Published...
 

I really wanted to title this "Suck it, Posey," but went with this instead (second letter):

Nice, as far as an attack on an enemy goes, but doesn't this

Unfortunately, Rep. Bill Posey voted against HR 2267. His vote shows that he is not interested in protecting consumer freedoms, children, problem gamblers and adults from unregulated Internet gaming.

suggest that you agree that Full Tilt, 'Stars et. al., are a danger to us?

I mean, I guess as a tactic, turning the opposition's argument against them is a valid way to win in the political arena, but the major sites already do a pretty damn good job of policing against collusion, probably better than the government can do. (If you doubt this, remember that the SEC was shown what Madoff was doing 8 years before anything was done, but ignored it because they were incompetent). As for underage gambling, no amount of verification will stop kids using a parent's credit card (with and without permission), so I don't know the value of that argument unless you buy in to the concept that it is government's job to watch over your kids.

Finally, the crux of why this is happening is right here $50 billion in new revenue for the United States Treasury. Unfortunately, if you think the solution to bad government is to shrink the size of Federal revenue, this is a non-argument. besides, would Barney Frank be exerting this much effort if there was $0 tax revenue involved.

On the plus side, however (yes, I see a plus side), more newbies will be attracted and the games will get better. Hopefully, the horrible tax reporting regs will be changed so the marginal players will not leave after owing taxes on $6,000 in phantom income, and even higher limit players who already itemize won't get screwed out of Roth IRA eligibility and/or get slammed by the AMT. The second plus is that this will bring new players into the game on the provider end, and competition and choice are good things that should help the games.

All-in-all, I'll grudgingly say this is a good thing if passed, if for no other reason than if it isn't, there will always be a danger of it being banned outright.

Just another reminder of the third position on online poker: Keep it legal and unregulated (and of course, no paper trail to the IRS) :donkey :cool:

The problem, Kurn, is that your third position is unrealistic at this time. HR 2267, which actually has a shot of passing, would be a pretty big step forward for online poker players. A massive one, actually.

Agreed. I hope in the least they fix the tax issue or all the noobs will leave after a year.