The House Judiciary Committee held a hearing to address the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act. The hearing took place on November 14 as a result of lobbyist efforts from the Poker Players Alliance. The purpose was to discuss methods of regulation vs. prohibition and to define what is legal and what is not.
Since the bill passed, there has been confusion among citizens, enforcers and even the lawmakers themselves as to how to interpret the legislation. It’s frustrating that a law could be so wishy-washy. Even the lawmakers didn’t want to deal with it after signing it into legislation, so they threw it into the hands of financial institutions to interpret and enforce. And it can’t be ignored that there are pending lawsuits about its legality toward international trade laws. There is something very wrong here.
The hearing on November 14 was supposed to shed some light on the UIGEA bill, but it seems that it only accomplished more contradictions. Present at this hearing was Catherine Hanaway, an attorney for the Department of Justice. She said that it was illegal for any online gambling company to accept bets from U.S. citizens, but that it was not illegal for a U.S. citizen to gamble online because there is no current legislation to prohibit it (What?). How can so much incompetence exist within positions of power? If this is how the country’s governing system works, they might as well just throw in the towel.
Also discussed was internet sports betting, which was the only item prohibited by the Wire Act of 1961. Hanaway did not know how to reply when horse betting and fantasy sports was brought forward. She did, however, report that BetonSports had horse betting that was illegal. Why is it only illegal for this company and allowed for others? Never mind. She probably doesn’t know that either.
Is there anyone in Congress that understands this bill? Perhaps they do and are purposefully trying to keep everyone confused and wondering. Could it be an easy way out for them? If you did something wrong, the simplest resolve is to pretend ignorance. Or perhaps they have an agenda that would be easiest accomplished by keeping it out of the reach of their opponents. It’s more difficult to contest something you don’t know or understand.
Two excuses they have riddled us with time and again are issues of morality and terrorism. Who do they think they’re fooling? Not many people still believe the war is about terrorism. If that were true, Bush would be more concerned with Bin Laden instead of trying to create a democracy for a country that doesn’t want it. And if gambling can fund terrorism, so can anything else. If the morality issue was of real concern, they would do away with land casinos and state lotteries. So what is their “real” agenda?
Obviously, if their reason for this bill were an honest one, there would be no confusion. It is very possible that their plan is to monopolize the gambling industry. In the United States, monopolies are taking over everything. Fast food restaurants, grocery stores, etc. These large companies and super stores are continuously smothering out the middleman and are already well on their way to ruling the country’s economy. And yes, “monopolies” have even taken over politics (both federal and local). Considering this, it only makes sense that this is their true agenda. By eliminating online casinos, only the richest people who are granted permission can own and operate such a business. And the government has the final say and the ultimate control.
By Victoria Maro
