What would regulation so to the USA?

madnessDoes, in another post, wrote On the good side of the news, someone in congress is really pushing for the US gov. to regulate online poker, and if that happens, we should see some sweet deals.
My question is, Why would we sweet deals with regulation?

If online poker were opened up for easy access to the US, it would mean a huge influx of new depositors to poker sites. In order to beat the next guy out of the new players, sites would offer great deals to entice in the new $$.

Send this to your congressman, it is from te ppa.

I am a constituent, voter, and poker player asking for your support.

Specifically, I ask that you support proposed legislation that clearly exempts the great game of poker from the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA). I also ask that you sponsor and support legislation to repeal the badly flawed UIGEA outright. With UIGEA regulations now pending, the debate on these issues has reached a tipping point, and new voices are emerging against UIGEA every day.

Our right to play poker online was inadvertently restricted with the passage of UIGEA. While it is clear that UIGEA should not affect online poker nationwide (UIGEA only enforces other federal gaming laws, and federal case law has consistently held that the Wire Act applies only to sports betting, and very few states have any laws against Internet poker), this legislation has nonetheless had a chilling effect on my ability to access and patronize these legal businesses. I ask for your help in rectifying this situation. There is no reason for the federal government to treat a poker game that adults play against others online any differently than a Friday night poker game played around a kitchen table.

As regulations to implement UIGEA come close to their effective date, our nation’s financial institutions are warning the Congress that these regulations are unworkable. At the April 2, 2008 Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade and Technology hearing on the impact of UIGEA on our nation’s financial services industry, even the authors of the UIGEA regulations testified that they have struggled with the ambiguity of the UIGEA statute.

Louise Roseman of the Federal Reserve testified that it will be very difficult to enforce the law "without a more bright line on what is included as unlawful Internet gambling”. Even if this “bright line” were defined, however, she stated that payment systems are not designed to perform this type of function. Representatives from the American Bankers Association, the Credit Union National Association, the Financial Services Roundtable and Wells Fargo fully concurred with this assessment. Dozens of other banks have submitted similar comments to the Federal Reserve and to the Treasury Department. The principal comment of the American Bankers Association is a concise summary: “We maintain that the UIGEA is a fundamentally flawed response to those challenges.”

I encourage you to introduce legislation repealing the badly flawed UIGEA. Banks should be responsible for managing their deposits and their loan portfolios, not for policing the behaviors of Americans in their own homes.

I also encourage you to support HR 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act, and HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act. HR 2610 clarifies federal law by expressly exempting games of skill like poker from UIGEA. HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, regulates online poker via stringent licensing regulations for poker site operators. Both bills have rigorous safeguards against underage and compulsive gambling. Both also clarify the Wire Act to bring it into the 21st century.

These safeguards will work – the June 8, 2007 House Financial Services Committee hearing on Internet gaming proved conclusively that Internet poker can be effectively regulated. Note that neither HR 2610 nor HR 2046 force any state to permit online poker, as states can opt out if they wish.

One thing the 2008 Subcommittee hearing made completely clear is that Congress needs to define “unlawful Internet gambling” before it can expect financial institutions to have any chance at effectively enforcing any ban on such activity. The idea that the federal government cannot define this concept, yet expects banks to perform this law enforcement function, is ludicrous.

Poker is a uniquely American game of skill and a great American pastime. Presidents such as FDR and Harry Truman, Chief Justices such as William Rehnquist and William Howard Taft, members of Congress, generals, and average Americans have enjoyed poker for more than 150 years. It is an honorable game. Congress now has an opportunity to show respect for the millions of voters who enjoy the great game, while at the same time averting the looming risks of asking our financial services industry to enforce a law that even our regulators can’t define.

What’s most important to me is your support for my rights. Please respond to this letter and let me know if you will support my freedoms. I will be watching your actions on this issue closely. I hope that I, along with my nearly one million fellow Poker Players Alliance members, can count on your support.

Thank you for your consideration.