Harrah's pondering opening internet poker site for European players

[The Buzz]

Hmmmm ... if this were already up and running, and the US regulated internet poker ....

Casino giant Harrah's Entertainment Inc.'s chief executive said Wednesday he's looking at taking the World Series of Poker brand into the realm of Internet poker in the U.K. and continental Europe.

Gary Loveman made the comment at the Global Gaming Expo, the largest trade show of the year for the North American casino industry.

Banks and payment processors are prohibited from handling cash transactions from U.S.-based players to and from online poker sites under legislation President Bush signed into law last year. But Internet gambling businesses are treated differently around the world.

"If you take a look at the legal landscape in continental Europe and the United Kingdom, there are countries where it's demonstrably legal and there's absolutely no encumbrance," Loveman said. "Those are areas that are very attractive to us."

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/finan.../D8STQ2CO0.htm

[pgaming]

Interesting isn’t their a U.S Senator who had or has a vested interested in Harrah’s Entertainment. The Senator who is against Online Gambling? Excuse me but I totally forget.

greek39

[GPWA Aaron]

Bob Goodlatte (member of the House of Representatives) took $50,000 from Harrah's a few years ago ... he's the guy who put together legislation prohibiting Internet gambling (language was even stronger than the UIGEA ended up being), and he's also the guy who vehemently testified that a study bill would do any good at yesterday's Judiciary Committee hearing ... basically, (my speculation) he knows that a study will find his baby to be completely ineffective, so he's trying like hell to keep it from happening.

[vinism]

It looks like Goodlatte is trying justify accepting money from Harrah's and opposing Internet gambling by framing his anti-online gambling stance in terms of protecting state's rights. That was the chief argument he made in yesterday's hearing. That WTO rules shouldn't trump the laws of the state of Utah. The analogy doesn't work because it's not true (I know, a minor technicality), but that's the thrust of the argument he's making.

[pgaming]

Thank you fellas. I realize this debate rages on but I always get hug up on this. The U.S Constitution guarantees FREEDOM SPEECH and the Bill of Rights guarantees PRIVACY of ASSOCIATION.

So realistically The United States Congress can only outlaw Online Gambling in by

1. Making operating an Online Casino within U.S borders illegal. Okay this has been done.

2. To make the use of Online Gambling illegal for its’ citizens. How?

Now how can some States ban Online Gambling for its’ residence when this lies outside their jurisdiction that being the Constitution? To outright ban participating in Online Gambling in certain States would require a Constitutional Amendment.

Perhaps after 911 the U.S Constitution was changed limiting these fundamental freedoms? After all wasn’t UIGEA attached to a Port Security Bill? Could this be done before 911.

I am no expert to say the least but this stuff just doesn’t make any sense.

greek39

[Ziggy]

I don't know jack, but as an American, for Harrah's to say they wish to provide online gambling where it is legal within the European Union is outrageous. To me, that is one heck of a smack in the face of world trade.

But Greek is correct in the idea that U.S. citizens will continue to gamble online. I was at a party the other night and a U.S. citizen was bragging (after a few beers) how he still gambles online by using a pre-paid credit card from Antigua.

I should have given him my site's address . . .