US: PPA questions reintroduction of prohibition Bill to overturn states’ rights to regulate online poker

“Every Congress to consider Internet gaming legislation has preserved the right of states to protect its citizens through a system that is accountable to regulators and the government,” said John Pappas, executive director of the PPA. “Attempting to re-write history through a piece of legislation that prohibits states from enacting these safeguards represents the worst kind of crony capitalism that favors political campaign mega-donors over what’s in the best interest of the states and their citizens.”

In 2006 Congress passed, with President George W. Bush signing into law, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA), which makes a clear exemption for regulated "INTRAstate" online gaming. The legislation introduced by Representative Chaffetz would undo what Congress and the President have already authorized and strip states of their 10thAmendment right to regulate online poker sites within their own borders, including the online poker markets already established in Nevada, New Jersey and Delaware.

“Despite outrageous claims made by opponents of state-regulated Internet gaming, it has not led to the downfall of Western society. In fact, to date there has not been a single documented case of a minor playing on any of these state regulated sites and no report of people wagering on a regulated website that is not authorized in their state. Finally, claims that regulated Internet gaming is a conduit for money laundering and terrorist financing are completely false and have no backing in the real world. At best these claims are fear-mongering, and at worst they are outright deception,” said Pappas.

“As the states are proving they can effectively regulate Internet poker and contribute to the economy by doing so, one might question the motives behind stopping such success. Americans are going to continue playing poker online, and with absolutely no consumer protections under a prohibition. If Congress is serious about protecting consumers, prohibiting states from implementing a sound regulatory framework is certainly not the answer,” added Pappas.