The Unlawful Internet Gambling Act (still sucks!)

Years after the Unlawful Internet Gambling Act was first introduced to the public, there is still a general pervading sense of hope within the poker community in the United States. Despite the events that have been happening which testify to the strictness and seeming effectiveness of the Gambling Act, poker players – especially the online poker players – still hope that there will be some way to circumvent this law. After all, there have always been loopholes to any law that has been laid down.

Yet just recently, someone with authority – a top American gambling administrator, no less – emphatically burst American poker players’ bubble by saying “…they don’t have a chance in hell.” Pretty strong words, aren’t they? Where did all this come from? What was the context?

Well, in the past few months, a lot of American poker players, together with online poker establishments and other entities have been trying to push for exemption from the Unlawful Internet Gambling Act. How do they plan on having this done? Their reasoning is that somehow, poker can be considered as predominantly a game of skill as opposed to a game of luck or chance. If they can prove this or convince the legislators of this fact, then the chances are that poker can be exempted from being under this law.

It sounds pretty straightforward and easy worded that way, doesn’t it? Yet it seems that the legislators are not falling for it. A poker lobbying entity, the Poker Players’ Alliance, has been one of the forerunners of this movement. In fact, their president Michael Bolcerek is the person who allegedly said that he had a meeting with key officials in Key West, Florida and that this meeting supposedly resulted in the officials acknowledging and understanding that poker is predominantly a game of skill rather than chance. That statement, I think, is what got Frank Fahrenkopf’s goat. The president of the American Gaming Association, Mr. Fahrenkopf uttered his now infamous line to the Sun’s Jeff Simpson in response to Mr. Bolcerek’s claim.

That is really disconcerting, isn’t it? Two people from supposedly the same side of the coin are bandying words with each other. Maybe it would be more helpful to the whole situation if they worked together to find a way to bolster the case of online poker. The American Gaming Association is not without its own activities, though. They are pushing for a study on how online poker can be regulated. What this means exactly, I do not know. Yet if it means that people can go back to playing online poker without having their banking transactions frozen, that would be a good thing.

Of course, nothing is always as simple as it seems. Quite obviously, even when it comes to leisure activities, politics will always make itself felt. Then who suffers? People who are merely doing what they enjoy best? It does appear to be that way, doesn’t it?