Live blogging the Internet poker bill House Subcommittee hearing

[GPWA Aaron]

This hearing started at 9:00 ... sorry, I opened up the window to watch the stream 15 minutes late!

Joe Barton (R-Tex.), whose is sponsoring the bill that would regulate and license Internet poker is now making remarks.

[GPWA Aaron]

Barton is pointing out to the group that his bill is poker only. During the last hearing there was a lot of talk about slot machines. He points out that poker is a game of skill, and points to himself as an example of someone who has lost money to more skilled players.

Barton says his bill is a states rights bill which allows states to make the decision whether its citizens can make a decision whether they would like to participate or not.

[GPWA Aaron]

Rep. Charlie Bass (R-N.H.) is not offering opening remarks. He is expressing concern about the affect of Internet poker on state lotteries.

"As our committee continues to examine online gambling, I think it is important that we discuss existing forms of gambling."

[GPWA Aaron]

Opening statements for the panel are now being given. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) is up first.

Barney looks rather disheveled. Looks like he just rolled out of bed.

[GPWA Aaron]

Frank is pointing out that this has bi-partisan support.

"I cannot understand how anyone would think it is the role of the federal government (to prevent adults from doing something that they would like to do). I hear people talk about the Nanny State. If we don't want to tell an eight-year old what to eat for lunch, why are we telling their parents what to do on the Internet."

"The current regime is one of the most intrusive regulations on the banking industry that we have."

"The notion that we should ban in a society for everybody things that are okay for adults because children might get to them is the end of freedom."

"I've had people say 'Well are you for the government being pro-gambling.' Let's be clear what the role of government is. There are some things that are damaging to others that we should prohibit. There are other things that are beneficial that we should encourage ... I disagree with suggestion that we should ban private sector entities from engaging in an activity that might hurt public sector entites."

[GPWA Aaron]

Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.) is now testifying on how harmful gambling is. He's shocked, shocked that Republicans are thinking of rolling back the UIGEA.

"Gambling is no budget panacea."

Says the social costs of gambling outweigh the revenues raised by 3:1.

Says odds of suicide in Vegas are 50% higher than anywhere else in the U.S.

Says Americans lost $92 billion gambling in 2007.

"I've long been concerned by the predatory nature of (gambling)."

"The important distinction between destination gambling and convenience gambling is that destination gambling is entertainment ... However, online gambling is the ultimate in convenience gambling. Internet gambling is the (wait for it ... here comes the cliche) crack cocaine of gambling. People can gamble in their bathrobes. And with the explosion in smart phones, people will be able to gamble whenever and wherever they are. ... It will result in an epidemic."

[GPWA Aaron]

"Congress will rue the day if it ever passes."

[GPWA Aaron]

Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.) is up next.

Says lots of Americans want to play poker online, and they're already doing it.

Since UIGEA has passed, the availability of Internet poker has exploded.

"There are tens of millions of Americans gambling online now, even after we passed a bill supposedly banning it."

"These people are unprotected. There's no regulation, there's no oversight. They don't know if they'll get the money if they win. But they continue to do it."

"By banning it, we've actually expanded what's going on. Now Mr. Wolf talks about problem gambling. There is problem gambling and there is going to be problem gambling. But we can deal with it much better if it is legal, it is regulated, and we know what's going on."

"There's been a lot of talk about Full Tilt Poker and what's been going on there. To me, that's the reason we should be regulating it. Millions of Americans were playing poker on that site and they weren't being treated fairly."

[GPWA Aaron]

4 reasons to pass the bill:

1) Freedom
2) Protection
3) Jobs
4) Revenue

[GPWA Aaron]

Now opened for questions for the panel.

Barton questioning Wolf, asking if he believes poker is a game of skill.

Wolf ignores the question, says that gambling declined among young people after UIGEA passed.

When pressed, Wolf says it will lead to other problems.

"I'm not here to tell you that poker's wrong. What I'm saying is that if you put this on the Internet, college kids will be broke in an instant."

[GPWA Aaron]

Frank points out how silly it is to say that a game is okay outside the Internet, but not okay for the Internet.

[GPWA Aaron]

Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.) is up for questions next. Asking Frank about distinction between Frank's bill, which allows gambling on slots, etc., and Barton's which doesn't.

"I don't think we should ban poker or anything else that doesn't hurt anyone else. It does have a prohibition on sports betting, that was a practical fact ... the NFL believes that if we allow betting on the Internet, people might start betting on football games."

"I'm for as much freedom as we can get for people. If all we can get is poker, then I'm for it."

[GPWA Aaron]

Butterfield: Wants to know which agency should oversee it.

Frank: Chair of Treasury hates this bill and won't let it come up. Commerce is more friendly, which is why they're discussing this issue in this committee. Thinks it can be done as well in one place as another. When it goes to the floor, committee jurisdiction can be adjusted.

[GPWA Aaron]

Butterfield: AGA is confident that technology can stop poker bots from being used.

Frank: Prohibition rarely works, certainly with something as expansive as the Internet. Legalization provides opportunity to provide safer environment.

[GPWA Aaron]

The second panel is just about to get underway.

PANELISTS
Mark Lipparelli
Chairman
Nevada Gaming Control Board
Witness Testimony (Truth in Testimony)

Charles McIntyre
Executive Director
New Hampshire Lottery Commission
Witness Testimony (Truth in Testimony)

Frank J. Fahrenkopf, Jr.
President and CEO
American Gaming Association
Witness Testimony (Truth in Testimony)

Dr. Rachel A. Volberg
Senior Research Scientist
NORC at the University of Chicago
Witness Testimony (Truth in Testimony)

[GPWA Aaron]

You can read everyone's prepared testimony here: http://energycommerce.house.gov/hear...px?NewsID=9088

[GPWA Aaron]

Lipparelli is up first. Nevada has already passed a law that will allow the state to license and regulate Internet poker if the federal government says it's okay, so he's chomping at the bit to get something passed.

He's pointing out Nevada's experience in regulating gambling operators and the protections they offer for problem gamblers is second to none and doesn't exist anywhere else. They can bring something special to the Internet gaming landscape.

"I'm confident that the work we've put on regulatory reform and technical standards will be the sound basis for regulating Internet gaming in the future."

[GPWA Aaron]

Charles McIntyre, Executive Director of the NH Lottery is next.

Giving a history of the NH Lottery, they've raised $1.5 billion towards education since the lottery started in 1963.

"The question whether to expand gambling to the Internet and mobile devices should be decided at the state level. ... A state should be able to determine its level of tolerance for gambling within its borders."

Hoping someone (probably Barton) points out that states can make that choice under both his and Frank's bills.

[GPWA Aaron]

Frank Fahrenkopf, President and CEO of the AGA, is next.

Wants legislation to pass three tests:

1) Cannot create competitive advantages between commercial casinos, Native American casinos, and lotteries
2) No form that's legal should be made illegal
3) Respect state's rights

[GPWA Aaron]

"It is settled science that at any given time, about 1 percent of the U.S. population are pathological gamblers. And that percentage hasn't changed despite a huge increase in opportunities to gamble in recent years."

Now citing a Harvard study of 40,000 online gamblers.

The comprehensive research found that the vast majority of gamblers are responsible gamblers and that the amount of gambling decreased over time.