It was looking really good up untill a couple of days ago. It really seemed as though this would be far too low on the Senate's priority list for it to get enough attention to pass and there were several holds on the bill placed by certain senators.
However, almost overnight things are not looking so grand. Apparently Bill Frist is trying to attach the language to the Department of Defense Authorizations Bill. The DoD Authorization bill is what lays out many of the programs the DoD will run over the coming year. THIS BILL HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH ONLINE GAMBLING, yet Senator Frist is inserting this language for many reasons.
1) The holds on the gambling bill itself aren't going to be removed, meaning it would be almost impossible to pass.
2) Anyone trying to hold up this bill will take a lot more political flak than they would for just stopping the internet gambling bill.
I think its complete horse . Its bad enough they are trying to pass this bill to begin with, but to insert it into something that is so damn different and irrelevent really just pisses me off. The status of things really won't be known untill Monday or Tuesday, but thats where they are now.
Well, but that's how a lot of things happen is with riders on important or necessary legislation.
I think it totally sucks, but one wonders about enforcement opportunities. I admit I haven't read up on it a whole lot, but is this going to be up to ISPs to enforce/block the law or solely on law enforcement?
Any info links you can provide would be appreciated, Manny.
They're going after the banking aspect of it. They want the banks to stop transactions between the bank and the gambling companies. This would require a large amount of effort on the banking industry's part and of course they dont' want to have to do that so they're fighting it.
All in all, it may end up being an uneforceable law because the banks may not be able to block transcactions from companies like Neteller or Firepay so we'll see where it ends up.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/po...Cat=&Board=law
Thats the best source of information on things right now.
Which website are you using for NFL this year? I've switched around to new ones each season for the last three years and I've been a little nervous about putting money into an account this year as I now fear never seeing it again thanks to our government focusing on such important legislation as this.
I havne't used any site for sportsbooking lately. I did use Sportsbook.com in the past.
I did just recieve something in the mail for Betonusa.com. They were offering 50 free bucks, so I may take that and blow it on a few games.
I've never used betonusa, I did use betonsports.com one year, I'd say avoid them as they will never stop emailing you and sending you ........however, I did get a lovely mousepad from them.
Sucks for the degenerate gamblers.
Sincerely,
Tony Bruno
Sucks for freedom.
What a manipulative rat Bill Frist is.
Is there something wrong with having good morals?
No, but when Bill Frist finds them, be sure to let us know.
It is looking good as of right now. The report will come out later today, but it seems as though Frist was unsuccessful in his hijak attempt. However, he will try again almost without a doubt before the session is over.
ass Frist.
good thing manny is Republicans don't vote str8 party lines. There will be some demagoging of the issue from the right but it won't fly. However, it will be taxed and regulated like I think it should.
I think your summary is correct, but I pull one conclusion from an unenforceable law.
No law or legal onus to pay if you do win. Interesting.
Oh that. The IRS doesn't care if I make may money selling crack to 7 year olds on the playground, but they better get their damn cut. Seriously.
What do seven year olds pay for crack with? Yu-Gi-Oh cards?
Is there something wrong with the government rather than the family being the enforcer of morality?
Our government encourages good habits all the time. For example, Sin taxes on tobacco and alcohol, restricitions on strip clubs etc...
free country my ass
more free than what Che started.
And all of those laws are , IMO.
whatever....
I agree to some extent, except when it comes to protecting children.
Don't let Billy Boy get you down, Manny -- that's just how dimmocrapacy works!
What does internet gambling have to do with protecting children? Morality is fine, but the problem is that there are many different views of what cons utes morality. Some people see no problem with spending 25 dollars to bet on their favorite football team when it has no effect on whether or not they can buy food or pay their bills. It's an entertainment expense - just like going to the ball game would be. There is no way to prove what actually cons utes morality, so what you get is people dividing into groups and fighting each other over what they believe is right. Since there is no way to prove what is moral or not, the government shouldn't get in the business of deciding what is moral. Besides, wouldn't that be the epitome of hypocracy? A government that sets morality standards that are violated by the very people that run the government and set the standards? I have no tolerance for that.
I agree that steps should be taken (IE keeping strip clubs away from schools etc etc) to protect children. I just don't like being told what I can and can't do as an adult when no one else is harmed.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
