Towards regulation: Online poker in the US

Americans love poker. Besides playing the game in great numbers - in our homes, our casinos, and yes, online - it is a part of our nation's narrative, celebrated through song, literature and cinema. The game has permeated the American lexicon: we speak of 'the cards you're dealt,' or 'upping the ante' more often in business, sports and politics than we do in the context of playing the actual game. Poker is a reflection of our boundless optimism, our willingness to take risks, to suffer defeat only to rise up and try again.

And yet there are those - a minority, to be sure, but obviously powerful and influential - that do not share this view, and who go so far as to support the passage of laws that would make criminals of neighbours who enjoy this simple pastime. The i-gaming opponents in the US who supported the passage of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) say that their interests lie in protecting underage and problem gamblers, and preventing online fraud.

Common goals

Actually, those same people might be surprised to find that, in fact, we at the Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association wholeheartedly agree with those goals. However, we strongly oppose the means established by the UIGEA, and suggest that there are far more effective means of protecting players, families and the game.

If you oppose the UIGEA, you certainly have a wide variety of flaws on which to base your objection: the intrusion by the government into the private, lawful conduct of its citizens; the impossible law enforcement burden placed on US banks, payment processors and credit card companies; or the utter vagueness of the law - which declines to even define what 'unlawful internet gambling' is - rendering it both unenforceable and unconstitutional.

But perhaps the greatest reason to oppose the UIGEA is this: in being denied access to service by US banks and credit card companies, the at-risk groups the UIGEA's champions apparently seek to protect are, in fact, made more vulnerable.

At any given moment, hundreds of thousands of electronic financial transactions are processed in the course of normal commerce, both online and off. Banks and credit card companies have established a network of safeguards to protect not only their institutions, but their customers as well. They include age and identity verifications, vectoring to track spending, checks on credit worthiness and limits and thorough  accounting of individuals' financial status, including liquidity and debt. It is a massive yet extremely reliable system designed to ensure our financial safety.

So why in heaven's name would anyone think it a good idea to bar this system and its tested-and-true safeguards from a marketplace where it would be the most effective means of protecting problem gamblers from over-extending themselves, steering consumers away from fraud and barring those who do not meet requisite age and identity standards?

Now, admittedly, I am no lawyer. But if a law is created to protect people and instead it puts them at greater risk, then that, my friends, is a bad law.

Good online poker operators have a vested interest in providing a secure environment for players who are of age and financially stable. Our members would be happy to work with the US government and our opponents to ensure the necessary safeguards are in place and remain vigilant so as to protect at-risk groups. Because in the end, the solution to these problems is to be found in technology, the kind that we employ every day in every other transaction we make.

These are the stakes. It is time for government and i-gaming opponents to fold their lousy hand and join the industry in establishing a sensible regulatory system for internet poker.