The War Against Online Gambling Escalates
June 10, 2009
The war against online gambling in the United States has finally crossed a line. The line delineating the simply absurd from the completely insane.
Last week, federal prosecutors asked four American banks to freeze payments that are owed to people who play online poker. These payments are in accounts held by payment intermediaries, and amount to tens of millions of dollars.
Online Poker Game
What has happened to us? I am aware that we have been boiled like frogs in a pot for the last half century, but things are accelerating at an alarming pace recently. Sure, it’s hard to get worked up about something as trivial as online poker, but the way in which this gambling war is being waged has far-reaching implications.
What happened to the Fifth Amendment which states that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law …
Freezing people’s poker winnings at any point in the chain is not “due process of law” when these people have no means to protest the seizures. Not being able to take possession of money that is rightfully yours meets the definition of deprivation.
Almost every industrialized nation is allowed to place wagers online, and by all accounts, they are perfectly fine. For reasons that absolutely nobody can explain, The United States forbids its residents from doing the same. It’s only a matter of time before we have Chinese Internet laws.
The self-professed bastion of freedom is rapidly becoming the laughing stock of the world. In a “free country”, how does anyone justify the fact that people can’t use their own money to play games? Why on earth would such an endeavor be illegal? Who does it harm?
Nobody can actually answer these questions. Instead, the government just plows ahead and wipes out anyone who displeases it in the slightest.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The United States is the world’s wealthiest Banana Republic.
The problem is greater than poker, though. What kind of confidence does this instill in our financial system? Face it, banks are a dangerous place to keep your money these days. Sure, you can make a deposit today, but will it be there tomorrow?
I know first hand that Wells Fargo has “lost” my cash deposits twice in the past eighteen months, and each time they gave themselves ten days to “find it”. Apparently, Federal Law allows them to float themselves ten day loans at-will from customer accounts, without any compensation to the customer whatsoever.
Not to mention, they are now permitted to freeze your assets for any reason, or no reason at all.
Stephen Cohen, a spokesman at Citibank, said that his bank had received a “request” from prosecutors, and that “as a matter of policy Citibank complies with such requests”.
That’s right. There was no court order, someone simply “requested” that Citibank freeze the assets of payment processors, and Citibank complied. They have a “policy” to comply with such requests. Yikes! Even if you have never gambled online in your life, this should frighten you. The private companies charged with the safekeeping of your money now make policies allowing themselves to do whatever they damn well please with that money.
Americans often get confused about this, but company policy is not law. It’s not anything. You could create a personal “policy” tomorrow that says you are entitled to the wallet of anyone you see wearing black shoes. You can’t act on your policy, however, because simply declaring a policy doesn’t make theft legal.
Of course, Citibank did not have to have its arm twisted. It takes no great intellect to see how having this “policy” greatly benefits Citibank. When assets are frozen, they stay in the bank and are counted toward the assets of that institution. Nothing prevents the bank from making money on the frozen money. Citibank would be absolutely thrilled if they got an order to freeze everyone’s accounts. This way, people could not make withdrawals. They were all the more pleased to realize that the frozen accounts were payment processing accounts in which money belonging to large numbers of people was pooled.
Wells Fargo actually received a court order to freeze the accounts, and it is not clear whether the other two smaller institutions received an order or a request. For the reasons stated above, it is always in the best interest of a bank to comply with anything that prevents withdrawals from being made.
Not content to ruin the security, privacy, and integrity of our own banks, the U.S. Government has been on a crusade lately trying to get other nations to follow our lead. Because of this, some countries (such as Switzerland) are closing accounts belonging to U.S. residents, because they are sick and tired of having their ass crawled up with a microscope.
The entire war on gambling, and war on the American people has simply gotten out of hand, and it needs to stop before it passes the point of no return.
While online poker is just a game, it has also unwittingly become the poster child for a troubling erosion of civil liberties.
If you have won an online poker tournament lately, allow me to offer you my most sincere congratulations.
My good wishes may very well have to suffice, because if you actually want to get paid for your victory, you might just be waiting awhile.
Written by notsurprising on June 10, 2009 at 6:33 pm
All Hail the Great Obama!
It is only going to get worse. You can thank the 70 millions idiots who voted for him!
Written by tully on June 10, 2009 at 6:33 pm
Just want to add the poker sites are covering the players for these cash outs. Money has been “returned” to people’s accounts, accounting-wise, and checks will be re-cut on different processors. Could those be seized also? Possibly. But the sites still serving Americans have gotten pretty adept at this at and mouse game. They’ve certainly had enough practice.
I’m so disgusted, can’t even muster a good rant. Regulation would solve the problem—and give the big boys their cut, which is what this is all about, ultimately—but who do you think will be the first big online rooms out of the gate in a US market? The same bunch of thieving hooligans doing their damndest to run LV into the ground.
You know the global free market—such as it was—worked pretty well, gambling wise, pre UIGEA. I’d like to go back to it. Not gonna happen, though.
Written by Michelle on June 10, 2009 at 6:59 pm
Your post reminded me of the Israeli woman that hid $1 million in her mattress, b/c she didn’t trust the banks, and accidentally threw her mattress out. I’ve had some of my deposits misplaced as well, I won’t disclose the bank.
Written by par88 on June 10, 2009 at 10:30 pm
The timing of this seizure is awfully suspicious given that Barney Frank’s bill to repeal the ban on online gambling is starting to make its way thru congress…
http://www.informationweek.com/news/government/policy/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=217800632
I doubt the bureaucrats could come up with this seizure idea on their own… my guess is there’s some right wing conservative lobby (same people who ran the “swift boat” ads and got Bush re-elected in 04?) who pushed the feds into this. Maybe they’re trying to get Frank’s bill defeated? Who knows what lengths these people will go to to push their own agendas?
Written by FoolsGold on June 11, 2009 at 5:39 am
So who is REALLY behind all this animosity?
The “Bricks Casinos” who want to eliminate the upstarts who beat them in the race to becoming a “Clicks Casino” on the internet?
The various politicians whose re-election campaign funds flow from Indian Casinos who don’t want to face any competition at all, present or future, real or imagined?
The Police/Prosecutors/Corrections-Industry who need defendants to move through the various processing lines?
Just as the enforcement of drug smuggling laws favors the entrenched criminal by eliminating upstart competitors, the elimination of online casinos has to be favoring somebody or else it would not be happening!!
Written by TsT on June 11, 2009 at 7:57 am
“notsurprising” you’re blaming Obama? LOL try looking at the Port Security bill that was signed into law in October of 2006. One of your heroes Bill Frist pushed it through congress and did you see what was attached to that bill? Tacked on quickly at the end was the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006.Thank you for keeping us safe from those evil-doers who want to bet a football game or play some poker.
Written by superfarmer on June 11, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Such a simple solution – legalize, regulate and tax. Afterall, it’s the loss of tax revenue that really has the government bent out of shape.
Written by CLM on June 11, 2009 at 6:05 pm
This is so stupid it’s beyond words. How come betting on horses online is perfectly legal? If Uncle Sam is so worried about not collecting taxes, wouldn’t it be easy for the poker sites to notify the I.R.S. if your winnings hit a certain point? In horse racing, if you win a bet in excess of $600 where the odds are 300-1 or greater, the online racebook will mail you
Written by dewey on June 13, 2009 at 6:05 am
you really have been hitting the cooking frogs metaphor lately. frying them in a pan, cooking them in a pot. What’s up with that?
Written by Rex on June 13, 2009 at 7:46 am
If you put a frog into a pot of boiling water, he will quickly jump out. However, if you place a frog into a pot of cool water and slowly turn up the heat, the frog will boil to death because each small increase in temperature will not represent a dramatic increase over the preceding temperature.
Simply put, if done slowly enough, a frog will willingly allow you to boil him.
This very same method is used by governments and corporations against large groups of humans to achieve goals that would be untenable to accomplish quickly.
Let’s say a company or government (remember, governments are businesses and nothing else) wants to raise rates or taxes by 50%. Simply raising them by 50% would provoke an outrage from the citizenry. Instead, they raise it by 2% a month, and in little over two years, they have their increase with little resistance. It’s a means to an end. It’s a method to obtain things which would otherwise be unobtainable.
After all, what pathetic loser tightwad can’t afford a 2% increase? Sure you will get a little bitching and moaning along the way, but nobody is going to revolt over two percent. It’s two F’ing percent, what’s the big deal?
You can tweak the percentages and time, but you get the gist. You get your 50%, and the people shut the hell up.
It’s not just money, though.
Imagine a president standing up and declaring that the Bill of Rights were hereby null and void. There might be riots in the streets. It would be too messy.
It’s much more sustainable to chip away at rights. Take a minor right away here, another one there, claim it’s for people’s protection and security, and tell them that the rights are being taken away to keep them free. Give them flags to wave and put singing competitions on television so they don’t think about it too much.
If done slowly enough, over the course of time, you can turn a free country into a totalitarian police state, and the population will not only go along with it, but they might just cheer you along the way.
Thus, the frog in the boiling pot, frying pan, etc.
We are the “frogs”. Once we get fully acclimated to the loss of a few minor and inconsequential rights (the right to play games online as an example), a few more minor rights will be taken away. Then a few more. Then a few more.
There won’t be a mass outrcry, because the rights of only a small segment of the population will be taken each time.
Then end result will be the same, though. An almost complete evisceration of civil liberties a/k/a “boiled”.