by Hillary LaClair, Senior Editor
The Poker Players Alliance, a prominent organization in online poker legislation with over one million members, has announced that Bill HR 6333 will not receive their support. Because Pete Session’s attempts to more clearly define what is and what is not considered unlawful internet gambling does not accurately portray the legal status of online poker, PPA chairman Alphonse D’Amato says “HR 6663 onlu confuses a clear judicial standing on this matter.”
HR 6663, not only proposed to give more clarity to the UIGEA but also to prevent online poker sites and other online gambling outlets from facing further punitive action due to pre-UIGEA activity. The proposal outlines the vague language used to convey whether online poker and casino games are legal within the U.S. According to the bill, “Federal Internet Gambling prosecutions have involved sports betting, creating a lack of authoritative court decision on the applicability of other federal criminal statutes to internet poker and casino style gambling.”
D’Amato, however, feels that the new bill implies that online poker is an illegal activity, which even the UIGEA proves is not the case. “The PPA remains concerned with the implication HR 6663 asserts that the UIGEA has made internet poker an unlawful activity that needs special protection. Previous federal case law (re: MasterCard 2002) has made it clear that existing federal criminal law (WIRE Act of 1961) applies only to internet sports wagering and not to internet poker,” says D’Amato. “Further, the UIGEA itself states, ‘No provision of this subchapter should be construed as altering, limiting or extending any federal or state law.”
HR 6663 does not protect any online poker website or internet gambling facility that accepts U.S. customers since the UIGEA was signed. If the bill is put into effect, it will give amnesty to internet gaming websites as if there were cause for prosecution in the first place. Prior to the UIGEA being signed these operations never faced scrutiny, and therefore there is no legal clout against those that withdrew from the market afterwards.
D’Amato continues to say that HR 6663 “only adds to the existing confusion and contradicts its own rule of construction by implying in its findings that the sites on which millions of Americans currently play are offering poker services in defiance of federal law.”
Sessions suggests that rather than wasting time and energy pursuing companies such as PokerStars and Full Tilt Poker, the Attorney General should put its efforts toward offering internet sports betting in the United States or processing payments for unlawful online sports betting in the United States.
While this legislation would let operations like Party Gaming and 888 off the hook, online poker rooms such as Bodog.com would become the prime target in U.S. prosecution. Even though Bodog offers poker, its online sports book would land it in the dog house under HR 6663.
HR 6663 is among several other motions currently introduced to Congress in an attempt to amend the UIGEA, but is so far the only bill that has not acquired the approval of the PPA.
|
