Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : Gambling, The Next Great Internet Industry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Herc who wrote (655)	7/16/2001 10:24:57 AM
From: kidl	Respond to of 827

If this bill fails, wouldn't it somewhat set the tone? thedesertsun.com ------ "Opposition to anti-gaming bill mounts" By Benjamin Spillman The Desert Sun July 13th, 2001 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Opponents are moving to kill a bill that would ban Internet gambling in California. Resistance from banking and gambling groups, as well as anti-gambling and social groups who normally favor betting bans, has mounted since the ban breezed through the Assembly, 61-2, in May. Critics say the ban is unenforceable and has too many exceptions. Backers of the bill say opposition has already slowed its momentum. A staffer for its sponsor, Rep. Dario Frommer, D-Los Angeles, said he’s not sure whether the bill can be saved. "There is so much big-money interest in this," said Dan Reeves, Frommer’s chief of staff. "You have all this support and no opposition, yet the bill will fail. You have all these people working in the shadows." The executive director of the California Council on Problem Gambling in Palm Springs questioned the practicality of a statewide ban on Internet betting. Taxpayer money would be better spent on education and prevention, not on chasing down Internet casino operators, said Tom Tucker, the head of the largest problem-gambling group in California. Tucker is skeptical of a ban, but wants the state to address the social problems caused by Internet gambling. He is assisting a San Jose man whose wife committed suicide after she lost $70,000 betting online to testify on behalf of the ban. "There wouldn’t be enough cyber cops available," Tucker said. "I think it is a feel-good bill." Testimony on the bill is delayed until at least August because of opposition from the Internet gambling industry, Reeves said. "The Internet is designed to be open," said Norm Towne, a lobbyist for the interactive Gaming Council of Vancouver, British Columbia. Towne said California should follow Nevada by licensing and regulating Internet casinos. Frommer has already compromised with the horse racing, Indian gaming and credit-card industries. Credit-card companies wanted to limit provisions in the bill that would have exposed the industry to lawsuits. In the course of bargaining, however, the lawmaker may have lost groups that normally support gambling restrictions. Stand Up For California -- a group that opposes the expansion of gambling -- and the Committee on Moral Concerns publicly criticized several changes to the bill. They oppose exceptions for slot machines in Indian casinos that are linked together by telephone lines, betting on horse races by telephone and Internet-based sports fantasy leagues. In a written statement, they said the exceptions are "making a variety of gambling options available to anyone, from their home or the nearest telephone." Reeves defended the compromises. The goal of the bill, he said, is not to infringe on gambling that already exists, but to stop expansion. Indian casinos and horse racing are already regulated, and sports fantasy leagues are games of skill, not gambling, Reeves said. A separate bill in the Legislature would authorize Internet-based horse betting. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Benjamin Spillman can be reached at 778-4643 or by e-mail at Benjamin.Spillman@thedesertsun.com

To: Herc who wrote (655)	7/18/2001 8:20:17 AM
From: kidl	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 827

Visa and the U.S. Government Clash by Grant Eastbourne, WINNERonline.com 16 July 2001 A U.S. House subcommittee met last Thursday to discuss the credit card- and financial services industries' roles in online gambling. And from all accounts, the meeting only served to further polarize the opposing sides. The House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations was convened to examine the relationship between online gambling and financial service companies as part of a growing demand that the government limit access to Internet wagering. Representatives from the Interactive Gaming Council, the National Association of State and Provincial Lotteries, the National Thoroughbred Racing Association, the National Collegiate Athletic Association and Visa, met before the committee to argue their cases. But the deck was stacked against the online gambling industry and the credit card companies before they even reached the meeting. One of the key subcommittee members was Rep. James Leach of Iowa, who has sponsored a bill that would make it illegal to use checks, debit-, and credit cards to pay debts for, or receive profits from, Internet gambling. The hearing also comes just as Rep. Robert Goodlatte is preparing to re-launch his online gambling prohibition bill. The bill received majority support in the House last year, but failed to pass because it did not receive a two-thirds vote. Goodlatte wants to ban most forms of Net wagering, and plans to include many of Leach's financial provisions in his revised legislation. Several issues came to the fore during Thursday's hearing. Experts from both sides told the subcommittee that it is difficult to prevent children from accessing gambling sites, that it is difficult to regulate most casino operations, and that problem gamblers can quickly get in over their heads. Notwithstanding, representatives from the gaming industry told the subcommittee that efforts to ban online gambling would be difficult and that the U.S. government would be better off trying to regulate the industry. The committee was also told that efforts to prevent credit card companies from processing transactions would likely fail because of the use of alternative payment solutions such as PayPal. Government legislation that would restrict the business practices of the credit card companies proved to be a particularly contentious issue during the hearing. Mark McCarthy, head lobbyist for Visa USA Inc, said gamblers could get around financial regulations by using online payment companies. He also added that Leach's proposed bill would put an unreasonable burden on Visa and other financial service companies to enforce federal regulations. Visa maintains that gamblers themselves should bear the responsibility for wagering online with credit cards. Not surprisingly, Leach disagreed with that sentiment. "We have an absolute obligation to look at this issue before it gets out of hand," he said. The use of credit cards in online gambling is undoubtedly a serious issue, and as Rep. Leach noted, one that should be addressed. But opponents of the proposed financial legislation (and all-out ban) have raised some compelling issues of their own that cannot be ignored by the U.S. government. It seems that a major showdown is brewing between the casinos, the credit card companies, and the U.S. federal government. And if this hearing is any indication of what's to come, it will be quite a battle. Stay tuned to WINNERonline for more details of this hearing and proposed legislation as it becomes available.