On-Line Gaming: Frank gets it right

Everyonce in a while I find myself agreeing with someone whom I think of as a liberal.  This morning while reading The Globe online is one of those times.  Barney Frank has introduced legislation to legalize on-line gaming.  Who knew Mr. Frank had a libertarian streak in him? 

Heather Wong, a spokeswoman for Frank, said the legislator is in the “thinking stage” of drafting a bill to reverse Congress’s decision last year to prohibit the collection of credit card payments from gambling websites. She said she had no other details.

The Financial Times quoted the Massachusetts Democrat yesterday saying that the law, formally known as the Unlawful Enforcement Gambling Act, is “preposterous” and one of the “stupidest” ever passed.

Congressman Frank, I couldn’t have said it better myself.

About Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno

  • GOPCobra

    Expanding gambling is not a good idea here in Massachusetts, and its not a good idea in D.C. Gambling preys upon the people who can least afford to participate. Online gambling is even worse because its pretty much anonymous and effortless. You don’t have to go to the corner store, the local race track or take the day trip to Foxwoods. You do it right in your livingroom with a credit card instead of real cash. It hides a lot of the reality of the problem, making it seem less dangerous than it really is.

    Gambling addictions and problems are so hidden, but can tear a family apart just as easily as alcoholism and drug addiction. This law was a smart piece of legislation, but it doesn’t surprise me one bit that its just another smart law that the Democrats are trying to overturn. Don’t even get me started on the tax cuts or “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

    • ColorPurple

      That’s a cool, calm and collected response. 

      If the state were seriously worried about gambling, they wouldn’t have pumped up the advertising line item for Tim.  He’s right about one thing – the poor, disenfranchised and vulnerable are the ones that are playing the lottery…and they are the ones more likely to get sucked into the vortex of gambling addiction – but I don’t see how online gambling is any worse than our beloved state lottery system.  If we really “care” about the gambling public, there would be no such thing as a state lottery department. 

  • There is nothing I love more than big government oppression.  It was clearly our founders intent to have the federal government ban personal economic freedom.  I’m to stupid to use my own money the way I see fit and I’m glad they are here to dictate that for me.  I hate personal responsibility  Thankfully the era of big government is back and the Republican Party is leading the charge!

    Oh, wait, did I just say that stuff I just said? I meant the exact opposite.  The fact is online poker is a game of skill.  It also is better in many ways than a brick and motor casino.  The government doesn’t have to pay for roads and police.  Negative elements such as prostitution, drugs, and organized crime are never involved.  There are no “not in my backyard” issues.  Even for losing players who spend a few thousand dollars a year, that is their choice.  Would it be better if they spent it paying thousands of dollars on a X-Box, games and online memberships that way?  Let people live their own lives and get the feds off our back.  Vote for Ron Paul.

  • geo999

    And today is no different.

    Gambling, and online gambling in particular, is regressive.
    It tends to prey on those least able to afford the losses that are predictable, and built into the gaming system.

    It is not “nanny government” to limit activities that are known to be detrimental to it’s citizens.

    We limit the number and location of bars, liquor stores, strip joints and casinos because it is to our overall benefit to do so.

    Unfettered online gambling is worse than having slots in the  corner grocery or local gin mills.
    It allows those with a predilection to the vice to indulge anonymously at any time and in any state of mind or body.

    It also may (though I’m no expert on this) raise a question of states rights to control gaming.

    In my view, if one wants to gamble away the mortgage money, then one should go to a casino, where there is at least some physical initiative required for the self destructive behavior.