This is part one of a three-part series by Allyn Jaffrey Shulman, Card Player Magazine's legal counsel.
The American Gaming Association (AGA) is an organization that represents land-based casinos, and is headed up by president and CEO Frank J. Fahrenkopf, Jr. The CEO is charged with being a national advocate whose job is to address regulatory, political, and educational issues affecting the industry.
Who better to lead the AGA than a former chairman of the Republican Party, whose experience includes 17 years of practice as a gaming attorney in Nevada, followed by being a partner in the Washington, DC, office of Hogan & Hartson, where Fahrenkopf specialized in regulatory, legislative, and corporate matters for multinational, foreign, and domestic clients.
Fahrenkopf's accolades include being a founder of both the National Endowment for Democracy and the International Republican Institute (IRI), both nonprofit, nonpartisan organizations dedicated to advancing freedom and democracy worldwide. If I were to inform readers of a small part of Fahrenkopf's impressive background, there would be no space left to write this column. Suffice it to say, his life and successes are an inspiration.
The Current Legal Landscape
It was, therefore, my pleasure to pick Frank's brain about his perception of the current legal landscape of online gaming. In his opinion, there is an odd marriage between those Democrats and Republicans who support a prohibition of online gaming.
Fahrenkopf explained: "In the Republican Party, the religious right think it's a sin to gamble, and they feel an obligation to stop everyone from sinning. Some very liberal Democrats don't think people are smart enough to protect themselves, so the government has to parent its citizens. It's an odd marriage."
Fahrenkopf thinks that in order to understand the landscape of online gambing, one must start with the 1961 Wire Act, whereby Congress enacted a law that had to do with using the telephone to place sports bets. Although the Bush and Clinton administrations have both taken the unique position that the Wire Act is broad enough to cover all forms of online betting, the courts disagree. The 5th Circuit ruled that the Wire Act deals only with sports betting. Fahrenkopf thinks that the case was never taken to the Supreme Court because it is clear that the high court would rule the same.
Behind Closed Doors
Fahrenkopf described a past experience: "About 11 years ago, I was invited to speak to the National Association of Attorneys General. I got there early and there was a session dedicated to Internet gambling, in which they were talking about the fact that there was no state authorization and no taxation or regulation of online gaming.
"They concluded that they couldn't do anything about it. So, they gave the issue to Senator Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), who wrote a bill 11 years ago that made it a felony to place bets online! The Senate Judiciary said no way. We're not going to make it a crime when a guy comes home from work, puts his feet up on his couch, and bets 20 bucks on a game.
Some History
"About five years ago, Kyl introduced an anti-gaming bill to the Senate that required the ISPs to police the industry. The Indians wanted to be excluded, and horse racing wanted that, as well. When the bill went to the House, David Drier was against it because it was bad for ISPs, and it died in committee. Then the committee chairman changed, and Mike Oxley was the new Chairman of the House Committee on Financial Services."
Please check back tomorrow for the second part to see how the UIGE Act came to be. Also, click here to visit CardPlayer.com's archive of articles on poker and the law.
