institutions.


"The measure would permit Treasury and the Fed to exempt certain transactions—including those made by check, automated clearinghouse and other modes—if it's not “reasonably practical” to discern if they're being used for Internet gambling."

- Gives the respective federal regulatory institutions an out in response to potential arguments that the bill would be impossible to enforce for certain types of transactions.


"Additionally, H.R. 4411 would allow the Justice Department to get court orders to freeze financial institution accounts held by gambling businesses and protects institutions from lawsuits arising from such activity."

- Provides additional teeth for enforcement law enforcement while providing added protection for financial institutions that provide confidential information to the DOJ.


WHAT AN ASSHOLE!
:fckmad:
 

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,361
Tokens
Dante said:
scary take on it walder

Believe it or not, my intent is not to scare everyone or continue to preach "doom and gloom" about this bill. I really hope I am wrong, but for reasons that I have outlined in many (probably too many) posts, I think this thing has a decent chance to pass.

The best chance for it to get delayed would be for the bill to get caught up in Arlen Specter's Judiciary Committee for some reason.

Unfortunately, the Banking Committee is chaired by Richard Shelby who co-sponsored a previous version of this bill . He has stated that he will not object if the new version of this bill bypasses his committee and goes directly to the floor for a vote.
 

"Life is 6 to 5 Against"
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
352
Tokens
Thanks for your take, K. Guess we better hang our hats on the brief period of time the senate has to get this done in September. Still can't quite believe that it is a priority issue in the scheme of things. At least the Tradesports odds still favor us.

:smoking:
 

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,361
Tokens
"The measure would permit Treasury and the Fed to exempt certain transactions—including those made by check, automated clearinghouse and other modes—if it's not “reasonably practical” to discern if they're being used for Internet gambling."

- Gives the respective federal regulatory institutions an out in response to potential arguments that the bill would be impossible to enforce for certain types of transactions.


The following legitimate objection was raised by the Independent Community Bankers of <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:country-region><st1:place>America</st1:place></st1:country-region> and makes it unclear how the DOJ would go after companies like Neteller:

http://www.paymentsnews.com/2006/08/internet_gambli.html

Stacy Kaper reports for the American Banker on comments from Rep. Jim Leach on last week's demise in the Senate of a bill intended to limit Internet gambling. The Independent Community Bankers of America had commented late last month (PDF) that the bill would "would create an impossible compliance burden for “uncoded” transactions. Unlike credit card transactions, which include a code that identifies the type of business – including gambling – that is receiving payment, uncoded transactions do not provide a bank with this information. So, while it is possible to monitor and block credit card transactions, a bank cannot do this with uncoded transactions. Uncoded transactions include Automated Clearing House (ACH) transactions as well as paper and electronic checks."
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,108,592
Messages
13,452,749
Members
99,426
Latest member
bodyhealthtechofficia
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