White House View on Online Poker (May 18, 2012)

[ValueJammer]

Is this a new development, or more of what we thought the current state of affairs was?

This email comes from the White House question/petition service:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What We Have to Say About Online Poker

By Brian Deese, Deputy Director of the National Economic Council

Thank you for taking the time to participate in the "We the People" petition process. We launched this online tool as a way of hearing directly from you, and are pleased to see that it has been effective in soliciting your feedback. We understand your interest in the petition to support the legalization of online poker, and appreciate the opportunity to share President Obama's concerns about this issue.

The Administration understands that many Americans engage in paid online poker games for entertainment purposes. Online gambling on sporting events or contests violates federal law. The legality of other forms of online gambling is dependent upon the law of the states where the bettor or gambling business is located. It is left to each state to determine whether it wishes to permit such activity between its residents and an online poker business authorized by that state to accept such wagers, but online gambling that is not authorized by state law may also violate federal statutes.

The rapid and anonymous nature of the internet distinguishes online games from onsite games, such as those in casinos, and creates distinct challenges. For example, there are many means of technologically circumventing restrictions on online gambling that can allow individuals from countries where gambling is illegal -- or even minors -- to play using real currency. Online games also have greater potential for fraud because gambling websites are much cheaper and easier to establish than on-site locations, and like telemarketing scams, can appear and disappear overnight. Finally, online gambling can be used in money laundering schemes because of the volume, speed, anonymity, and international reach made possible by internet transactions. The Administration will continue to examine this issue and is open to solutions that would help guard against the use of online gambling sites as tools for conducting illegal activities or preying on unsuspecting individuals to the extent that online gambling is permitted.

Thank you once again for signing the online petition. We appreciate hearing your opinions and look forward to hearing from you again soon.

[ValueJammer]

Sounds like a big green light for states to proceed. That's super +EV in my opinion.

"It is left to each state to determine whether it wishes to permit such activity between its residents and an online poker business authorized by that state to accept such wagers, but online gambling that is not authorized by state law may also violate federal statutes."

A little disappointing that it seems to imply this administration will not push for a federal bill. What do you guys think?

[sofocused978]

Just got the email too. The second paragraph basically says it all. States can do whatever they want as long as it's not sports betting. Sounds like a go ahead for interstate too. If MA decides it will authorize WSOP.com to offer poker games to its residents for a piece of the rake then thats cool?

[Max Cut]

Online version with a link to the petition.

https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petition...t-online-poker

[Malefiicus]

Expected, but lame.

[LetsGambool]

Seems like it opens up intrastate and then pooling without Federal legislation if it reflects the DOJs views.

[Jerok]

Did this really happen two months ago and this is the first I've heard about it, or is there a typo in the title of this thread?

[vicnice]

Typo. It's May 18th. I received the email about 7pm eastern today.

[Go Get It]

Meh, standard non answer answer imo.

And segmenting Ipoker to the states is no where near optimal, for players or the states.

[TheDarkElf]

Originally Posted by Go Get It

Meh, standard non answer answer imo.

And segmenting Ipoker to the states is no where near optimal, for players or the states.

Life is not always optimal.

[MrAce777]

Got the same message too. So I assume this means internet poker can pool players interstate should other states begin to legally license and regulate internet poker?

[ValueJammer]

mod: typo yes. May 18th. Is there a way I can change it?

[LetsGambool]

Originally Posted by Go Get It

Meh, standard non answer answer imo.

And segmenting Ipoker to the states is no where near optimal, for players or the states.

This didn't seem to limit play to intrastate. We have to get the states pooled eventually, I agree, but with Fed legislation seemingly stalled this might be a good next best alternative

[t_roy]

sounds like the states can go ahead. I really see no reason that legal ipoker can not currently be offered in states that clearly don't outlaw it. (maybe there really aren't any idk.)

[Go Get It]

Originally Posted by TheDarkElf

Life is not always optimal.

CSB

Originally Posted by LetsGambool

This didn't seem to limit play to intrastate. We have to get the states pooled eventually, I agree, but with Fed legislation seemingly stalled this might be a good next best alternative

It is def better than nothing. But nothing anywhere close to pre BF.