http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/ Poker Players Alliance Forums: Forum: State - IL - Recent Posts en Wed, 07 Jan 2009 20:09:27 +0000 http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/topic/371#post-1178 Fri, 19 Dec 2008 16:19:15 +0000 geno875 1178@http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/ <p>Below is the email sent to me from Dick Durbin. What a politically correct way to say piss off.</p> <p>Dear Mr. Hubbart:</p> <p>Thank you for your message regarding Internet gambling. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.</p> <p>The debate over Internet gambling has generated strong public interest. While most types of Internet gambling operations are prohibited under federal law, many Internet gambling operations are based in foreign countries and have fallen outside the jurisdiction of American enforcement agencies. Overall, Americans spend roughly $4 billion to $6 billion a year on Internet gambling. Because of the largely unregulated nature of this business, Internet gambling sites often fail to block access to gambling by children and often lack effective safeguards against fraud. Further, Internet gambling can be addictive, and this addiction has had a harmful effect on some individuals and communities.</p> <p>In September 2006, the Senate passed the SAFE Port Act of 2006 (H.R. 4954). This legislation contained numerous important provisions that would improve the security of our nation's ports. When a House-Senate conference committee met to work out differences in their separate versions of the bill, the conferees added language regarding Internet gambling.</p> <p>The language that the conference committee added to the SAFE Port Act prohibits those who are in the business of gambling from knowingly accepting credit cards, checks, electronic fund transfers or similar financial instruments in connection with unlawful Internet gambling. The Act imposes fines and/or prison sentences on violators. The legislation further requires the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve Board to issue regulations directing banks and other financial transaction providers to adopt practices that will enable them to identify and prevent restricted transactions that support Internet gambling.</p> <p>The final version of the SAFE Port Act of 2006 included a number of provisions important to our national security. It passed by unanimous consent in the Senate. There was not a separate vote on the provisions to prevent unlawful Internet gambling.</p> <p>As the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve Board craft the regulations required by the gambling provisions of the SAFE Port Act, it is important that they work with law-abiding financial transaction providers. We can effectively improve the enforcement of our longstanding ban on unlawful Internet gambling transactions without imposing unrealistic or overly burdensome requirements on law-abiding financial transaction providers.</p> <p>Thank you again for contacting me. Please feel free to stay in touch.</p> <p>Sincerely,</p> <p>Richard J. Durbin</p> <p>United States Senator</p> <p>RJD/td</p> <p>Why not just say I don't care about how you feel about internet poker? would of saved alot of typing. </p> http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/topic/139#post-334 Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:18:45 +0000 PeteMoretta 334@http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/ <p>chukphx, Skallagrim, thanks for the fast response! And yeah GO LEE! I figured if there was hope it already would have been done by now in IL but then again maybe folks are too intimidated to step up. It is such a stupid law! Protecting me from the evils of gambling is NOT a rational basis. As a matter of fact it is quite irrational and I'd say space aliens (ok lobbies) made them do it! But precedence has been set I assume. I'll have to muster up the nuts (pun intended) to get more politically involved. In the meantime, crappy freerolls it is. Thanks again and let's hope freedom reigns!</p> <p>Pete</p> <p>ps all those other stupid laws should be struck down too! :) </p> http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/topic/139#post-331 Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:00:05 +0000 Skallagrim 331@http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/ <p>Sorry guys, you have to have some sort of basis for a "class action" suit other than that the legislation in question is stupid. If a law being "stupid" was enough for a court to strike it down, laws would be struck down on a daily basis.</p> <p>Unfortunately, the courts have ruled you have no more right to make money by playing poker than you have to make money by selling marijuana. So if the legislature wants to pass a law forbidding you to do either of those activities, it only has to have (pursuant to the Due Process clause) a "rational basis" for the law. A "rational basis" as the courts use that term means basically <strong>any</strong> reason short of "the space aliens told us to do it." With respect to poker "protecting our citizens from the evils of gamblng addiction" will be ruled a rational basis.</p> <p>There is, however, another part of the Constitution that may cause this law to be struck down: the Commerce Clause. The CC basically says that only the Federal Government may make laws affecting interstate or international commerce. Online poker is clearly interstate/international commerce, but regulating a citizens gaming habits has always previously been a state concern (you really couldnt have interstate poker before the internet). I think we should win on this issue, ultimately, and the argument is already advancing through the courts: PPA member and lawyer Lee Rousso has taken the issue up in the state of Washington, and although the lower court didnt have the guts to strike down the anti-online poker law in Washington state, the case has been appealed. You can follow its progress from the link on the main PPA web page. GO LEE!</p> <p>If that case is successful, the same rule will apply in Illinois.</p> <p>If you want the law changed in Illinois faster than that though, you are going to have to go through the political process. The Illinois PPA chapter ought to work on this.</p> <p>Skallagrim</p> <p>PS - thanks for the kind words chukphx :) </p> http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/topic/139#post-329 Thu, 10 Jul 2008 00:52:59 +0000 chukphx 329@http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/ <p>You need to mail Skallagrim and see what he has to say. I am sure he could help you get started if not at least point you in the right direction. He posts frequently and is very active here. Should be easy to find him on the main forum just scroll down and post under "ask a lawyer" or something similar is the topic. He is the man. No joke. </p> http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/topic/139#post-328 Wed, 09 Jul 2008 23:00:46 +0000 PeteMoretta 328@http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/ <p>I'm not sure I have the stomach to carry through on what I'm about to say but it seems to me the Illinois law violates my right to work. I easily spend 30+ hours per week playing lame freerolls (when I can find a worthwhile tourney). I can't claim it as my day job since all my income comes from elsewhere... uh, because Internet poker's illegal here. As I understand it, the Fed law only makes bank transfers illegal but the State of Illinois has taken it upon themselves to decide that Internet gambling is illegal altogether. Furthermore, the premise used is protecting the public from themselves. I understand that there is a segment of the population that is prone to gambling addiction but I for one really don't want that kind of protection from my government. I want to play. I want to make money playing. Am I good enough? Well I can't say because the law has relegated me to bottom-of-the-barrel freeroll tourneys (which I have one a few). But real money? No, not really yet because I can't play real games.</p> <p>Well there's more but to get to the point of the topic, I'm wondering if there are any lawyers and players willing to talk about a class action against the State of Illinois. I think the State policy is ludicrous and, frankly, is insulting. I know nothing in regards to whether legally it can be considered unconsitutional. However as an American, I am offended. I don't believe it's a case where plaintiffs could receive settlement which makes it tough for a lawyer to take it on and not much incentive for players. Not to mention the goliath we'd be up against. Illinois players that feel like me, are you interested in chipping in a couple bucks for lawyer fees? Lawyers who are players, are you willing for the "love of the game?" </p> http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/topic/50#post-126 Thu, 05 Jun 2008 13:49:53 +0000 PlayerX 126@http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/ <p>It's easy. The egg came first, and the chicken in the egg was an evolutionary abberation. </p> http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/topic/50#post-94 Fri, 30 May 2008 13:05:42 +0000 umjm 94@http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/ <br /> http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/topic/49#post-93 Fri, 30 May 2008 13:04:03 +0000 umjm 93@http://pokerplayersalliance.org/forums/ <p>I keep getting the old catch 22. When I write to my U.S.representative, she writes back that internet gambling was already illegal in the state of Illinois. When I contact my IL state rep, she acts like there a bigger problems (and we do have bigger problems in Illinois, no budget AGAIN!) and changing IL law on internet poker won’t help because it's illegal on the federal level.</p> <p> How do we win this “the chicken or the egg” argument? </p>