Sec. 2. Findings

403 words·~2 min read·/bill/113/hr/2666/ih/section-2

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

Congress finds the following: Since the development of the Internet, online Web sites offering Internet poker have raised numerous policy, consumer protection, and enforcement concerns for Federal, State, and tribal governments as such Web sites are run by operators located in many different countries and have sought to attract customers from the United States. The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (title VIII of Public Law 109–347 ; 120 Stat. 1952) was intended to aid enforcement efforts against unlawful Internet operators and to limit unlawful Internet gaming involving United States persons.

However, that Act has only been partially successful in doing so. There is uncertainty about the laws of the United States governing Internet poker, though not about laws governing Internet sports betting. In United States v. DiCristina a Federal District Court for the Eastern District of New York held that poker is a game in which skill is the predominant factor in determining the outcome and that in passing the Illegal Gambling Businesses Act, Congress only intended to criminalize clear games of chance.

Additional tools to assist law enforcement in the prevention of unlawful Internet gaming activities would be important and beneficial. Maintenance of a list of unlicensed Internet poker enterprises and the owners, operators, and key personnel of such enterprises (as well as entities and related personnel found unsuitable) would aid those law enforcement efforts and would make the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act more effective. Poker is distinct from the class of games of chance traditionally defined as gambling in that players compete against each other, and not the person or entity hosting the game (sometimes called the house ), and that over any significant interval the outcome of a poker game is predominantly determined by the skill of the participants.

United States consumers would benefit from a program of Internet poker regulation which recognizes the interstate nature of the Internet, but nevertheless preserves the prerogatives of States and federally recognized Indian tribes. Such a system would require strict licensing of Internet poker providers and would require licensee operators to— have effective means to prevent minors from playing poker on-line; identify and help treat problem gamblers; prevent minors and players in non-participating States; allow players to self-exclude and limit losses; and prevent money laundering.

Such a program would create a new industry within the United States creating thousands of jobs and substantial revenue for Federal, State, and tribal governments.

Connections2 off-index

2 references not yet in our index

Pub. L. 109-347
120 Stat. 1952

Citation graph

cites case law

Sec. 2

Findings

Pub. L.Pub. L. 109-347

Stat.120 Stat. 1952

Cites 2Cited by 0 across 0 sources