One More Step Ahead for Online Gambling Bill

July 31, 2010 | News Category: Gaming Law

0 Comments

After months and months of waiting, the online gambling bill, HR 2267 has finally been marked up. The Barney Frank online gambling bill, the bill for the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, which was first introduced in May 2009, has passed out of the House Financial Services Committee.

There were a number of amendments to the proposed bill, which were debated by those who are members of the House Financial Services Committee, of which Barney Frank is the Chairperson.

There are already entities, such as state lotteries and tribal casinos that have already been exempted from the UIGEA (Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act), and Gary Peters of Michigan proposed that these entities retain their status, and should be considered to be exempt from any regulations that arise from HR 2267. Spencer Bachus, one of the biggest opponents to legalized online gambling, said that he felt that any new regulation should cover all aspects of online gambling, however, the amendment, as it was suggested by Gary Peters, was passed.

A concern of many was addressed by Mary Jo Kilroy of Ohio. She suggested that there should be restrictions included in the bill, which would regulate the advertising done by licensed online gambling operators, restricting advertisements such as those that target problem gamblers, and suggested that unsolicited marketing should be limited. This was also passed as an amendment to HR 2267.

Bachus had a number of other objections, including one regarding the participation of individual states as far as online gambling goes. The bill, HR 2267 is worded in such a way that once the law is passed, states have the option to opt out of participating in online gambling. Bachus wanted to change the wording to allowing the states to make a choice to opt in, and until they do so, they would still be restricted by the UIGEA. However, his attempt to have this changed was unsuccessful.

Of the 18 amendments that were moved, 14 of them were passed. Apart from those mentioned above, other concerns were addressed, such as more stringent provisions to prevent minors from Internet gambling, a requirement for players to set financial loss limits, and the requirement of a substantial presence in the Untied States from those who are granted licenses.

The Republican, Spencer Bachus, clearly did not get what he wanted, and requested that there be a role call registering which politicians voted which way, even though it was quite clear from a voice vote that the online casino bill was carried through. The vote showed that there were 41 in favor, and 22 against the online gambling bill, HR 2267.