Inconsistent enforcement

An interesting article off the Reuters News Wire: http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN0731627620080807?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0, entitled Lawmakers urge U.S. stop action vs EU gambling firms. According to the article "Rep. Robert Wexler, a Florida Democrat, and Rep. Steve Cohen, a Tennessee Democrat" issued letters of warning to "U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey" urging that the U.S. Department of Justice to cease criminal investigations related to the UIGEA (Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act of 2006) against companies which operate Internet gaming from European Union (EU) member nations. Specifically, they warn against investigation of activities which occurred prior to passage of the UIGEA. This "trend" if continued could "lead to a potentially damaging trade spat between the United States and the European Union at the World Trade Organization."

The article by Doug Palmer goes on to say that the European Commission launched an investigation of its own in March to determine if the U.S. "was singling out EU companies for enforcement actions, while allowing U.S. online firms to operate freely."

Recall that following passage of the UIGEA (the law which made payments by banks and credit unions to online gambling sites, illegal) a number of online poker rooms departed the U.S. market and began seeking customers elsewhere. Most notable among that group was the then giant of the industry, Party Poker. Despite this fact there are still quite a large number of available online poker options at the disposal of the U.S. market. These available options are largely outside of the member nations of the European Union. Most notably/remarkably U.S. based companies continue to operate undeterred. This fact causes most concern as it is perceived (and rightly so) as inconsistent enforcement.

As a poker player it goes without saying that I don't agree with the UIGEA and the ban by the U.S. of online poker, under the auspices of "illegal gambling." I'm not going to get into the "it's a sport" argument. It's a game, that can be best played using skill and experience, however involves a true element of chance. I do not agree with demonizing poker, and taking it away from a U.S. public which largely treated it as recreation under the guise that illegal dealings and a seedy element was all that did partake in the online arena. BUT, aside from all of that. Right or wrong and ultimately however this whole online poker thing works itself out; it is FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG to go after someone or a company for illegal conduct which was NOT deemed to be illegal at the time! I can't even get away with that kind of action against my two children. I think even they would raise an eyebrow. I'd look quite foolish. I believe that is the role which Representatives Wexler and Cohen are currently playing. They are crying foul at the activities of the Justice Department. They recognize that the implications could very well be far reaching and further damage the reputation of the United States in the international community. (Yeah, like we need anyone else in the world mad at us!) This just is NOT a fight that is worth winning. I'm not even sure what there is to win.

The UIGEA has proven to be a hot bed of controversy and I fear that its effects will continue to be felt for quite some time. But the problem isn't going away. A large part of the population in the United States continues to play poker, despite the initial impact that was felt when the UIGEA passed. It continues to grow in popularity. Poker players are not going away, their numbers continue to grow. Those are facts that the European Union and the World Trade Organization cannot continue to ignore. Still, I firmly believe that this argument will be going on for many years to come.

Regards,

cheer_dad