Opposition to Possible UIGEA Repeal Mounts

by , Dec 3, 2010 | 1:19 pm

So as we thought might-could happen (April, June), Harry Reid (D-NV) is pushing repeal of the UIGEA a way to shore up America’s net bottom-line. I get the feeling the re-empowered Senate Majority Leader was hoping this poker-only proposal could be a last-minute slip-in, a la the UIGEA. But that possibility now seems moot, with the issue officially on the DC radar.

The opposition is rallying the troops to squash any dreams of a poker-industry Christmas present. Check out the letter below, sent to Reid and Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) by Reps. Spencer Bachus (R-AL), Dave Camp (R-MI), and Lamar Smith (R-TX), the ranking members in the powerful Financial Services, Ways & Means, and Judicial Committees, respectively.

The CC list includes influential Republican online gambling haters Kyl, Boehner, Cantor, and Pence — so you can see how it’s essentially a call to arms to the Republican party to sink this ship before it leaves port … or should we say port security?

Expect gloves to come off in congressional backrooms and in-boxes. The letter points out bipartisan opposition to HR 2267, even though it sailed through its 2010 committee vote with more bipartisan support. What it doesn’t point out — beyond the general issues of more tax revenue while protecting American liberty and supporting the will of the people — is how:

  • regulated online poker will create American jobs — 10s of thousands of them
  • Ron Paul has repeatedly supported efforts to repeal the UIGEA, a note to Tea Party voters who really wanna believe in sensible government, so they know this isn’t your usual government expansion
  • “Poker-only” is probably a safe compromise — that legal American businesses support and stands to have the most immediate positive impact with least possible likelihood of damage (since so many millions of Americans already play)

Camp-Smith Ltr to Reid and McConnell (1)

3 Comments to “Opposition to Possible UIGEA Repeal Mounts”

  1. Easycure

    This is the sorry-ass part of the Republican Party that conservatives like me hate. Please don’t “protect me from myself” by making what some people think are vices illegal. Online poker doesn’t hurt families a tenth of what TV does, but we’re not going to ban that. Kitchen knives end up in people’s chests all the time, but we are not going to ban them either.

    I believe another important aspect (and positive outcome) of the legalization of poker is to protect U.S. players from getting ripped off. Payment processors will be licensed. The games themselves will be monitored. and theoretically more protected from bots and inside cheaters like Russ Hamilton.

    The flip side is that most players are not going to enjoy and/or be able to afford beating the game when taxes are added on top of the rake. Yeah, they should be paying now, but how many really are?

    Sure, the government is going to love the taxes on what the sites make, but the players are going to hate it. Some of them won’t survive it and will be bust quickly. Bye, bye fishies.

  2. Dan Michalski

    France is having a lot of problems now because of their overtaxation … and someone in Europe (also maybe France?) are having problems because of overlicensing). But I still contend get the thing done, fix it later. Like health care (lol).

    Then, when online poker’s getting exactly what it wants create the foundations for an internet police force with direct access to our personal and business bank accounts that goes strongly against my libertarian leanings, I can fight to change that, too. Either way, should give me plenty to cover for a long time.

  3. Losty

    If there was a bill saying Senator Turtle Head had a nice tie, and that Apple Pie was good the Republicans would vote against it.

    If there was a bill to say water’s wet they’d block it..
    The Pope Catholic? Wouldn’t pass..

    You get the idea..