PDA

View Full Version : N.D. House OKs massive Internet gambling Legislation


wiggum82
02-17-2005, 01:45 AM
Here is a story published in the Fargo Forum, Thursday, Feb. 17, 2005.

Very interesting indeed. What do you guys think? What does this mean for us Internet gamblers in America?

Online poker? You bet
* Some N.D. lawmakers say the state can profit by providing a safe haven for online gambling outfits now operating overseas.

BISMARCK – After glowing speeches about its potential for economic development, jobs and unique opportunities, the House voted Wednesday to have the state become a national headquarters for companies that host worldwide live Internet poker.
Rep. Bill Kretschmar, R-Venturia, said North Dakota would offer to regulate the industry here, collecting taxes and fees for its general fund in the process.
“It’s like ‘If you build it they will come,’ ” he said. No companies operate in the U.S. now, he said. They are in the Caribbean or other foreign countries.
Rep. Jim Kasper, R-Fargo, is the prime sponsor of House Bill 1509 and said the state could enjoy tremendous revenue from licensing and regulating the industry.
“This industry is growing at about 10 percent per month. No single state has passed legislation like this. We would be the first to do that,” he said. “So the market is tremendous and as you know, the first one out of the chute generally has a pretty good opportunity to capture that marketplace.”
He said that because the Internet sites are already there, “This is not an expansion of gaming whatsoever.”
He said if the state licenses 200 poker sites, it could take in $40 million. There are 50 million Internet poker players in the country now and 300 million worldwide. If the state licensed 50 million players, “That’s 500 million dollars per year new revenue to North Dakota.”
Another sponsor, Rep. Ron Iverson, R-Fargo, said, “This is a rare opportunity for us to be first out of the gate here. The reason other states aren’t doing this is they don’t have the foresight. This is our time. This is our time to seize this opportunity.”
Rep. Lawrence Klemin, R-Fargo, said he doesn’t think companies would bring jobs here. It’s more likely the company would bring a 4-foot-by-4-foot computer server, he said.
The bill passed 49-43.
The bill now goes to the Senate.

tek
02-17-2005, 09:40 AM
I thought hosting online gambling was a federal violation.

daveymck
02-17-2005, 10:31 AM
Doesnt matter I think most of the big sites will come to the UK once our Gaambling bill gets its final reading.

Patrick del Poker Grande
02-17-2005, 10:43 AM
I can't believe it took this long for a state to do this.

megabit
02-17-2005, 11:59 AM
I think this will create a great fight on states rights. The feds will never let this happen, I don't think they can rack in enough to cover the Fed funds they would loose.

tek
02-17-2005, 12:24 PM
States rights pretty much ended with the Buck Act of 1940.

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=buck+act&fr=FP-tab-web-t&toggle=1&ei=UTF-8

SinCityGuy
02-17-2005, 02:01 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I thought hosting online gambling was a federal violation.

[/ QUOTE ]

The ultimate test will come when more states rule on whether poker falls into the gambling category, or whether it is a game of skill (California).

J.R.
02-17-2005, 02:14 PM
You're an absolute moron.

Ever hear of Morrison or Lopez? Go, go Rehnquist Court! Give us Raich (they almost certainly won't though).

J.R.
02-17-2005, 02:20 PM
[ QUOTE ]
The ultimate test will come when more states rule on whether poker falls into the gambling category, or whether it is a game of skill (California).

[/ QUOTE ]

What does this artifical, California state law distinction have to do with anything? There are states (not indian tribes) who have authorized "non-skill" gambling, e.g. slots or intra-state lotteries, and the feds can't inherently regulate that state activity simply becuase it involves gambling. The issue here is interstate/international commerce hook via the internet.

lucas9000
02-17-2005, 03:20 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I think this will create a great fight on states rights.

[/ QUOTE ]

not really. online gaming falls pretty neatly into the commerce clause power held by the federal government. commerce clause > all.

sf340flier
02-18-2005, 01:43 AM
Cross posted to Internet Gambling.

As a citizen of the great state of ND (yes, I'm admitting that), I just wanted to add the actual bill being considered.

North Dakota Internet Poker Bill (http://www.state.nd.us/lr/assembly/59-2005/bill-text/FANJ0400.pdf)

Also, ND knows that a Federal fight would ensue and are prepared to battle it. Here's the link (http://www.ndlegislature.com/news/n020205b.html) to an article about it.

Did you ever think that ND would/could be the "hot"bed of internet poker? Who knew?

CCass
02-18-2005, 12:25 PM
[ QUOTE ]
States rights pretty much ended with the Buck Act of 1940.

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=buck+act&fr=FP-tab-web-t&toggle=1&ei=UTF-8

[/ QUOTE ]

You have to go back further than that. States Rights have been a virtual dead duck since the Civil War.

CORed
02-18-2005, 04:53 PM
I'd love to work for an online poker site (I'm in IT), but given a choice between living in Costa Rica or the Bahamas (or even Gibraltar) and North Dakota, I think Nort Dakota would be my last choice.

tek
02-18-2005, 08:08 PM
Yes, we could also talk about: whether Lincoln's declaration of martial law still stands, the 14th Amendment,
the ICC, etc.

ChuckHumphrey
02-19-2005, 11:10 AM
TwoPlusTwo readers amy find an article I wrote about the North Dakota Internet Poker bill of interest. It is posted at
http://www.gambling-law-us.com/Articles-Notes/ND-licensed-poker.htm

MicroBob
02-19-2005, 03:44 PM
Terrific analysis Chuck.
Very interesting stuff.

thanks so much for the link and for sharing your thoughts on this with us here on 2+2.

fooz
02-20-2005, 01:48 AM
"A card game played by players who are dealt cards by an online nonplayer dealer with the objective of each player betting the superiority of the player's own hand and winning the other players' bets by either making a bet no other player is willing to match or proving to hold the most valuable cards after the betting is over."

Yeah. That's usually how I describe it too.

fooz
02-20-2005, 01:58 AM
WOW!! So it was Barry Shulman, his wife and Frank Catania (?) who really helped pass the bill....

bobbyi
02-21-2005, 06:54 PM
[ QUOTE ]
There are 50 million Internet poker players in the country now and 300 million worldwide.

[/ QUOTE ]
50 million distinct people (meaning, we aren't multiply counting people with multiple accounts) in the US play online poker for money (I assume they mean for money, since play money is obviously legal and irrelvent to the discussion)? There are only about 260 million people in the US. So 1 out of 5 people play poker online? I don't see how that can possibly be right. If I went outside right now and asked 100 people where they play online, there is no way that 20 of them would say "Oh, I play on Pardise" or "I play $25 PLO on Party" or whatever. No way.

Sully
02-21-2005, 10:42 PM
Something I've never quite understood about this type of legislation:

Why would I, a citizen of Colorado, feel the need to pay a licensing fee to North Dakota?

Why would a Costa Rican company (for example) feel the need to pay aa licensing fee to North Dakota?