Opinion: Why We Will Miss Barney Frank
The US is closer than ever to regulating online gambling and whatever the outcome this should be seen as outgoing Congressman Barney Frank's legacy, argues Jeremy D Frey of Pepper Hamilton.
As Jonathan Cohn writes for The New Republic in Why I’ll Miss Barney Frank, there are two types of legislators: those who make headlines and those who make laws. Congressman Frank “managed to do both things and do them well.”
Frank (pictured) has announced his retirement from Congress in January 2013.
From his perch as former Chair (and now ranking member) of the House Financial Services Committee, he was the earliest and most influential US politician to advance internet gambling legislation in Washington. Frank’s pitch for internet gambling was not about filling depleted coffers of government with tax revenue or a complaint that America’s prohibitionist stance was out of step with the rest of the world. His position was never a populist appeal to the millions of US internet gamblers.
Instead, he brought to the debate three plain but powerful arguments. First, unless an activity is harmful to others, it’s not the business of the federal government to regulate what adult Americans do. For Frank, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) is an example of illegitimate government paternalism; it’s also a waste of time and effort.
Second, in a quasi-First amendment argument, Frank advanced that UIGEA impermissibly intrudes on the freedom of the internet.
And finally, in Frank’s view UIGEA inappropriately burdens financial institutions by imposing criminal penalties for failure to correctly divine the source of funds deposited by banking customers. His arguments were a focused appeal to the political tenets of his Republican legislative colleagues. It worked.
Various bills sponsored by Republicans have been introduced and are under consideration, primarily including Frank’s HR 1174 (sponsored by John Campbell, R-Ca) and Joe Barton’s (R-Tx) HR 2366. The Frank/Campbell bill, which is not limited to internet poker, and Barton’s bill, which proposes to legalise internet poker though state licensed agencies, each have a brace of Republican co-sponsors. In a related development, on December 23 the Department of Justice acknowledged that the Wire Act (18 U.S.C. 1084) does not prohibit states from using the internet to sell lottery tickets (non-sports betting) within their own borders. New Jersey and its influential Republican governor are now reportedly rushing to complete an intrastate internet gambling law sometime early this month.
In short, Frank’s departure from Congress 12 months from now will only mean the loss of a potent advocate for internet gambling. The initiative is now so mature that the most important remaining question is whether US regulation will be federally co-ordinated (favoured by the bricks-and-mortar American Gaming Association) or left to the states, as now seems more likely. Whatever the outcome, it should be counted as part of Frank’s legacy.