Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Legislation for Poker & Income Taxes for Poker Players Discussions of various poker-related laws and steps players can take to push for better laws.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-28-2010, 10:42 AM   #101
repulse
veteran
 
repulse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 3,070
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Bachus' Amendment

"An even stronger prohibition, which we worked on in conjunction with several different groups"

"If it is the will of the committee to move this flawed bill forward, we should at least do everything we can to limit the damage, not just to US online gamblers but to their neighbors and fellow citizens."

"Since 2006 there [have been companies that ignored our laws, criminal enterprises that took US bets every day]. Whether you supported the UIGEA in 2006 or not, as most people did support it, every member of this body supports the rule of law. Hr2267 rewards illegal offshore casinos, the casinos that have spent tens of millions of $ lobbying Congress to overturn UIGEA. [any IG legalization bill should explicitly prohibit them]"

"The companies and their employees are simply unsuitable for license here. They violated the law and there's no reason to believe they won't again."

"[this amendment would prevent] any company that has [ever accepted US bets] on sporting events, POKER [emphasis mine], ... from entering the market"


Frank says:
"We are in general agreement on this" (!!)
repulse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:42 AM   #102
rocketragz
old hand
 
rocketragz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Land of the restricted.
Posts: 1,297
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEngineer View Post
LOL at Bachus wishing to protect my neighbors from my poker playing.
Thank god cause I live in am apt complex. I'm endangering a lot of people with my reckless online pokers
rocketragz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:43 AM   #103
Dawgfan1980
stranger
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 8
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

I have no use for Spencer Bachus. He speaks of site operators ignoring US laws, how about the US ignoring the WTO?
Dawgfan1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:43 AM   #104
craigmarq
old hand
 
craigmarq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Had dem pocket 77s
Posts: 1,545
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Yeah, thats really really bad. I think those are my least two favorite politicians so I'm not very surprised.
craigmarq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:43 AM   #105
Rich Muny
Former PPA President
 
Rich Muny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 27,752
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Quote:
Originally Posted by repulse View Post
Bachus' Amendment

"An even stronger prohibition, which we worked on in conjunction with several different groups"

"If it is the will of the committee to move this flawed bill forward, we should at least do everything we can to limit the damage, not just to US online gamblers but to their neighbors and fellow citizens."

"Since 2006 there [have been companies that ignored our laws, criminal enterprises that took US bets every day]. Whether you supported the UIGEA in 2006 or not, as most people did support it, every member of this body supports the rule of law. Hr2267 rewards illegal offshore casinos, the casinos that have spent tens of millions of $ lobbying Congress to overturn UIGEA. [any IG legalization bill should explicitly prohibit them]"

"The companies and their employees are simply unsuitable for license here. They violated the law and there's no reason to believe they won't again."

"[this amendment would prevent] any company that has [ever accepted US bets] on sporting events, POKER [emphasis mine], ... from entering the market"


Frank says:
"We are in general agreement on this" (!!)
Frank has been consistent in stating his belief that UIGEA banned online gaming, including poker.
Rich Muny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:44 AM   #106
sluggger5x
John Connor of poker
 
sluggger5x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Fight for Poker Rights Action Thred
Posts: 5,592
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Bacchus is taking down janitors and parking lot attendees today too. What a Maverick!!!
sluggger5x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:44 AM   #107
SkandarAkbar
grinder
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Nixa, MO
Posts: 406
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Janitors must be punished for their bosses errors!
SkandarAkbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:44 AM   #108
niss
Wood
 
niss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Woodmere
Posts: 16,076
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

I understand Bachus has a political appearance he needs to make, but this issue about the janitor seriously makes me consider the possibility that he is ******ed.
niss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:45 AM   #109
repulse
veteran
 
repulse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 3,070
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEngineer View Post
Frank has been consistent in stating his belief that UIGEA banned online gaming, including poker.
True, but up until now we didn't know if he supported explicitly prohibiting the reputable "offshore operators", right?
repulse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:46 AM   #110
sofocused978
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
sofocused978's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,765
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

How are publicly traded companies over in Europe criminal enterprises?
sofocused978 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:46 AM   #111
SkandarAkbar
grinder
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Nixa, MO
Posts: 406
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Bachus...He is incredibly blind but he seems almost defeated as he speaks. If this is moving forward blah blah blah. He seems resigned to this moving and it's fun to watch him suffer through this.
SkandarAkbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:47 AM   #112
eersfan
journeyman
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 386
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Quote:
Originally Posted by niss View Post
I understand Bachus has a political appearance he needs to make, but this issue about the janitor seriously makes me consider the possibility that he is ******ed.
It just seems to be an unnecessary and I don't know why he is trying to argue about this. Why not just take that part of the amendment out if he wants it approved?
eersfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:47 AM   #113
niss
Wood
 
niss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Woodmere
Posts: 16,076
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

oh, hi Mrs. Bachmann!
niss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:47 AM   #114
Rich Muny
Former PPA President
 
Rich Muny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 27,752
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Bachmann thinks this class warfare??
Rich Muny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:48 AM   #115
SkandarAkbar
grinder
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Nixa, MO
Posts: 406
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Quote:
Originally Posted by repulse View Post
True, but up until now we didn't know if he supported explicitly prohibiting the reputable "offshore operators", right?
Yeah his attitude seemed like he was for wiping out the current operators and starting over I'm sure some people cringed at that.
SkandarAkbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:50 AM   #116
ivey10k
grinder
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 472
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Bachman and Bachus think they r slick...their amendment essentially rules out everyone which is what Sherman picked up on...What do you think TE?

Michael of NJ
ivey10k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:51 AM   #117
jenisis
banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 76
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

if obama played poker this wouldnt even be an issue anymore..
jenisis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:51 AM   #118
LetsGambool
banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 26,578
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

The problem with the licensing language regarding foreign sites is not what happens if/when a bill passes. If we design the bill right, there are plenty of places to play.

The problems are, given this bill is still a long shot for this Congress

A) We are going to lose a funding source. If Stars and Tilt can't get licensed, they will support the status quo. This is going to hurt the PPA and our chances in future Congress.
B) Hurts players as it makes it more likely that the big two leave the US and/or run their business short-term.

Smart amendment by Bachus, really bad that Frank supports it IMO.
LetsGambool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:52 AM   #119
Rich Muny
Former PPA President
 
Rich Muny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 27,752
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivey10k View Post
Bachman and Bachus think they r slick...their amendment essentially rules out everyone which is what Sherman picked up on...What do you think TE?

Michael of NJ
Looks like they caught it and caused it to be withdrawn (to be fixed up).
Rich Muny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:53 AM   #120
repulse
veteran
 
repulse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 3,070
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsGambool View Post
The problem with the licensing language regarding foreign sites is not what happens if/when a bill passes. If we design the bill right, there are plenty of places to play.

The problems are, given this bill is still a long shot for this Congress

A) We are going to lose a funding source. If Stars and Tilt can't get licensed, they will support the status quo. This is going to hurt the PPA and our chances in future Congress.
B) Hurts players as it makes it more likely that the big two leave the US and/or run their business short-term.

Smart amendment by Bachus, really bad that Frank supports it IMO.
Agreed.




Amendment offered by Baca of California

Amends the Johnson act to make sure tribes can participate in internet gambling.

Frank says they don't have jurisdiction over that act and dismisses it.
repulse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:53 AM   #121
GatorXP
old hand
 
GatorXP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Out of the Theater
Posts: 1,758
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEngineer View Post
Looks like they caught it and caused it to be withdrawn (to be fixed up).
So under that amdendment PokerStars will be out?
GatorXP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:53 AM   #122
SkandarAkbar
grinder
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Nixa, MO
Posts: 406
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsGambool View Post
The problem with the licensing language regarding foreign sites is not what happens if/when a bill passes. If we design the bill right, there are plenty of places to play.

The problems are, given this bill is still a long shot for this Congress

A) We are going to lose a funding source. If Stars and Tilt can't get licensed, they will support the status quo. This is going to hurt the PPA and our chances in future Congress.
B) Hurts players as it makes it more likely that the big two leave the US and/or run their business short-term.

Smart amendment by Bachus, really bad that Frank supports it IMO.
It really sounds like they want to punish those who kept allowing Americans after UIGEA and reward those who gave us the boot. Party Poker must be grinning ear to ear right now if they consider them an unintentional offender.
SkandarAkbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:54 AM   #123
LetsGambool
banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 26,578
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Sweet if this is withdrawn (House is under construction, cant hear the hearing so following here)
LetsGambool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:54 AM   #124
ivey10k
grinder
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 472
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

Bachus is a clown...They submitted a faulty ammendment just like UIGEA was snuck through...Now they have to withdraw it...Bachus was embarassed and i hope the committee took notice...PPA needs to exploit this...We need to focus lobbying efforts to prevent the stupidity of the Bachus Bachman ammendment...Not that we aren't doing so already...If bachus gets that amendment through...he essentially strengthen UIGEA by banning everyone.

Michael of NJ
ivey10k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 10:55 AM   #125
repulse
veteran
 
repulse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 3,070
Re: HR 2267 Markup, Wed. 7/28 10:00am

2nd Amendment proposed by Baca:

Require state and tribal gov'ts to opt-in to the scheme rather than opt-out. He is concerned about the impacts on state and tribal gaming, which states and tribes depend on for jobs and revenue.
repulse 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 05:32 AM.


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