Poll results: Federal bill "no chance of passing", say eGR readers
More than half of eGR readers say a federal bill will not pass on this occasion.
With less than 10 working days to go before what many commentators believe will be one of the closest US Presidential elections for years, more than half of eGaming Review readers have said Senator Harry Reid and Jon Kyl’s co-authored federal bill has “no chance” of passing.
A further 45% believe that the bill stands less chance of passing this time around than it did in 2010 when Reid is believed to have been close to attaching his previous efforts to a wider tax bill. Only a small number of readers who voted this week are optimistic that Reid will be more successful on this occasion.
It is widely believed that if Republican candidate Mit Romney succeeds in removing Barack Obama from the White House a federal online gambling bill will remain off limits for at least another four years, while if Obama manages to secure a second term its chances of passing during this year’s “lame duck” period, that lasts from 7 November until 31 December, are more favourable.
Last week eGR reported that Senators Reid and Kyl dropped language from their federal online poker bill penalising players from depositing funds at unlicensed sites.
The 73-page draft of the bill contains no provisions permitting the government to seize money deposited or won at illegal sites.
In contrast, the summary of the bill which leaked last month stipulated: “To deter US players from patronizing illegal sites, the bill makes explicit that any property involved in or traceable to a gambling transaction in violation of the new act (including winnings) is subject to forfeiture.”
The bill states that to apply for an online poker licence, an operator must have owned a US casino for 180 days after the Act is passed, therefore favouring existing US land-based casino licensees. There is also a 15-month blackout period before any operator is allowed to go online.
The bill also appears to clear the path for Nevada to drive federal regulation, due to a provision stating that a qualified body that has “demonstrated capabilities relevant to the online poker environment” will be designated. To date, Nevada is the only US state that has experience in investigating online poker applicants and issuing licences.
To increase protection of players’ funds, the bill states that deposits must be segregated in order to avoid financial risk the operator could face, while strict measures are also imposed for cheating, as any individual caught using bot software programs could receive up to three years in prison. Moreover, any person found failing to comply with any applicable law could face a US$250,000 fine, which increases to $750,000 for corporations.
The bill’s other main provisions as outlined in the summary still remain, including the articles which would impose a five year-ban on any entities that continued to operate online in the US post UIGEA at the end of 2006 for five years, unless that is can prove to a court that they did not break any federal or state laws during this time. This would prohibit PokerStars and its recently acquired Full Tilt brand unless the former can argue its case successfully.
States will have the chance to opt-in, with tribes only permitted to offer online poker if the state they reside in has opted-in. Interstate poker between participating states would be permitted, but international player pools would be prohibited.
The Office of Online Poker Oversight (OOPO) would be set up as part of the Department of Commerce to oversee online poker regulation. Operators would be required to pay a gross rake tax rate of 16%, with 14% going to states and tribes, and 2% set aside for the federal government to cover the cost of the OOPO.