UIGEA, Barney Frank, State-to-State
Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank is trying to introduce a poker bill that would overturn the UIGEA. Is standpoint is basically that the U.S. government should not be able to interfere with what Americans do with their money. By disallowing direct communication between players and certain financial institutions, The U.S. government is attacking civil liberties. Not only is this an issue for Americans, however, but the European Union is also weighing in on the decision. It has been said that the U.S. is in conflict of WTO commitments through the IGEA. Online poker and online casino is an international market, and how the U.S. decides to regulate it will affect the entire world.
In the meantime, some states have been tossing around ideas that could help them operate online gaming within the confines of the UIGEA (assuming it does not get repealed). California regulators seem to be the first to accept the notion of building state-run and state-confined online gaming sites. As it stands, the state of California has one of the biggest gaming markets in the nation, perhaps only 2nd to Nevada. If they could incorporate an online site to their brick-and-mortar casinos, their residents would not have to worry about the trouble with existing sites and the difficulties of transferring money to an from them. They would be gambling in an arena akin to the lottery as far as the state is concerned, but in a skill game.
But there are obvious differences between online and live poker. In a casino, you can only play one table at a time. You can only play the games they are spreading. If you want to play 5/10 Limit Stud and they don’t have a game running, you have to choose something else. Online, these games are more abundant. So abundant, in fact, those players have found a way to become profitable by multi-tabling several games at once. In lieu of the UIGEA, introducing online poker within state borders might appeal to the volume players who can’t get what they are looking for in a live casino. Also, online poker has been a good breeding ground for new players. They can play for nickels or hundreds of dollars. There is no game too small or too big. There is no one to intimidate you or laugh at you when you don’t know the rules. For brick and mortar casinos, online gaming is a sort of a preparatory school. Some will never leave, but many will move up to the “real” thing. If online poker gets regulated state by state does this mean that poker players might move away from states that do not offer an intrastate system, or will the casinos in their state have more success and rise to accommodate all of the internet players? How does this affect states that do not have casinos or are too small to legitimately set up and run an online system? Is this really the answer to the UIGEA?
