UIGEA – the end game?

So they finally published the regulations. Timed to be law the day Bush leaves office (hoorah!!!). As expected it’s still a pigs ear. There are many articles on the web about it, so rather than try and explain it I will simply muse on some bits and pieces. It is, as we all know, a ridiculous law, poorly defined and ultimately unfit for purpose. Despite all that, it will be promulgated as a swansong to Bush. Of passing interest is some of the comment at the top where the feedback on the drafts is considered.

“After carefully considering the comments, the Agencies have adopted a final rule to implement the Act. In accordance with the Act, the Agencies have consulted with the Department of Justice during the development of the final rule. The Agencies also conducted further outreach to gather information on the issues raised in the public comments.” – therein lies the real truth. The DOJ has been running its own version of the law for ages now, with the arrests of high profile individuals such as David arruthers and Peter Dicks (none of these have resulted in a court decision in favour of the prosecution). They seem to have an almost unhealthy infatuation with the notion that they can make their own laws.

On the issue of whether to publish a list of the “bad boys” …

“The first step in including a business on such a list would be to ensure that the particular business was, in fact, engaged in activities deemed to be unlawful Internet gambling under the Act. The Act,
however, does not set out the precise activities that are covered by the term, but refers to activities that are unlawful under other Federal or State gambling laws for such determinations. Creating such a list would require the Agencies to formally interpret those laws that are written and enforced by other entities, such as State legislatures and law enforcement agencies.”

So – the Agency cant work it out yet the banks are still required to.

Here’s a great piece of legaleze that will upset the many poker players hoping for exemptions on the basis of it being a skill game …

“The Agencies note, however, that a careful reading of the statutory language of the Act may be instructive in discerning Congressional intent regarding what constitutes a “game subject to chance.” The Act defines the term “bet or wager” as including a “game subject to chance.”29 However, the Act also defines the term “bet or wager” as including the purchase of a chance or opportunity to win a lottery or other prize (which opportunity to win is predominantly subject to chance).”30 The fact that Congress used “subject to chance” in one paragraph and “predominantly subject to chance” in the next paragraph in the same subsection suggests that Congress intended the element of chance in “game subject to chance” to be less than predominant. The Agencies believe that if Congress
had intended chance to be the predominant factor in determining the outcome of a “game subject to chance,” Congress would have inserted the word “predominantly” as it did subsequently in the same section. Therefore, even if chance is not the predominant factor in the outcome of a game, but was still a significant factor, the game could still be deemed to be a “game subject to chance” under a plain reading of the Act.”

Great! The act is ambigiuous and poorly worded. So rather than clarify it we take the view that it must have been implied that poker is illegal otherwise “Congress would have inserted the word “predominantly” ” (that is if Congress even read it)!

It goes on – a monstrosity of a law for a monstrosity of an act. God bless America!

Tags: Gambling, UIGEA, UIGEA Gambling