Your take on the legislation that might pass?

**fsugolf** · 12-08-10, 07:43 PM

looks like we might have gotten slowrolled

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's staff said late Wednesday that he is still intent on pushing for legislation during the lame duck session to legalize online poker.

The remarks came in response to a Sun article posted on-line earlier in the day. In that earlier article, Reid was quoted telling the Sun after a press conference that he would not be adding legalization of online poker to his list of objectives during the lame duck session.

“We’re still working on that, we’re not able to,” Reid said in a remark captured on audio tape.

A spokesman for Reid said later that the second half of Reid's comment was in response to a different reporter's question. That question was not heard by other reporters and in apparently responding to it, Reid did not break eye contact with the Sun reporter

Page Not Found - Las Vegas Sun

http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/pol...-falls-agenda/

**RudyRuetigger** · 12-08-10, 08:05 PM

thanks for the info.. it sucks looking through 2p2 with all the bs remarks

**RudyRuetigger** · 12-09-10, 02:20 PM

by looking at the poll on 2p2, i dont even know if poker players want this thing to pass (whether thats an ignorant stance by them,who knows).

tax bill is having problems getting passed..not many days left something has to happen soon.

**nosniboR11** · 12-09-10, 02:22 PM

rudy i am not sure if I am for the bill

good luck today

**RudyRuetigger** · 12-09-10, 02:26 PM

Originally posted by nosniboR11

rudy i am not sure if I am for the bill

good luck today

thanks pal, you too

it seems like the most in favor of the bill are:

a. the people that are located in states that are mostly likely (or have to) opt in
b. those that can easily move to opt in states
c. those looking at the bigger picture

not sure if its a good thing in general either. ofcourse dsi poker will still be available for everyone, but come on, we know how that is going

**RonPaul2008** · 12-09-10, 02:28 PM

I am praying this does not pass anytime soon

**GAB** · 12-09-10, 02:32 PM

wtf wtf what what what

**nosniboR11** · 12-09-10, 02:32 PM

rudy you are the man

you like my new pic

**MartinBlank** · 12-09-10, 02:46 PM

I don't understand what the reluctance is to support this.

If the end game is completely free wagering whenever and wherever we like----the first thing that needs to happen is some sort of destruction of the UIGEA-------

This would be a small step down that path.

**goochalooch** · 12-09-10, 02:51 PM

Wow, should be interesting to see when this becomes official and the exact wording in it.

**RonPaul2008** · 12-09-10, 02:54 PM

**** this lame duck shit of hiding important legislation is larger bills. ******* UIEGA passed that way and I ******* hope it doesn't happen for this. If we can manage to get by this lame duck session without it passing then it will be at least another 2 years before it has any chance.

**sharpcat** · 12-09-10, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by RonPaul2008

**** this lame duck shit of hiding important legislation is larger bills. ******* UIEGA passed that way and I ******* hope it doesn't happen for this. If we can manage to get by this lame duck session without it passing then it will be at least another 2 years before it has any chance.

We can only cross our fingers that this does not make it through.

This might work out to be a good thing for online sports gambling but its more likely to be a bad thing

**RonPaul2008** · 12-09-10, 03:05 PM

Might be good if the tax cut deal does not go through now and then something similar gos through with a retroactive tax decrease under the new congress. That way there is no way this poker bill gets added in.

Anybody know when exactly when this lame duck session is over? That is the day I can jump for joy if this bill has not passed.

**RudyRuetigger** · 12-09-10, 03:09 PM

Originally posted by nosniboR11

rudy you are the man

you like my new pic

I usually notice someone by the image first...I had to do a double take from your reply the first time.

Originally posted by MartinBlank

I don't understand what the reluctance is to support this.

Could end up being something like state lotteries where some have it and some dont.

*not trying to argue one way or the other as i really don't know which is the best

**mrmarket** · 12-09-10, 03:10 PM

Originally posted by MartinBlank

I don't understand what the reluctance is to support this.

If the end game is completely free wagering whenever and wherever we like----the first thing that needs to happen is some sort of destruction of the UIGEA-------

This would be a small step down that path.

First of all UIGEA does not have anything to do with this legislation. Hoping this legislation will somehow undermine UIGEA legislation so that it is nullified is like believing in god. No proof exists for the argument.

The reluctance to support this bill stems from the fact the games will become unbeatable if the current legislation is passed as is. The sites will have to increase rake to offset the tax losses screwing over every player (The tax which I have heard is going to be like 20% of revenue). The argument that the fishpool will increase winrate enough to compensate for the rake losses is laughable. The initial player surge will die off and everyone will lose going forward except the fish will not realize it. So basically it fukks all poker players,winners or losers. You might as well just play for playmoney. In addition the 15 month blackout for non US B&M sites that want licensing and the segregation of the player pool to US only will only compound this cluster fukk.

Basically this bill is Harry Reid giving a blewjob to his casino base while he fukks everyone else in the ass. Any legislation having to do with specifically the pool structure SB will be taken out by the NFL lobbyists.

This is what you get for supporting regulation. Anyone with half a brain can operate in the current environment successfully with a bit of effort.

My thanks to all the droolers who support the PPA and regulation without knowing what it really means. My hats off to you.

**RudyRuetigger** · 12-09-10, 03:42 PM

edit: i got excited and copied/pasted something that is clearly irrelevant now

**KKoz9** · 12-09-10, 05:31 PM

I was for this at first, now it seems it will only serve to regulate us to hell, hell, hell.

We can't let the government get a toe in the door or they will kick it in fully, especially this administration.

**RonPaul2008** · 12-09-10, 05:37 PM

The House Democrats are revolting and have prevented the tax bill from coming up for a vote today.
Hopefully, even if the tax bill passes under the lame duck session, this will lessen the chances of this poker legislation being tacked on.

**RudyRuetigger** · 12-09-10, 06:36 PM

Originally posted by RonPaul2008

The House Democrats are revolting and have prevented the tax bill from coming up for a vote today.
Hopefully, even if the tax bill passes under the lame duck session, this will lessen the chances of this poker legislation being tacked on.

they might be looking to tack it on some other bills

**nosniboR11** · 12-09-10, 06:38 PM

figured it would mix ya up, so if i say im betting pennies , i mean pennies , lol

good luck tonight partner

**KKoz9** · 12-09-10, 08:14 PM

Yes, the IDEA of legalizing and regulating online poker that underlies this bill is a step in the right direction.

This bill however SUCKS for all gamblers. Not only will it allow further government intrusion into yet another aspect of our lives, it is going to be ALL BAD for online gaming in general. It's like throwing a crumb to a mouse with a string on it. The bill would allow and regulate (i.e TAX) online poker for those sites that are licensed (after a proposed 15 MONTH BLACKOUT PERIOD) while at the same time ramping up efforts to prosecute and kill all other forms of gambling including casinos, sportsbooks, and poker sites that don't wish to jump through the abominable hoops to get licensed.

We have once again been duped by the politicians (and even the PPA? who is now backtracking on what the bill woudl abd wouldn't do) into thinking this will be good. In essence, it will make any online gaming much more limited and gaming as we know it now will vanish.

I pray this sham of a bill doesn't go through.

**** UPDATED - EMAIL JUST RECEIVED FROM PPA THIS AFTERNOON BELOW ****

Dear XXXXX,

Reid Backs Legalizing Web Poker I wanted to update you on the status of Congressional efforts to pass legislation which would license and regulate online poker in the U.S. While it remains an open question whether a bill will succeed during the "lame duck" session happening now, I want you to know what we are doing to protect your right to play online poker.

The PPA has been and continues to work night and day on this issue. While many have speculated that the "Tax Bill" would be a likely vehicle for iPoker legislation, because of recent political developments with respect to the tax bill it has become complicated to predict whether that bill is a viable path. I still maintain, as I told the Wall Street Journal (click to read) yesterday when the rumors circulated that the bill was dead, that nothing is dead until Congress adjourns.

Let me assure you that we have heard and strongly considered the concerns a number of our online poker playing members have raised, specifically regarding the 15 month "blackout period" contained in the draft bills that have circulated in recent days. The blackout period means that upon enactment of the proposed internet poker law there would be fifteen months where NO licensed Internet poker would be available to U.S. players. In all likelihood, some of the web sites where you currently play would leave the market so they can go through the process of obtaining a U.S. license and then re-enter the market after the 15 month blackout period.

Frankly, the proposed blackout period is absurd and the PPA opposes it. And we have fought – and continue to fight – tooth and nail against it. But it is a reality. There will likely be a blackout period of some length included in any legislation that is passed, whether it is in this Congress or future Congresses. Our opponents have been throwing their weight around to get a lengthy blackout period included and, unfortunately, I fear they are winning.

Reid Backs Legalizing Web PokerThat being said, upon significant analysis, review and reflection, we believe that the long- term benefits of this bill to the poker community make the blackout period a bitter pill we have to swallow. Our goal is to establish a permanent, safe and regulated U.S. online poker market, similar to the European regulatory markets. While many think the status quo works and is fine, it is not a long term solution and cannot last.

Without Federal licensing and regulation, individual states could – and have started – to license play within their borders only, setting up monopolies that will not provide you with the playing experience you’ve come to expect. Or they will ban online poker altogether, like Washington State has done. That is why the PPA encouraged you earlier this week to contact your Senators and voice support a Federal bill before the end of the year.

We believe that the trade off for getting regulated, permanent US online poker market is worth a temporary blackout of some sort. It’s not what we want, either, and it’s not what we pushed for in Congress, and we don’t even like it. But when viewing this from the perspective of maintaining a sustainable Internet poker market the 15 month period is short-term pain for a long-term gain.

This has been a very tedious process and seems to change from moment to moment. As Congress considers bills throughout the remainder of the lame duck, we will continually update you on our progress.

Thank you, as always, for your support and we welcome your thoughts and feedback.

Proud to Play,
John Pappas
Executive Director
Poker Players Alliance

**RudyRuetigger** · 12-09-10, 08:16 PM

yea they posted that on 2p2 as well.

**Lockitup1x** · 12-09-10, 10:05 PM

One neglected aspect in this discussion...

Brick and Mortar poker action will suffer if this legislation passes. That will hurt B&M players and B&M casino employees (and support employees) who rely on income directly and indirectly from B&M poker action.

FWIW, I highly doubt congress will put a stamp of approval on this.

**RudyRuetigger** · 12-09-10, 10:21 PM

as of now they say reids tax bill compromise will not include this bill...looks like they might try to add it somewhere else? or are being sneaky about it, who knows

**daneblazer** · 12-09-10, 10:52 PM

I worked in government for a few years and can say this won't be over until the bill passes or the session is over and it hasn't passed. The gaming bill itself won't be voted on but it will be tacked on to a much, much larger which will be voted on in full. If it gets snuck onto the tax bill and it's at the last minute, it's possible it will get passed. It doesn't take a lot to get it added onto a bill, a simple amendment through the back door will do it. That's why I don't believe a word these guys are saying.

It's ultimately out of our control, so I'm trying not to worry about it, but a 15 month blackout would be the equivalent of a baseball strike. It would really kill the overall interest in poker B&M and online. That said, this doesn't mean online poker is completely going away during the blackout. Sites like Bodog will probably completely ignore this legislation.

**zjohnzzz** · 12-10-10, 03:59 AM

its just a lousy bill that reid put together, for all the money he got from his vegas cronies

**RonPaul2008** · 12-10-10, 04:48 AM

**** Poker, i'm worried about how it will effect the sport betting market!

I'd much rather have a ******* tax increase then have this bullshit bill pass.

**wtt0315** · 12-10-10, 03:44 PM

congress is slower then a snail

**RudyRuetigger** · 12-10-10, 03:46 PM

alot less chance of it passing

**dstover13** · 12-10-10, 04:38 PM

play at sevenwins.com its completely legal in the US

**BeerDog99** · 12-10-10, 11:48 PM

FYI: http://wickedchopspoker.com/the-reid...+International

Looks like it is a dead issue.

**ApricotSinner32** · 12-11-10, 12:08 AM

That legislation will never pass or even if it does it's going to be hard to enforce.

**RudyRuetigger** · 12-11-10, 12:54 AM

not sure if thats good or bad, hopefully it turns out for the best

also, fukk me

common sbr, how do i know who scored the first goal in the 2006 world cup? i wouldnt have even know the world cup was played in 2006

**rfr3sh** · 12-11-10, 12:56 AM

I remember it was Lahm on Germany and it was a nice goal too

**RudyRuetigger** · 12-11-10, 01:01 AM

Originally posted by rfr3sh

I remember it was Lahm on Germany and it was a nice goal too

damn, i really thought i put lahm and it was marked frings or something like that. i guess i got it backwards though