Check out AT&T's FREE camera phones
April 26, 2007 10:42 AM PDT
Democrat proposes lifting federal ban on Net gambling
- Related Stories
-
Neteller blames job cuts on U.S. gambling crackdown
February 18, 2007 -
House votes yes on Net-gambling crackdown
July 11, 2006 -
Prohibition won't work for Net gambling either
May 5, 2006 -
WTO slams U.S. Net-gambling ban
April 7, 2005 -
House votes to restrict Net gambling
June 10, 2003 -
House bets against online gambling
May 6, 2003 -
Discover Card nixes credit for Net gambling
May 24, 2001
Rep. Barney Frank, a Democrat from Massachusetts and chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, on Thursday introduced a bill that would replace the current broad prohibition with strict regulations, including criminal background checks and financial disclosure, imposed on companies that seek to offer legal Internet gambling.
"The existing legislation is an inappropriate interference on the personal freedom of Americans and this interference should be undone," Frank said. His
Last year's
Those sites included ones like BetBug of Toronto; BetWWTS.com of Antigua; Bodog Sportsbook, Casino and Poker of Costa Rica; and Betfair, which has offices in London. Estimates typically put Internet gambling revenue at more than $12 billion a year.
The bill never received a formal up-or-down vote in the entire Congress. Instead, Republican congressional leaders have been criticized for gluing it onto an unrelated
Frank argues that because nearly all states already permit some form of traditional gambling--including lotteries, betting on horse and greyhound racing, and sports wagering--the federal government should legalize and regulate the online equivalents. Instead of a blanket legalization, his legislation would require the Treasury Department to police the industry and ensure that it takes adequate steps to identify minors and compulsive gamblers.
The World Trade Organization ruled in March, for a
There are signs that the 2006 Net gambling ban has had an impact on the industry. In November, the British site BetOnSports
See more CNET content tagged:
ban,
Democrat,
legislation,
bill,
Rep.
I for one am happy that internet gambling was banned. Now it should be on to wiping online pornography off the net.
For the WTO to say the U.S. is in violation of free trade? Who the F do they think they are to tell the U.S. that we should allow something that is wrong so others can make money?
GET IT RIGHT PEOPLE: GAMBLING IN ANY FORM IS WRONG!
You do realize, of course, why BF wants to "legalize" internet gambling, don't you? Hint: he's from Taxachusets, oops, I mean Massachusets, right? You know the next step is to tax the gamblers and the U.S. firms that host it (which will THEN cause them to move offshore, or at least those that were too stupid to start out offshore). The only reason to legalize it from Franks' point-of-view is to make it a source of revenue, as he has everything else he's thought of legislation to "regulate". If it's legal, then it's taxable. Why stop at e-gambling? Why not, then, e-commerce (even E-bay sales)?
C'mon, folks, even this early in the game you should see through the Honorable Democrat from Massachusets! Ask anyone who's ever lived there!
My $2.00 worth (.02 plus tax, gov't fees, etc...)
John Sirko
- I appologize to Mr. McCullagh
-
by John Sieko
May 1, 2007 11:33 AM PDT
- I want to apologize to Mr. McCullagh for my previous blog. I was given the wrong facts about who glued the net gambling law to the port security bill. Upon checking more into it, I was embarrassed and ashamed to discover that it was actually a small group of Republicans that railroaded this through. I again want to apologize to Mr. McCullagh. His article was right on about the Republicans being criticized. I guess I had better triple check what I am told next time.
-
Reply to this comment
-
-
See all 21 Comments >>John Sirko