Editor’s Note: Most people reading this article are probably familiar with the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006. If not, please visit the CardPlayer Magazine website and read about it.
Recently, I sent an email to Senator Saxby Chambliss of Georgia regarding the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA). While I was happy to see a return response to my email, his response was less than satisfactory in my opinion. If his opinion is typical of the people who represent our interests in the nation’s capitol, I must seriously question if Congress understands what it is doing when making laws for our country.
The email I sent was part of the Poker Players Alliance’s (PPA) campaign to contact our representatives and let them know how hard-working American poker players feel about the laws they have passed and future laws that will affect poker (and specifically in this case, online poker). To summarize the email I sent, it describes my desire to see the UIGEA repealed and also asks for his support in passing HR 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act (which would exempt poker from the UIGEA) and HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act (which would place regulations on online poker).
Here is the response I received from Senator Chambliss:
Thank you for contacting me regarding internet poker and the Unlawful Internet Gambling Act (UIGA). I appreciate hearing from you.
The UIGA was included in the final passage of H.R. 4954, the “Port Security Improvement Act of 2006,” and was signed into law (P.L. 109-347) by President Bush on October 13, 2006.
I support placing a ban on Internet gambling, and I supported the final passage of this bill. The National Gambling Impact Study Commission documented, and Senate and House hearings confirmed, that Internet gambling was growing at an explosive rate. Because the Internet can be used anonymously, the danger existed that access to Internet gambling would be abused by underage children. In most instances, a would-be gambler merely needed to fill out a registration form in order to play. Most sites relied on the registrant to disclose his or her correct age and the sites made little or not attempt to verify the accuracy of the information. Underage gamblers could easily use their parents’ credit cards or even their own credit and debit cards to register and set up accounts.
While I believe P.L 109-347 is a good law intended to protect children and reduce crime, I do understand the concerns of many internet poker players who will be affected by this new law. Should legislation regarding a poker “skill game exemption” come before the Senate for debate, I will give your views consideration.
Is he serious with that logic? If so, I’m very scared!!! While I most certainly understand the need to protect our children from underage gambling, is this the right way to do it - by making it unavailable to almost everybody?
By the same logic, I would have to assume that Senator Chambliss would also be in favor of any law that prohibited the production or sell of alcohol. After all, underage drinking is a large problem in this country and teenagers can unlawfully obtain alcohol in a myriad of ways. Therefore, alcohol should be taken away from everybody to protect the children, right?
Lawmakers tried to take alcohol away from everybody almost 100 years ago and we all know how well that worked. Prohibition was an obvious disaster. So is the UIGEA. Until our representatives learn from their past mistakes, we are doomed to make the same mistakes. This is another one. Hopefully, the same results will ultimately occur and the UIGEA will be repealed much like prohibition.
Until next time,
KC
Stumble it!
