The Democrats Are Fighting to Reverse the Online Gambling Ban
An entire community of bettors and gamblers alike watched in disbelief as the UIGEA became law on October 13, 2006, effectively putting an end to legal and regulated online gambling in the United States of America. The act was a direct response to the passing of several bills throughout various states in an attempt to legalize online poker and casino gaming within the borders of said states, which were then vetoed by Governor George Pataki of New York, who stated that the legality of online gambling should be left up to each individual state. The act was promoted through extensive lobbying efforts by Nevada casinos, and signed into law by President George W.
Internet Betting Sites Have Had A Positive Impact on Sports Betting
When it comes to sports, bettors want convenience. It’s why many of them like betting at online gaming sites: They can do it anytime, anywhere. For years now, you could do that with offshore sportsbooks and racebooks. But since 2007—when Congress made it illegal for U.S.-based banks and credit card companies to process transactions from gambling sites—that freedom has come with a hefty price tag: You can only bet at offshore operators or through shady bookies (and risk getting in trouble with your credit card company or bank). Those restrictions may be coming to an end soon as a proposed repeal of PASPA will likely be introduced in Congress soon. While not everyone is on board with internet betting—some politicians have argued that this would lead to addiction and more compulsive gamblers--if the bill gets enough support, it could pass. And if it does, we'll see a major shift in how people view sports betting as a whole.
In recent years there's been plenty of evidence to suggest that internet gambling isn't just harmless fun. In fact, while some people do enjoy internet gambling without any problems, there are plenty who get addicted to the thrill and experience some pretty serious consequences--whether they're financial or emotional--as a result. So while this law could very well help Americans access their favorite sport faster than ever before, there are also serious concerns about what would happen if these laws were repealed altogether. One thing's for sure: More people will start wagering money on sporting events. With so much debate over whether or not that's a good thing, one thing is certain: We're definitely going to see some changes ahead of us.
This year alone we've seen nearly $50 billion wagered on sports at Nevada casinos, where betting has been legal since 1931. Legalized sports betting in Nevada has spurred ancillary businesses like fantasy leagues and sports media outlets because it has created demand for more information. And many analysts say legalisation (or de-criminalisation) would create billions in tax revenue and reduce crime associated with illegal bookmaking operations in America. The leading argument against legalization? That it can lead to problem gambling – which can be deadly if left untreated. Which is why it’s important to remember that, no matter what decision Congress makes, there will always be negative impacts. If it legalizes online sports betting, those with addictive tendencies might suffer even more. If it doesn't legalize it, then those seeking to gamble legally will find themselves breaking the law. Either way, there are negatives.
It Is Too Late To Prevent Americans From Having Access
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said that despite Trump’s support for restricting online gambling, it is now too late because the genie is already out of the bottle. What Schumer means by this is there are currently state laws in place that allow Americans access to online gambling and therefore it would be near impossible to eradicate online gambling. The issue right now is not preventing Americans from accessing online gambling but rather making sure they are able to play while safely ensuring they aren’t playing at an unsafe or unregulated site. Once these things have been implemented then we can begin allowing Americans access back into what was once a $40 billion industry before legislation made it illegal in 2006. It will take time to reverse the damage that has been done since 1998 when Congress passed the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) which criminalized online poker among other games. Along with reversing some of the damages, it will also require an act of Congress to make online gambling legal again. If President Trump were to sign such a bill he would likely only do so after securing some concessions as he did with his recent trade deal with Mexico and Canada. Any move to legalize internet gambling should include regulating the practice under either federal oversight or a system managed by states. As long as American players know where they are legally allowed to gamble, I think legalizing online poker and sports betting will be possible. In order to regulate sites properly so that they are honest and safe, there must be some form of self-regulation on their part. Finally, it would make sense for us to legalize internet gambling in light of our opioid crisis; as many people are addicted because its more difficult for them to get opioids than recreational drugs like marijuana or alcohol—which can also kill you if used improperly—some believe legalizing another addictive substance could help decrease addiction rates overall.
It Is More Likely That Internet Gambling Sites Contribute to the Economy than Harm it
The business of internet gambling is definitely profitable and powerful. The online gambling industry is so large that it rakes in more than $30 billion every year and employs over 150,000 people worldwide. On top of providing numerous employment opportunities, the online gambling industry has also donated a lot of money to various causes. The United States alone receives over 2% of its annual tax revenue from online gambling revenues in state lotteries alone. These are staggering numbers that show how much profit can be made by not just online casinos but also online sportsbooks and poker rooms too. These contributions to the economy have led many economists to conclude that this ban is hurting Americans who want a job or want their taxes paid for. In addition, without any regulation of these industries there will inevitably be an increase in crime as well as the potential for terrorists to use it as a means of funding their operations. Allowing online gambling sites to operate legally would allow authorities to monitor them closely and reduce such issues.
In response to these benefits, the Republican Party has taken up the cause against legalization by citing moral grounds. Their argument rests on claims that playing with one's own money leads people into addiction, which will lead them deeper into debt and other unfortunate circumstances in life.
This is simply untrue because unlike traditional casino games like roulette where gamblers bet with physical chips or coins, all bets at an online casino are done with digital currency meaning they do not run out of cash like they do when they go out to gamble at a brick-and-mortar casino. No matter what form of currency they prefer to play with, players never actually see the money itself. When they deposit funds onto their account it gets converted into credits that cannot be spent outside of the site; only inside. That way if someone does get addicted and lose everything, there are no consequences because the funds were never exchanged for real money anyway. It's a win-win situation for everyone involved except for those who might not want people to enjoy themselves in peace and privacy. There's no reason why online gambling should remain illegal in America when it contributes so much to our society. If you're going to legalize weed then why not legalize gambling? I know plenty of people who've gotten really good at Poker and Blackjack, maybe we could even host the next World Series!
National Security Argument Falls Short
The ban was imposed in 2006, when gambling over the Internet was a brand-new phenomenon. From a national security standpoint, it made sense for Congress to put a freeze on new forms of gambling until it understood whether it could threaten public order or American values. But now that we have 10 years' worth of experience with online gaming, we can see that no such threat has emerged. This year's effort is simply an effort by conservatives and anti-gambling lobbyists to use fears of terrorism as an excuse for continuing their long war against any form of legalized gambling they dislike. Since they don't like all forms of legal gambling — even if you're doing it at a real casino or racetrack — they'll fight any change that lets Americans bet online. It's not just our democracy these ideologues are trying to subvert: It's yours too. And the Democratic leaders know this; they will be able to undo this part of President Trump's legacy. If you want your voice heard on this issue, speak up right now! What does Senator Grassley have to say about repealing the ban? Pursuing reversal of the Department of Justice rule may send a message to those who might otherwise invest in legitimate industries, he said last week. I am concerned about drawing away potential investment into other industries. What does Senator Marco Rubio have to say about reversing the ban? He argues that efforts to repeal or weaken UIGEA would signal a lack of seriousness regarding international crime groups. For them, online gambling may represent one more business opportunity to exploit. I think what we need to do is go after the problem - which is the money laundering, Rubio said. I think there's a very important discussion going on in Washington right now about how vulnerable our financial system currently is because of virtual currencies. So while they each take different approaches, both Senators warn us that by repealing UIGEA, we would signal to criminals around the world that America isn't serious about stopping them from using various loopholes and technicalities - including this one - to get around whatever rules we set up.
The Dems Just Want an Option
The Republican-led Congress introduced HR 4301 in 2006. It blocked commercial banks from processing online gambling transactions and made it illegal for credit card companies and banks that service your checking account from doing business with online gambling sites. The bill banned U.S.-based websites that offered real money gaming, restricted financial institutions from serving those sites and punished credit card companies and payment processors who worked with them by prohibiting them from offering their services to other kinds of businesses. To make sure no one tried to circumvent those regulations, it required any internet company that took a U.S.-based bet (even though there is no way for a company outside of America to conduct a transaction involving American citizens) had to block people physically located in America from using its services. All of this goes back to an earlier idea: banning online gambling altogether. That was never going to happen - too many Americans want access to casino games and poker tournaments on their phone or laptop. So what we're left with is prohibition by law. The Republicans didn't just introduce legislation; they also appointed regulators who have gone after companies which provide Internet gambling services to American players. An initial crackdown netted nine operators, including industry leaders PokerStars and Full Tilt Poker. But the government has not been able to get rid of all these providers because you can play most forms of Internet gambling through offshore sites without breaking the law if you use prepaid cards or virtual currencies like Bitcoin to place bets and pay off winners. As long as an operator isn't based in the United States, then it doesn't need to abide by our laws. The result is that millions of people still gamble online every day. Meanwhile, our country suffers as billions are siphoned out of the economy and into countries like Canada where recreational gambling is legal.
Trump Does Not Want Unrestricted Internet Poker
Donald Trump’s election as president puts a full ban on Internet poker in danger. The billionaire Republican made his position clear during an interview on a Washington, D.C.-based television station WJLA (ABC Channel 7). I have one friend that's really interested in online gambling, Trump told WJLA host Bruce DePuyt. And I tell him all the time that I don't like it because people are getting away from taxes and he doesn't like hearing that. While opponents of poker claim players aren't paying their fair share of taxes, evidence suggests they already do —and there's no hard evidence to support claims otherwise. The best possible chance for overturning the law would be through legislation. There is strong opposition to any changes by both Republicans and some Democrats. For example, Democrat Joe Barton is against regulating internet gaming but favors taxing it at a rate not less than 50%. Given this divide within their own party and across the aisle, prospects for passing legislation seems dim. However, the new administration is just weeks old and President Trump will undoubtedly continue to evolve his policy positions. His campaign slogan was Make America Great Again. And if reversing this ban makes America great again—that could mean for poker players too.
Clearly American voters' views differ considerably from those held by many state legislators - particularly when it comes to treating them with basic fairness and equality. That does not seem likely to change anytime soon. But for now, conservative critics of widespread legalization should take comfort knowing that things are unlikely to get much worse without legislative action. Whatever future impact Clinton or another democratic candidate may have had on online poker regulation has been set back months or years with Trump occupying the White House. Unlike Congress where democratic wins come few and far between, states seem more willing address controversial issues such as unregulated online poker. California, Pennsylvania, New York and Illinois have all introduced legislation legalizing internet poker. None of these efforts so far have been successful. With Trump as president, these efforts are even less likely to succeed. Even if they did pass into law, it is unclear how long they would survive under a trump presidency before being struck down under the guise of religious freedom or other similar arguments. In the meantime, players have resorted to traveling to Canada for a fix. In Quebec, for instance, it is legal to offer games of poker. Players have taken advantage of the lax laws and risked fines of up to $2000 Canadian dollars ($1600 US) per player per day. Other Canadian provinces are following suit and recognizing the fact that people will always find a way to gamble. It's a reality that they're going to do it anyway, said Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne. So we might as well regulate it.
Some in GOP Would Support a Compromise
An important reason that online gambling hasn’t yet been legalized is because there have been obstacles in both Democratic and Republican parties. After passing a bill that included a ban on internet gaming, Rep. Chaffetz said, I will never support an expansion of gambling into our homes. I think it's wrong. It would seem unlikely he’d be supportive of reversing course now. However, others in his party would likely come along for compromise reasons if faced with pressure from within their own party or concerned about appearing too extreme. For example, former Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) had also supported bans on internet gambling but has since reversed himself. In 2016 he said I’m not sure we need this dramatic change to federal law when asked about reversal by ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos.
In 2013 Representative Pete Sessions (R-TX) also voted against legalizing online poker but by 2015 was saying I don't know why they want me to make such a big deal out of this. Some Republicans may view voting against such legislation as providing cover for those who want to reverse course and still vote conservatively without supporting expanding gambling interests at home. And other members of Congress might be more inclined to support a compromise. They include Representatives James Lankford (R-OK), Lou Barletta (R-PA), Chris Collins (R-NY), Tom Cole (R-OK), Rodney Davis (IL-13), Andy Harris (MD). A number of these are part of the GOP leadership and will be under significant pressure to get things done. If they were to see that their base wants something different than what they stand for, the rest of congress would take notice. Even one defection could spell doom for a bill otherwise passed easily by largely unified GOP lawmakers. The most significant obstacle, however, comes down to leadership: House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy isn’t committed to this effort; Speaker Paul Ryan doesn’t seem eager either. He's remained steadfast in opposing regulation on internet gaming so far. He also won't let bills become law unless a majority of GOP leaders back them—and thus far, he does not seem convinced. Nonetheless, the powerful chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee Greg Walden has agreed to pursue this cause with Chairman Fred Upton who heads up Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade subcommittee. The two chairmen plan to offer a legislative fix for sports betting restrictions due to the legalization of PASPA last year—it would help those frustrated by America’s slow pace toward regulating sports betting compare favorably among constituents when it comes time for re-election efforts.
What Would This Mean For States Rights?
The argument for a reversal of PASPA is also framed as a state's rights issue. The online gambling ban would violate individual states' rights to regulate their own citizens and would be an overreach of federal authority. In other words, it doesn't matter if you're a Democrat or Republican, if you support states' rights, then you should support overturning PASPA. That's why we'll likely see opposition from both sides of the aisle in Congress. But will that really happen? It's hard to say at this point. For one thing, there are only 50 seats held by Democrats in the Senate; so even if every one of them voted for an overturn, they wouldn't have enough votes without GOP support (assuming all Republicans vote against). However, there are 24 GOP Senators who have publicly come out against the law--signaling that there might be some wiggle room with Republicans who could end up voting Democratic on this issue. And remember: these aren't normal times! As more and more Americans start coming around to supporting legalization of recreational marijuana (now legal in 10 states), it may not be such a long shot after all... though many experts think it's still unlikely that Republicans will side with Democrats on anything regarding gaming or gambling. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens next. If Republicans do come around, it will open up a whole new can of worms: how do we control internet regulation when one country is regulating its borders but another isn't? What about security risks and privacy concerns when government data is being collected outside our borders? There are a lot of issues here that don't have easy answers. What matters most now is electing officials who understand the importance of legalizing internet gambling--whether they're Democrats or Republicans.
Will Online Betting Be Legal by 2020?
The Internet gambling ban was officially passed in 2006, but there are many supporters of overturning it. There has been a great deal of debate about reversing it due to many Americans supporting legal online gambling. Several U.S. states also have petitions for creating their own laws for legalizing online gambling and casinos as well. The House Ways and Means Committee is expected to hold hearings with experts from both sides in March 2017 and will then vote on whether or not to repeal it. This could take months so don’t expect it any time soon if they decide to repeal it at all but more than likely we will see them hold more hearings next year before voting again on it. In order to make changes to the law, some Republican representatives would need to change their votes. It's unlikely that Republicans would want this since most of them were against the law when it was first made. But after seeing the amount of money it brings in via taxes alone, they may reconsider. If you support legalization of internet gambling, please contact your representative now to let them know how you feel about this issue! A survey taken by Dr. Yang Hong during his research found that 79% of people who gambled on the internet said they gambled responsibly.
He feels very strongly about this because he sees people being negatively impacted by lack of information due to the law banning internet gambling.
In November 2016, Congress members submitted a petition to reverse this ban and allow state governments to establish their own laws governing what citizens can do with their free time, especially those in dry counties who cannot go out and gamble in casinos like everyone else can because of its location restrictions.
There are no estimates as to when these Congressional hearings will be held yet but according to USAToday reporter Steve Reilly Congressional aides believe it might happen within six months. When asked about the potential reversal, Congressman Joe Barton stated I think it's worth studying.
