This article is the third in an ongoing series of articles on the proposed legislation to ban gambling. This article will expand the discussion on the motives for making this legislation essential, as well as the evidence that exists Togel Singapore within the actual world such as the Jack Abramoff connection as well as the addiction of online gambling.
The lawmakers try to shield our citizens from certain dangers, or is it? The whole situation is a bit confusing to at best.
In previous posts In previous articles, as mentioned in previous articles, the House as well as the Senate have been taking a look at “Online Gambling”. The bills have been proposed from Congressmen Goodlatte as well as Leach and Senator Kyl.
The legislation being proposed by Rep. Goodlatte, the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act, is a clear plan for changing the Wire Act to outlaw all types of gambling online, making it illegal for gambling business to accept credit cards and electronic transfers, and also to oblige ISPs or Common Carriers to block access to gambling-related websites at the demand from law enforcement.
Similar to Rep. Goodlatte and Sen. Kyl, in his bill, Prohibition on Funding of Unlawful Internet Gambling will make unlawful for gaming companies to accept electronic transfers, credit cards check and other payment methods to be used for placing illegal bets. However, his bill doesn’t address the businesses who place bets.
The bill proposed by Rep. Leach, The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act is essentially an exact version of the bill that was introduced by Senator. Kyl. It is aimed at preventing gambling establishments from accepting electronic transfers, credit cards as well as checks and other transactions. It’s similar to the Kyl bill, does not make any modifications to the current lawful or prohibited.
In a quote by Goodlatte we can read “Jack Abramoff’s total disregard for the legislative process has allowed Internet gambling to continue thriving into what is now a twelve billion-dollar business which not only hurts individuals and their families but makes the economy suffer by draining billions of dollars from the United States and serves as a vehicle for money laundering.”
There are many interesting aspects in this article.
First there is a bit of confusion about Jack Abramoff and his disdain for legislation. This statement, along with other which have been made are based on the notion that: 1.) Jack Abramoff opposed these bills, 2)) the man who voted for him was corrupt, and 3) to avoid being associated with corruption, it is best to vote against these bills. This is, of course, absurd. If we took this argument to the fullest extent, we must reverse and nullify any legislation that Abramoff approved, and then pass any bill Abramoff was against regardless of the substance or content of the legislation. Legislation should be enacted or not based on its merits legislation proposed and not on the reputation of a single person.