Posts Tagged ‘Spencer Bachus’

RE: Poker Bill Passes Committee (4) / Could Poker Help Bail Out American Banks

by , Sep 25, 2008 | 12:04 pm

Previous poker enemy Spencer Bachus (R-AL) — perhaps feeling bad about the outrageous mistruths spewed back in June? — seems to be softening on his opposition to the Payment Systems Protection Act.

Check it out
:
[Birmingham News, via Wicked Chops]

“A lot of people out there that play poker on the Internet – they may lose their money but they’re adults – and they went to their members of Congress,” Bachus said.

BTW, also interesting/delightful to see that Al.com (a collective internet effort from three Alabama newspapers, not to be confused with Al.blogspot.com) has a dedicated poker blogger on staff — Brian Heptinstall’s Floppin’ Aces — keeping ‘Bamans up to date with the bigger poker world as well as Gulf Coast casino biz and hyperlocal concerns such as collusion in mid-stakes area tourneys.


Could Poker Help Bail out American Banks?

by , | 11:23 am

OK, overstatement, I know … a potential collapse of the entire US economy (which George Bush is warning us about, upon request for a $700 billion semi-blank check to his buds in the banking industry) is far more important than poker.

But I gotta say, it was kinda interesting just now to see none other than Barney Frank (Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, D-MA) step out with Spencer Bachus (Frank’s enemy in recent poker fights, R-AL), letting the public know that they are working with the hastily constructed bailout bill to massage it into good working must-passable shape. Frank is talking about provisions Congress will add to the bill, and Bachus is there by his side, assuring taxpayers whatever happens, they won’t get screwed.

(Fingers crossed!)

Seeing these guys working together toward compromise (as John McCain and Barack Obama huddle with President G-Dub) made me think a little more about how poker might fit in to America’s 21st Century economy … and why shouldn’t the poker sites have to/get to pay a fee to American banks for processing their electronic transactions? Not anything to do with actual bets across the table, of course … but paying the banks to secure the transfer of money for players making deposits and cashouts … that certainly seems fair enough to me.

Maybe a drop in the bucket toward helping out such a huge industry … but a push in the right direction for the banks’ bottom line.