Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

News, Views, and Gossip For poker news, views, and gossip

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-28-2010, 12:51 PM   #151
Dima2000123
veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,494
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

I hate hearing about "state exception". UIGEA is one thing, state restrictions enforced by Stars and Full Tilt are an unmitigated disaster.
Dima2000123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 12:51 PM   #152
tk1133
veteran
 
tk1133's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Making friends one post @ a time
Posts: 2,221
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

Can I get a quick link please?
tk1133 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 12:52 PM   #153
Kevmath
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: @Kevmath
Posts: 28,213
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

http://financialserv.edgeboss.net/wm...iop_070131.asx

Manager's amendment passes.

Amendment #11 by Bachmann of Minnesota:

Requires Internet sites to not allow people who are delinquent on child support from gambling on their site. Sites who don't lose enforce this rule lose their license.

Frank offering a secondary amendment (subject to additional negotiation)

Bachmann's amendment passes

Last edited by Kevmath; 07-28-2010 at 12:59 PM.
Kevmath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 12:53 PM   #154
Scott Diamond
journeyman
 
Scott Diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 309
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

http://*******/9WZdpg

Link
Scott Diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 12:53 PM   #155
dfbuzzbeater
old hand
 
dfbuzzbeater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Chitown
Posts: 1,510
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by rob554 View Post
Do you realize how many of my fishy friends who play in a 1/3 NL home game would deposit if direct advertising were prevalent and there were no stigma attached to attempting to withdraw money?

A lot of my B/M and home game friends won't deposit online because of the difficulty to get the money OFF the website.

This would bring in a HUGE amount of fishy US players.
Exactly. Thanks.
dfbuzzbeater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 12:56 PM   #156
RRizGod
veteran
 
RRizGod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,265
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

lol child support payments?

are you kidding me? Jesus.

Maybe the gambling companies should monitor who hasn't paid there parking tickets.
RRizGod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 12:56 PM   #157
dblgutted
adept
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: wenzhou
Posts: 731
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

If you make child support payments, you can't play poker? Kind of sucks for poker pros -- guess they can't make their payments...
dblgutted is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 12:57 PM   #158
THE F DO
grinder
 
THE F DO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 408
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by repulse View Post
Nope, all "gambling". It doesn't treat poker in particular at all, lumps it in with everything else, though states may be able to opt-out of casino gambling but not opt-out for poker (not sure on this one).
That sucks, I would think there's a much smaller chance of this passing if that's the case. There should definitely be a distinction between games played vs. the house and games played vs. other players imo
THE F DO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 12:58 PM   #159
ESRAKES
newbie
 
ESRAKES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sebastian,FL
Posts: 17
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by dblgutted View Post
If you make child support payments, you can't play poker? Kind of sucks for poker pros -- guess they can't make their payments...
If you dont pay ur child support..u cant play is what they are saying
ESRAKES is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 12:59 PM   #160
repulse
veteran
 
repulse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 3,070
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by THE F DO View Post
That sucks, I would think there's a much smaller chance of this passing if that's the case. There should definitely be a distinction between games played vs. the house and games played vs. other players imo
I'm with you, and the PPA has suggested that, in the Senate at least, a version of this that treats only poker might have a better chance than one that treats all gambling. It seems to be a distinct possibility going forward.
repulse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 12:59 PM   #161
blizzind
centurion
 
blizzind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 188
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by dblgutted View Post
If you make child support payments, you can't play poker? Kind of sucks for poker pros -- guess they can't make their payments...
there's no way you could actually think that's what they meant
blizzind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 12:59 PM   #162
dblgutted
adept
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: wenzhou
Posts: 731
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ESRAKES View Post
If you dont pay ur child support..u cant play is what they are saying
that's what it sounds like now, but initially she said if you make child support payments sites must reject you (not delinquent payments -- just payments)
dblgutted is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 01:01 PM   #163
Kevmath
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: @Kevmath
Posts: 28,213
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

Amendment #12 by Peters of Michigan:

Exempts state and tribal lotteries from licensing requirements, as long as they are intrastate activities.
Kevmath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 01:01 PM   #164
ESRAKES
newbie
 
ESRAKES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sebastian,FL
Posts: 17
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by dblgutted View Post
that's what it sounds like now, but initially she said if you make child support payments sites must reject you (not delinquent payments -- just payments)
oh ok i didnt hear it that way my bad
ESRAKES is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 01:02 PM   #165
two2brains
veteran
 
two2brains's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,636
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

that is just a waste of time and money to try and enforce that law.


Lets just say idiot A owes back child support. Idiot A wants to play online. Idiot B (Idiot A's brother) doesn't have an account online. **LIGHT BULB** **DING DING DING**



no monies in regulated poker, child supports solid.
two2brains is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 01:04 PM   #166
ESRAKES
newbie
 
ESRAKES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sebastian,FL
Posts: 17
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by two2brains View Post
that is just a waste of time and money to try and enforce that law.


Lets just say idiot A owes back child support. Idiot A wants to play online. Idiot B (Idiot A's brother) doesn't have an account online. **LIGHT BULB** **DING DING DING**


very valid point
ESRAKES is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 01:04 PM   #167
craigmarq
old hand
 
craigmarq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Had dem pocket 77s
Posts: 1,545
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by dblgutted View Post
which says nothing about a 12-year old gambler. There was a mention of a 17-year old, but bachus keeps bringing up this supposed 12-year old...
He keeps mentioning that they've (the sun) received letters each time he references the article. So more likely its a stretch of a quote from a letter that the sun received in response to that article.
craigmarq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 01:05 PM   #168
Kevmath
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: @Kevmath
Posts: 28,213
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

Thought it was those who were delinquent on child support can't gamble online.

Peters amendment passes.

Bachus reintroducing the amendment that was earlier withdrawn.

Narrows prohibition to those who knew, or should have known they were working at an Internet site that was taking US bets illegally.

Amendment passes by voice vote.

Amendment #12 by Sherman of California

Requires key facilities and corporate entities be located in US.

A majority of employees have to be in the US

Last edited by Kevmath; 07-28-2010 at 01:12 PM.
Kevmath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 01:06 PM   #169
anakedcowboy
journeyman
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 235
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

I love that people have explain things to Bachus like he's a ****ing child.
anakedcowboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 01:07 PM   #170
tygrayfox
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: around Detroit
Posts: 64
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

go Peters, tell that boy from Alabama how it is, lol.
tygrayfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 01:10 PM   #171
RNauta
veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,163
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevmath View Post
Thought it was those who were delinquent on child support can't gamble online.
Yes but where is the burden of proof ?
Will the states or US government provide a list of these people to the poker sites ? Or will the poker sites have access to a central database of people ?

You can't have the burden of proof rest on the customer. The site could ask him whether he is delinquent on child support, the customer chooses the 'no' checkbox, boom a billion dollar business goes down the tubes because it loses its license. Sites would never take that risk, so they'd have to get a list of offenders from the state or government.
RNauta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 01:12 PM   #172
ESRAKES
newbie
 
ESRAKES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sebastian,FL
Posts: 17
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

So are they gonna be passing and/or not passing this today?
ESRAKES is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 01:13 PM   #173
Kevmath
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: @Kevmath
Posts: 28,213
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

Two more amendments after Sherman's amendment

I'd think the states have a list of people who are delinquent on child support to garnish wages and other purposes.

Amendment passes by voice vote

Amendment by Kilroy of Ohio:

Mandates that an anonymous database be made available about gambling

Final amendment by Bachus:

Black list of illegal Internet companies
Appeals process for sites who believe they should not be on the list
Safe harbor for banks/credit unions who may have processed financial transactions

Last edited by Kevmath; 07-28-2010 at 01:19 PM.
Kevmath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 01:15 PM   #174
dblgutted
adept
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: wenzhou
Posts: 731
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevmath View Post
I'd think the states have a list of people who are delinquent on child support to garnish wages and other purposes.
some states do (CA does). I wouldn't be surprised if many states do not
dblgutted is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 01:16 PM   #175
dblgutted
adept
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: wenzhou
Posts: 731
Re: House Financial Services Committee Markup on HR 2267 (markup on HR 2267 now!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ESRAKES View Post
So are they gonna be passing and/or not passing this today?
no. the bill is just being amended today.
dblgutted is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive