Tuesday, August 4, 2009 - Annie Duke
I just got back from DC from yet another lobbying trip. But this time I combined it with a vacation with the kids to explore the seat of our nation. I have been to Washington so many times but never during the summer months when the kids are out of school. As soon as the PPA contacted me and asked me if I would be willing to come out and lobby during National Poker Week I thought, “Awesome! I can take the kids with me this time!” And so I did that. The kids got to see a bit of what Mom does when she is in DC but they also got a great vacation trip, experiencing The Smithsonians, The Capital Dome Tour, The Floor of the House of Representatives and all sorts of other cool crap.
So first the lobbying. The Poker issue is really seeing some movement now. Granted, the Health Care Legislation is slowing things up a little right now as Congress is focused on matters that are certainly more important than the poker legislation. But I felt a real difference in the legislators on this issue. On this trip there was much less educating of members on the issue and why it is important, something we had to do a lot of over the past couple of years. This year seemed to be more talking of attack plans, how to get legislation moving forward and how to get other programs paid for using the poker revenue. The $3 billion to $10 billion dollar tax base that would be generated from taking and regulating the poker industry was definitely creating a lot of buzz on The Hill as Members are needing to find ways to pay for the health care program. That much tax revenue is attractive to a country in financial crisis and is most likely one of the big reasons that the support for poker is much more bi-partisan.
There are a few pieces of legislation swirling around Capitol Hill. The first is a piece of legislation that would delay the regulations for UIGEA being put into effect. Those regs are set to go into effect in January. What Rep. Frank is asking for is that that deadline be delayed while a court decides what is or is not legal under UIGEA. The problem is that UIGEA, while admonishing payment processors that they cannot process illegal transactions, does not define what is a legal or illegal activity. HR 2166 would ask the courts to define what is legal so there is clarity on that issue. Put poker up in a court of law and we will take the chance that it will be determined a game of skill and, therefore, a legal activity. I am happy to hang my hat on the courts on this one.
HR 2167 is the full on legalization and regulation of Internet Gaming in all its forms except for sports betting. This bill would put a system in place similar to the system they have in England and 25 other countries already. It would create a licensing process for online gaming companies so they could legally operate in the US. Along with this would come better consumer protection measures and majority verification measures as licensed companies would have to use best efforts to comply on those issues. It is what the companies want and what the consumers want. There is also a bill on the Senate side from Sen. Menendez that would license peer to peer games of skill only…lucky for us, poker falls in that category.
I came away from this trip the most optimistic I have been from any lobbying trip. Hopefully, I am not just being a Pollyanna
In my next blog I will post pictures of all the cool crap we saw at the Smithsonians.
Annie
Tags: Annie Duke, Congress, HR 2166, HR 2167, national poker week, poker legislation, Poker Poker Poker, Smithsonians, uigea, Washington
Comments (3)
Monday, June 22, 2009 - Gene Bromberg
The Poker Players Alliance held a press conference this morning to announce some new initiatives and discuss the current legislative state of affairs. PPA Executive Director John Pappas discussed three recently-launched websites that should help further the PPA’s grass-roots recruitment of poker players to the cause:
- The PPA announced that July 19-25 will be National Poker Week. At least 35 PPA State Directors and several well-known poker players (including Annie Duke, Howard Lederer, Linda Johnson, Jan Fisher and Dennis Phillips) will be in Washington, D.C. to visit with member of Congress and ask them to support the legalization of online poker. There will also be a charity poker tournament (benefitting the USO and Walter Reed Hospital) and other poker-related activities. So if you have some free time in mid-July, or happen to find yourself in our nation’s capital during that time, mark your calendars.
- During National Poker Week PPA representatives will also deliver a petition to President Barack Obama, which you can sign yourself at PokerPetition.com. All you need to do is enter your name, email, and address, and your name will be added to the petition. Pappas said they’re hoping the number of signers is in six-figures–maybe seven–when the petition is presented to the President.
- If you’d like to make a more personal statement about poker you can visit My Poker Story and upload a video describing why you play and love the game. A lot of people are passionate about the game (and passionate about their right to PLAY the game) and a brief video explaining how that fervor came to be adds a personal touch to this unnecessarily contentious issue.
Pappas said that there may be additional legislative initiatives introduced before the start of National Poker Week; he said that Senator Robert Menendez may re-introduce his bill to legalize online poker (his is a more narrowly-defined bill than Representative Barney Frank’s House bill). Rep. Frank may hold a hearing on H.R. 2267, the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, & Enforcement Act of 2009 (whew) which would give online poker’s legislative defenders a chance to debate their opponents in public. And further sway public opinion in poker’s direction.
PPA Chairman Alfonse D’Amato was at the press conference (and as we speak he’s playing in today’s Senior’s Event, his first WSOP tournament) and said that the legislative effort is going forward and that while Rep. Frank’s bill might need “some tweaking” before it comes out of committee he’s confident that they have a piece of legislation that will eventually end up on the President’s desk for signature. And while it may seem odd that poker players need to pull the levers of government in order to get the government to treat us fairly, that’s politics for you. “Big Brother government should not tell you what you can do online,” D’Amato said emphatically. “We should be allowed to do what we want online without the arm of the government intervening.”
D’Amato’s words were echoed by U.S. Representative Shelley Berkley, who serves Las Vegas in the House. “That legislation (the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act) was an affront to every freedom-loving American,” she said. She also said that it’ll take more than a handful of politicians to wipe the UIGEA off the books. “The only way (Rep. Frank’s) legislation will pass is if we stand up and get involved. Politics is not a spectator sport”.
And there are ways for you to get involved in the process. Sign the petition (I just did, it takes ten seconds). Upload a video, if you have mad camcorder skillz. Rep. Berkley recommended sending your Congresspeople emails in lieu of a written letter (will arrive instantly and is far more likely to be read). And ask your poker-playing friends (or friends who think that adults should be free to live without onerous goverment interference) to do the same. The UIGEA passed in large part because a small group of very vocal people convinced a handful of politicians to subvert the legislative process. To defeat them we need an army of freedom-loving citizens to stand up and be counted. Do your part, and stand up.
Tags: 2009 world series of poker, barney frank, barney frank legislation, barney frank poker, poker laws, poker legislation, poker players alliance, ppa, uigea, world series of poker, WSOP
Comments (1)
Sunday, May 3, 2009 - Gene Bromberg
At long last…finally…maybe…perhaps…we will finally see the introduction of Barney Frank’s bill to overturn the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act. Of course we’ve been hearing about this potential bill for months now but let’s be honest, Congress (at least those members of Congress with IQ’s in double-digits) has been busy with some rather pressing issues. The global economic meltdown. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And now there’s this delightful swine flu epidemic spreading around the world. We live in troubled times but stop for a moment and consider this–how would you be feeling if George W. Bush was still in power? OK, OK, will you STOP SCREAMING!!!
Not that our government isn’t still riven with lunatics and buffoons who shouldn’t be allowed to manage a paper route, let alone have access to the levers of power. At the same time that that the federal government may consider legislation to legalize and regulate a multi-billion dollar industry enjoyed by millions of Americans, a divison of the Minnesota State Department of Safety took a page from the Chinese Communist government and demanded that ISP providers and telecom companies block Minnesota residents from accessing online gaming webistes. John Willems, the director of the state’s Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division, had this to say about his department’s Draconian decree:
“We are putting site operators and Minnesota online gamblers on notice and in advance. State residents with online escrow accounts should be aware that access to their accounts may be jeopardized and their funds in peril.”
I call “bull” on that. Even if Minnesota was able to block it’s residents from accessing their online accounts (more on that in a bit) their funds wouldn’t be in “peril”. The money would still be in those accounts, and in a worst-case scenario the online sites could simply issue checks to players who couldn’t access the sites. Come to think of it, how hard would it be for an online gaming company to set up a simple site with no gambling connotations whatsoever just to act as a communications portal for customers whose access was blocked by the government? A day? An afternoon?
Willems was interviewed by Dan Cypra at PokerNewsDaily and while he didn’t come across as an anti-gaming fanatic he said a few things that were rather strange. Asked about the websites that his department wanted blocked by the telecoms, Willems said,
“The list, which is only 200 out of literally thousands of websites, was selected at random without regards to what type of internet gambling each site is engaged in. Online poker would fall within that possibility.”
Uh, what? The states wants to deal with what Willems described as “sizeable illegal gambling activity” and they choose the sites randomly? Isn’t that, well, ludicrous? Shouldn’t they try to figure out which sites are engaging in this alleged illegal activity and, y’know, target them all? Why pick only 200 out of thousands, and why pick them randomly? Bizarre.
Cypra pointed out that Minnesota has a state lottery and tribal casinos and card rooms and asked if taking action against online sites was done to protect state-run gaming. Willems replied:
The motive is to deal with sizable illegal gambling activity and to use the most reasonable tool we can to deal with it. We are an enforcement agency that has very few tools available. As the contraction of the telecom industry has occurred, this statute seems much more viable today than it was before.
Again, uh, what? Why has the contraction of the telecom industry made the “statute” (not sure if he’s referring to the UIGEA or the Wire Act) more viable? Does fewer ISP companies mean there are fewer arms to twist to force this through, since the onus will be on the telecoms to actually block Minnesotans’ access. And is handing down an edict to block millions of people from visiting websites they’ve freely accesed for years truly “the most reasonable tool”? Two lawyers quoted in the Star-Tribune piece didn’t think so. David Axtell, an attorney at Leonard Street and Deinard in Minneapolis, said:
“This is an old law put in place before the Internet, and there may be an argument that it doesn’t cover Internet service providers.”
And Michael Fleming, an attorney with Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren in Bloomington, said:
“If their goal is get people to stop gambling online, I think there’s not much chance of that. Either there will be some technological work-around, or the law won’t support what the state is trying to do.”
Despite the actions taken by his department, as I said before Willems doesn’t come across as some sort of zealot. Near the end of the interview he says:
I hope we’ll have a mutually satisfying outcome to whatever occurs and I hope we’ll get good public policy because of it. It appears to me, based on voice messages and phone conversations, that the Poker Players Alliance must have contacted their membership because I’ve gotten a lot of feedback. I respect their viewpoint and understand it.
“Good public policy” would mean, once again, relying on the good sense and good intentions of elected officials. Gulp. But maybe the introduction of Barney Frank’s bill, if it does come this week, will bring about a rational, intelligent conversation about online gaming that might result in what Willems and I apparently both want–good public policy. I remain optimistic…but I won’t be holding my breath.
Tags: barney frank, barney frank gambling bill, barney frank gaming bill, barney frank uigea, minnesota online gambing ban, minnesota online gaming block, minnesota poker, uigea, unlawful internet gambling enforcement act
Comments (0)
Sunday, March 29, 2009 - Gene Bromberg
Tens of millions of Americans play poker every year and so it comes as no surprise that the game fits nicely within our cultural mainstream. But with poker facing so many legal and political challenges the last few years it’s always good to be reminded that people play poker, people love poker, and people are fascinated by poker, across just about every demographic line you care to draw.
This past week The New Yorker featured an article by Alec Wilkinson about poker, one that focused primarily on Chris Ferguson but also discussed the UIGEA and the legal issues surrounding the game (you need to register to read the full article). That the pre-eminent literary magazine in the land published a positive article about poker doesn’t mean the UIGEA will repealed this afternoon (there are members of Congress who probably balk at reading so much as the back of a cereal box) but it adds to the groundswell of support poker has received in the media the last year or so.
The New Yorker has actually published a number of major articles about poker in the past, most notably two pieces by the English poet/critic A. Alvarez that he later expanded into The Biggest Game in Town, one of the leading works in the poker canon. If you haven’t read Alvarez’s articles, or The Biggest Game in Town, and you consider yourself a poker fan, shame on you.
Alvarez wrote those articles (and the book) in 1983. In 1994 he returned to World Series and wrote about fulfilling a lifelong dream–playing in the Main Event. These days it almost seems quaint that taking a seat in the Main Event would seem like such an ambitious gamble, but this was long before you had online qualifiers swelling the field into the thousands. That year there were 268 entrants and many of the players Alvarez writes about (Chan, Ungar, Hellmuth) are still well-known in the poker world today.
Alvarez wrote that article a bit less than fifteen years ago, a fact that hit me broadsides because reading that piece planted the seeds of my later love affair with the game. I actually clipped that article out of the magazine and kept it in a folder with other poker stories I came across over the years. And it was eight years later, in 2002, that I read an article that transformed my interest in poker into something akin to an obsession. Joseph Epstein reviewed Andy Bellin’s Poker Nation, Epstein first writing about his own experience playing poker while growing up in Chicago before turning to Bellin’s examination of underground New York card clubs and the current poker universe.
I devoured Poker Nation (several times, actually) and later that year something called the World Poker Tour debuted on the Travel Channel. As I watched the WPT from week-to-week I learned that thousands of folks were playing poker online, and as I considered dipping my toe into that vast aquarium some guy named Chris Moneymaker won the Main Event and $2.5 million. Poker may have suffered some legislative and political bad beats the last few years, but I think the perfect storm of the WPT, the advent of the digital world, and the Moneymaker Effect rather makes up for that. Should the UIGEA be repealed (and allegedly Barney Frank will be introducing just such a bill in early April) it might not usher in a new Golden Age of Poker…it might just help perpetuate the one we’re in right now. Five (or fifteen) years from now some budding poker player may read Wilkinson’s article and find all this UIGEA hullaballo rather silly. Let’s hope so.
Tags: a. alvarez, al alvarez, alec wilkinson, andy bellin, biggest game in town, Chris Ferguson, moneymaker effect, new yorker poker, poker nation, Poker Poker Poker, the new yorker, the new yorker poker, uigea, World Poker Tour
Comments (0)
Sunday, February 22, 2009 - Gene Bromberg
It seems these days that I write more about legal and political issues than poker. Once upon a time I thought about going to law school but when I told my parents they were less than enthused:
Mom (sobbing): I can’t be hearing this…my baby wants to be a…a lawyer.
Dad (rending his garments): What did we do wrong? Why would God punish us so?
Mom: You teach your children right from wrong, and how do they show their appreciation? By studying law???
Dad: You’re…you’re not thinking of going into politics, are you?
Mom: Oh God…oh God…it’s the end…
Me: Alright, fine! I won’t go to law school! Mom, get up off the floor!
Mom (crawling to her feet): Then what are you plans?
Me: Jeez, I dunno. I think I’ll be…a blogger.
Dad (perking up): A blogger? What’s that?
Me: It’s a job that doesn’t exist yet but it’s gonna be the hot thing by 2007.
Mom: Not as good as a hedge-fund manager, but I think that’ll play.
Etc, etc, etc. That belabored joke aside, these days a humble poker writer has to keep one eye on the felt and one eye on the powers that be. This past week saw a South Carolina judge rule that poker is a game of skill (good) while still finding five defendents guilty because the applicable anti-gaming law doesn’t differentiate between games of skill and chance (bad). This follows favorable (or at least semi-favorable) rulings in cases from Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Colorado that indicate poker is gettting a fairer shake in the courts than it has in recent years.
But the 800-pound gorilla, when it comes to poker legislation, remains the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA). More than two years after it was passed no one seems to know what to do with the UIGEA–the government doesn’t know how to enforce it, the Justice Departement doesn’t know who it applies to, and the banks who are supposed to search for prohibited transactions want no part of it. On top of that the law attempts to restrict poker players from spending their money as they see fit. Millions of Americans play poker in casinos and cardrooms across the country and millions more play in their homes. Poker tournaments are regular programming on major networks. Yet online poker is such a plague upon the land that it should be illegal? This makes sense how, exactly?
The optimists among us hoped that once the Bush Administration was swept aside the UIGEA would be swept aside as well. That seemed a bit overly-optimistic to me, as President Obama had a lot on his plate as he took office. But with the economy tottering, the stimulus bill passed, and the President yesterday announcing that he wants to cut the budget deficit in half by the end of his first term, it’s possible that the time is ripe to once again introduce the idea of legalizing online poker.
And apparently that’s what Representative Barney Frank believes. Frank, the chairman of the Financial Services Committee, announced on Friday that he will introduce a bill to repeal the UIGEA “in the next month”. But even with Democrats in control of both houses of Congress, this is far, far from a slam-dunk. Online poker has opponents on both sides of the aisle, and that’s why it’s extremely important that poker players make their voices heard. The Poker Players Alliance has letters you can send to your members of Congress and to President Obama, as well as a Congressional directory so you can send your own letter or even call them directly. Remember to always, ALWAYS, be polite. Friendly, even. Explain why you want online poker to be legalized. Be direct and to the point–these are busy people. But make sure they know you consider this an important issue that you’ll be following closely.
Americans won’t be the only folks watching this issue closely. Also on Thursday the European Union announced that it’s considering filing a World Trade Organization complaint over the UIGEA. The Obama Administration seems to have less of an extended-middle-finger attitude toward treaties and trade agreements and whatnot, and getting mixed-up in a WTO complaint over online gaming might be a headache the President isn’t interested in right now, especially as the U.S. will need to work closely with the EU (and other countries) to deal with the global financial situation.
So, big news this week, with the promise of bigger news in the near future. Of course you can keep up with what’s going on right here at the UB Blog, and you can also check for updates at our Twitter feed. The PPA is also on Twitter, they even have a Facebook group for goodness sake. So there’s no excuse for not being informed on the issues, and no excuse for not making your voice heard. Everyone who loves poker kinda dropped the ball back in 2006 and they snuck the UIGEA past us. It’s time to pick that ball up and make those in office aware of our political weight.
Tags: barney frank, barney frank legislation, barney frank uigea repeal, eu poker, european union poker, online poker repeal, poker players alliance, ub, uigea, uigea repeal, ultimatebet, world trade organization poker, wto complaint poker, wto poker
Comments (0)
Sunday, February 8, 2009 - Gene Bromberg
Every week seems to bring fresh news about a potential change in the government’s stance toward poker, and the past seven days was no exception. Earlier this week the Financial Times published three articles about online gaming and how governments (both in the United States and abroad) are changing their attitude toward the industry.
The biggest news from the three pieces is that Barney Frank, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, plans to introduce a bill “in the next few weeks” to regulate online gaming. Frank tried to get a bill passed last year but it never got to a vote. But this is 2009, President Obama is far less likely to veto a bill should it pass, and there is growing sentiment within Congress (and the public at large) that regulation, not prohibition, is how online gaming should be approached.
Two other statements from Frank should be of interest to poker players. One, the Congressman said that he “expected anti-gambling regulations, rushed through in the dying weeks of the Bush administration, to be included among the measures Congress will look to rescind.” That’s something I wrote about a few weeks ago, that the Congressional Review Act could be used to reverse the anti-gaming rules enacted by the Bush Administration shortly before they left office. It’s perhaps a bit overly optimistic to expect that to happen, but how long has it been since the words “optimism” and “online gaming regulations” were used in such close proximity?
Frank also said that he “expects the Obama (Department of Justice) to be less zealous about locking people up. These outrageous arrests in transit – they should be stopping that stuff.” It’s not just the DOJ who’s less-than-enthusiastic about going after online gaming operators. The financial services industry, who have had, um, a bad time of late, are among those clamoring the loudest for a change in the regs. The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) put much of the onus for identifying and reporting online gaming transactions on banks and other financial institutions, and these days they have enough on their plate without burrowing into their customers’ records and trying to deduce what they should and shouldn’t allow.
There are other political and cultural forces that seem to be tilting the field in online gaming’s favor. On a purely practical level, governments around the world need to find ways of generating revenue. Right now the Senate is putting the finishing touches on a $780 billion stimulus bill–no matter how you slice it, that’s a lot of bread. And at the same time the Obama Administration wants to cut taxes on 95% of Americans. Government at every level will be grabbing up every nickel they can scrounge–it does not take a cynic to see that regulating online gaming might be a very attractive option to tax-starved legislators.
I personally take a civil liberties stance on why online gaming should be legal. People should be free to do what they want with their own time and money. Playing poker is legal in Vegas, in cardrooms around the country, you can play at home with your buddies…why should online play be forbidden? OK, if the government regulates the industry they’re gonna take their rake in some kind of tax, that’s just the price of doing business. But I don’t think revenue-generation should be the primary goal of regulation–as I said, people should be free to do what they want with their time and money. And, perhaps, the end of the Bush Administration’s policy of “surrender your rights and we’ll keep you safe, promise” will bring a new spirit of personal freedom (and personal responsibility) that’s been lacking the last eight years. And Barney Frank seems to agree with that. From the FT analysis piece:
Online gambling is a fundamental freedom, Mr Frank maintains, and attempts to make it illegal smack of a rightwing puritanical zeal that led to Prohibition in the 1920s and 1930s.
“It is often the case in politics that the people who want change get energised,” says Mr Frank, adding that the political momentum in the US is coming from poker players. “This is impinging on their freedom and they are fighting back.”
Once upon a time (say, 2006) it was the religious right who were energized, who saw an opportunity to remake the world as they saw fit. That time, thankfully, has passed. But there are still harmful artifacts of those dark ages, one of them being the UIGEA. It’s not enough to sit back and wait for Barney Frank to weave his legislative magic and repeal the UIGEA. People who believe they should decide how best to live their lives (instead of Bill Frist and James Dobson) need to step up and make their voices heard. Write to your Congressperson, your Senator. The Poker Players Alliance provides pre-written letters you can send to your representatives, or you can take pen in hand (or keyboard in lap) and write your own.
When the UIGEA passed in 2006 a lot of people asked why no one spoke out against it beforehand. Well, it’s never too late to make your voice heard. The Financial Times analysis piece (written by the awesomely-named Roger Blitz) says the following about the online gaming regulation:
But the tide has shifted: this year is set to mark the moment when gambling online reaches a measure of acceptance and respectability its detractors on both sides of the Atlantic have long fought to prevent.
Online gaming’s detractors fought in the past and they’ll fight in the future. Maybe the tide has shifted, but that’s the funny thing about tides–they shift back. To keep that from happening will require poker players to fight just as hard, for just as long. It’s taken two-and-a-half years just to get to this spot, and there’s a long way to go before we enjoy anything like a true victory. If you love poker, if you value your personal freedom, keep yourself informed on this issue, and make sure your voice is heard. That’s some change we can believe in.
Tags: barack obama poker, barack obama poker regulations, barney frank, barney frank poker, barney frank poker legislation, barney frank uigea legislation, financial times online gaming, financial times online poker, obama online gaming, obama poker, poker players alliance, ppa, uigea, uigea repeal
Comments (0)
Monday, February 2, 2009 - Gene Bromberg
Most of the discusssion about how the government restricts poker players’ freedom to play focuses on the federal level. And understandably so, as the federal government is the ultimate 800-pound gorilla, able to marshal an awesome array of forces to keep Americans from…playing cards. And the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) is the most important and obvious legislative fruit that years of anti-gaming lobbying and back-room-dealmaking bore.
But as everyone knows there are also state and local laws that carry enormous weight. And in the last few weeks poker has made some major advances on the state level, perhaps showing that the momentum has indeed shifted in poker’s favor. For example, in the great state of Texas a bill has been introduced that would legalize and regulate poker. Now, it’s legal to play poker in your own home there, but if you want to play in a cardroom that takes a rake and always has games running, that’s illegal. And so there’s a thriving underground poker scene in Texas, one that has attracted a lot of attention lately both from robbers and SWAT teams. Legalizing poker would allow people to play in safe, regulated rooms where they wouldn’t have to play behind metal bars and worry about getting a shotgun stuck in their face. It’s one of those win-win-win situations–poker players get a safe place to play, the state collects revenue from the cardroom, jobs are created, police are out pursuing criminals who are a bit more damaging to society. One is hopeful that logic like that is starting to gain traction in our society.
As further evidence that sanity is returning to our lives, the Kentucky Court of Appeals overturned a ruling that allowed the state to seize 141 internet gaming domain names. Now Gov. Steven Beshear, the driving force behind the original effort to grab the domain names, is appealing the appeal. Such is the wild and wacky world of legislative politics, but hopefully the additional judicial review will only strengthen the idea that government officials, be they the governor of Kentucky or some foreign despot, do not have the right to seize the domains of any internet site that displeases them and deny law-abiding citizens access.
And then we come to some most-welcome news from Pennsylvania, where I happen to live. Pete Campana, a lawyer from Williamsport, successfully defended two clients accused of running an illegal gambling operation (a $1/2 No-Limit game) by arguing that poker isn’t gambling. That poker is…wait for it…a game of skill. And the court, in its infinite wisdom, agreed. From the ruling on the case:
Commonwealth and Defendant both agree the controlling issue is whether Texas Hold’em poker is “unlawful gambling” under the Crimes Code.
… the controlling sub-issue is whether Texas Hold’em is a game of skill or chance, or, if both, does skill trump chance or vice-versa. Simply, if chance predominates, Texas Hold’em is gambling. If skill predominated, it is not gambling.
… Pennsylvania courts have not specifically addressed the issue … Our courts have found that poker is gambling within the context of the Liquor Code.
… With the advent of internet poker and tournament poker has come a spate of very intrusive law review analyses of gambling law and poker.
… Using the predominance test, in conjunction with analyzing skill versus chance using the four prong dominant factor test, it is apparent that skill predominates over chance in Texas Hold’em poker.
… Skill comes with varying degrees of competence, but that is the case with any competition involving skill.
The academic studies and experts generally agree that a player must be skillful to be successful at poker. At the outset, chance is equally distributed among the players. But the outcome is eventually determined by skill. Successful players must possess intellectual and psychological skills. They must know the rules and the mathematical odds. The must know how to read their opponents “tells” and styles. They must know when to hold and fold and raise. They must know how to manage their money.
This court finds that Texas Hold’em poker is a game where skill predominates over chance. Thus, it is not “unlawful gambling” under the Pennsylvania Crimes Code.
Isn’t it nice to read in legalese that poker “is a game where skill predominates over chance”? But of course folks here in Pennsylvania are well-known for their keen legal minds, their clear-headed common sense, and their irresistable sexual magnetism. Well, some of us anyway.
But what we can take from each of these stories is that within the halls of Justice and among our legislative bodies, attitudes toward poker are changing. No longer do we hear hysterical (and ficticious) claims that online poker is destroying children and laying waste to vast swaths of the adult population. Instead we’re hearing about courts restoring long-established rights to the citizenry, about legislators introducing bills to allow responsible people to play a game enjoyed by millions of Americans for generations. We’re seeing poker described as a game of skill in judicial rulings. We’ve still got a long way to go, and there are still powerful forces opposing poker that will not give up without a fight. But the tide is turning.
Tags: domain seizure, kentucky domain seizure, kentucky poker, kentucky seizes domains, pennsylvania poker, pennsylvania poker ruling, texas poker bill, texas underground poker, uigea, unlawful internet gambling enforcement act
Comments (0)
Sunday, January 25, 2009 - Gene Bromberg
Last Tuesday saw the inauguration of Barack Obama as our 44th President. The major thrust of Obama’s campaign was change–and after eight years of George W. Bush running things that was rather an obvious tack to take. Immediately after taking office the new President signed a number of executive orders reversing policies established by the previous Administration, and all this righting-the-ship and steadying-the-rudder no doubt has poker players hoping that the down the road some sanity might return vis-a-vis the government’s stance on the game.
It’s doubtful that poker is high on Obama’s list of priorities, what with the economy and Iraq and Afghanistan and other nightmarish problems to deal with. But there has been quite a bit of news on the legal and legislative front the past week or so that shows that the tide maybe be slowly shifting back in poker’s favor.
First, the bad news–on Monday, January 19th, the rules governing Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) went into effect. Over two years after the UIGEA was tacked onto the Safe Port Act at the last minute and voted into law, the rules governing the UIGEA were finally issued on November 12th. They did not formally go into effect until the day before Obama was inaugurated, which was hardly a coincidence. These rules put the onus on financial institutions to identify and block transactions to internet gaming sites…although the rules STILL do not define what is and isn’t an internet gaming site, nor which transactions specifically are to be blocked. Which is not the sort of ambigious witch-hunting that beleagured financial companies need to waste time on these days.
However, there are ways wherein these rules might be rendered moot. The big gun is the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to reverse or cancel regulations made by the previous Administration within 90 days of their enactment. President Bush didn’t have much need of the Act because the Clinton Administration put forth it’s new rules in it’s last few weeks, so President Bush was able to rescind them without Congressional help. He hoped to avoid his own rules being swept away by the new President by enacting them more than 60 days before he left office, but the Congressional Review Act gives legislators a bigger window to work with. And it’s big enough to go after new regulations the Bush Administration passed that allowed for uranium mining near the Grand Canyon, that made it easier for coal companies to dump debris in nearby streams and valleys…and that required banks to block transactions to internet gaming sites.
Typically it’s a good thing politically to make the tent as big as possible and get as many people on your side. Having enviromental groups and civil rights advocates standing shoulder-to-shoulder with poker players would be a good thing. The problem is that to reverse regulations using the Congressional Review Act, every single regulation has to be debated and voted on separately. That could take an awfully long time, and Congress’s attention might be better served focusing on the colossal problems (economy, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc) we currently face. To get around that problem, Representative Jerrod Nadler (D-NY) introduced the Midnight Rule Act, which would give Cabinet secretaries more latitude in rewriting regulations created in the final 90 days of the previous Administration.
There are some problems facing the passage of this bill–it would have to be passed FAST to so that the changes could be made within the 90-day window. And Congress has a lot on it’s legislative plate right now–getting this bill up for a vote might not be a priority. It could also be filibustered by Republicans in Congress. And while I like the whole checks-and-balances part of our government, this might put a bit too much power in the hands of those able to re-write and rescind regulations. I don’t think laws should be written in stone, but they shouldn’t be written in sand either. Something for the constitutional scholars among us to mull over.
Maybe it’s unlikely that the UIGEA rules will be reversed. And maybe it’s unlikely that we’ll see a repeal of the UIGEA this year and online poker finally legalized and legitimatized. But as you can see there are powerful forces at work, both inside and outside of government, that want to see the laws governing poker changed. Of course, there are still powerful forces opposing poker–during Attorney General-designate Eric Holder’s confirmation hearings, Sen. John Kyl (perhaps online gaming’s most implacable Congressional foe) asked Holder the following:
The question that I’d ask and wanted just to get confirmed for the record is that you indicated that under your leadership, the Department of Justice would continue to aggressively enforce the law against the forms of internet gambling that DOJ considers illegal
Somehow understanding the question despite Kyl’s tortured syntax, Holder replied that he would enforce the law. Which makes sense–as the nation’s top law-enforcement official it would’ve been very odd had Holder replied, “Nah, don’t like that law, think I’ll give it a miss”. Of course the Attorney General will enforce the laws on the books. Whether Holder will “aggressively” enforce the UIGEA, or whether he’ll focus his attention on more serious matters, remains to be seen.
So that’s what’s up on the on the federal level. In another post I’ll talk about the legal battles being waged at the state and local level. But I think this is enough talk about Congress and legislation and John Kyl for one day. Especially a Sunday.
Tags: barack obama, change.gov, eric holder, john kyl, obama inauguaration, obama poker, obama uigea, online poker laws, online poker legislation, online poker regulations, poker laws, poker legislation, Poker Poker Poker, ub, ub blog, uigea, unlawful internet gambling enforcement act
Comments (1)
