Internet gambling law a success, but faces scrutiny

By Doug Carlson - Nov 27, 2007 - 1

It is estimated to be a $13 billion industry worldwide, and the United States has been its biggest market. Yet this industry is illegal in our nation and is opposed by pro-family organizations as well as the National Football League, the National Basketball Association, the National Hockey League, Major League Baseball, and the National Collegiate Athletic Association.

While many people mistakenly believe Internet gambling is legal, the activity is outlawed in the United States under a 1961 law known as the Wire Act, which prohibits businesses from using wire communications in interstate commerce to transmit bets or wagers. Unfortunately, enforcement of the law has been difficult.

Last year, however, opponents of Internet gambling achieved a momentous victory with passage of a bill to put in place restrictions to help enforce existing laws against online gambling. The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA), signed into law October 2006, creates enforcement tools to prevent or interdict gambling on the Internet by prohibiting financial institutions from approving transactions between U.S.-based customer accounts and offshore gambling merchants, thereby making it difficult for people to send money to online gambling coffers. It was included in a port security measure and received wide support, passing 409-2 in the House and with unanimous consent in the Senate.

The bill struck an immediate blow to the bottom line of offshore Internet gambling companies, which had relied heavily on the United States to fill their coffers. Shares for the Gibraltar-based PartyGaming, the largest online gambling company, plunged 58 percent, wiping out $3.8 billion in stock the first day the exchange opened after Congress passed the measure. The company up to that point had generated 78 percent of its revenue from the United States.

Recent polling shows that Internet gambling has continued to drop in the wake of the UIGEA’s passage, even before the regulations have been put in place. A study released in October by the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center found that weekly Internet gambling among college-age males fell from 5.8 percent in 2006 to 1.5 percent in 2007. Further, monthly Internet gambling dropped from 8.9 percent to 2.9 percent among this sample.

The UIGEA requires the Department of Treasury and Federal Reserve Board to formulate steps financial institutions must take to block credit cards, fund transfers, and other methods of payment to Internet gambling businesses. Rules will be issued after the two agencies consider public comments, which can be offered through December 12, 2007.

Several members of Congress, however, are pushing legislation that would reverse the positive trends already seen under the UIGEA. Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-NV), for example, believes Internet gambling should be both legalized and regulated and has introduced the Internet Gambling Study Act (H.R. 2140), which would require yet another study of the impact of Internet gambling, even though its adverse effects are clear. Other bills, such as the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007 (H.R. 2046) and the Skill Game Protection Act (H.R. 2610), would pair the legalization of some forms of Internet gambling with enforcement measures for minors.

By prohibiting gambling businesses from accepting payments over the Internet, the UIGEA has the potential to spare millions of lives from the tragic effects of economic ruin and broken families. But unless strong regulations are put in place and efforts to overturn the law are squelched, offshore Internet gambling companies will continue to prey on Americans.

If you believe Internet gambling should remain illegal, please urge the Department of Treasury and Federal Reserve Board to issue strong regulations on the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006. Also, tell your congressman or congresswoman to oppose any bill that weakens the UIGEA.

Further Learning

Learn more about: Family, Addictions, Gambling, Citizenship, Legislation, National

comments (post your own) feed

1 On Dec 27th, 2007, at 6:04am, Jerry wrote:

It figures that I’d see this on a religious site. I’m religious, but I still feel that people have the right to choose what they want to do without religion getting deeply into politics to force people to comply.

The UIGEA will fail miserably because the banking industry has already said that they can’t comply, people in the U.S. are actively gambling right now, and this law doesn’t make it illegal to gamble online.

It’s funny how you fail to mention the carve-outs for horse racing and fantasy sports. They aren’t gambling too? Also, you mention that the bill was passed by most members but you fail to mention that it was added a few minutes before voting and most of the members didn’t even know that it was attached to the Ports Bill.

I don’t need to post anymore.. because I don’t believe that this will even make it to your article comments. You’ll just delete it.. because I presented the facts.

Post a Comment




Notify me of follow-up comments?

Before You Submit Your Comment (below), Read This:

Thank you for your interest in the ministry of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (SBC).

Comments are moderated to preserve the family-oriented nature of this website and in an attempt to avoid comment spam. We welcome opposing viewpoints, and we will not turn comments away as long as your views are presented with respect to everyone.

Comments will not appear immediately and are subject to editing or deletion. We will make every attempt to moderate in a timely manner, though there will likely be delays on the weekends and around holidays. Comments are now accepted up to 30 days beyond the original posting date of the article.

Please follow the these guidelines to insure your comments will be posted:

  1. Use a real name, at least a real first name. We find folks speak to one another online more respectfully when not hiding behind screen-names, aliases or anonymous blogs.
  2. Posts that contain name-calling and vulgar language will be deleted. We will not spend time editing profanity. And yes, because we pay the hosting bill for this site, we decide what is and what is not vulgar.
  3. Comments must be on topic. General remarks (compliments, complaints, and otherwise) are best delivered here or expressed on your own personal Web site.
  4. Comments are limited to 1000 characters, but multiple posts are permitted.
  5. And please, do not type in ALL CAPS. It looks like you're screaming at people.

Additionally, within Baptist polity, please recognize that many issues and decisions are addressed at a local church level. SBC denominational (national) offices have no control and desire no control over the activities of a local church. This entity is not responsible for overseeing and insuring the ethical behavior of Southern Baptist pastors or church members. If your concern involves a legal civil or criminal matter, we suggest you contact the proper local officials.

Issues involving pastoral staff or other church members, local Baptist associations or state Baptist conventions are local issues. Therefore the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission cannot and should not address such issues. While we regret we are unable to assist you, we encourage you to seek a biblical resolution of the issue at the local church level. If your question or submission pertains to a matter covered in this text, it is likely we will not acknowledge your submission.

Other than that, we welcome you and hope to see thoughtful discussions at ERLC.com