Q & A: Barney Frank

By now, no one in the I-gaming world is unaware that Congressman Barney Frank has introduced a bill to regulate Internet gambling in the United States. But those who haven't watched policymakers duke it out on Capitol Hill over this issue for the last decade might not realize that he's been perhaps the most vocal of all opponents to prohibition over the years. And regardless of the many factors making I-gaming a very complex issue for Washington to conquer, for Frank it has always come down to one very basic concept: As long as they're not harming others, people don't need to be told by the government what they can and can't do in the privacy of their homes.

I was fortunate enough to speak briefly with Rep. Frank this afternoon about his new bill. Here's what he had to say:

IGN: It took those pushing the prohibition bill over a decade to get their legislation passed. Do you think you'll have a similar battle on your hands?

Barney Frank: Nobody knows. I do think you're going to see a lot of opposition that people hadn't expected, and I think the anti-gambling people might end up regretting this because it will engender a strong sense in people (to ask), "Who the hell are you to tell me what to do?" And it's conceivable that there will be a reaction that will go even beyond this, not just into the Internet situation, but removing some of the restrictions actually engaging [terrestrial gambling].

IGN: Will the land-based gambling industry support this bill?

BF: I've talked to them, and they're divided on it. Some people think it's better than making people come to them. On the other hand, I do think they recognize that anti-gambling sentiment--the view that gambling is the work of the devil--can't be good for them.

IGN: And what about the sports leagues?

BF: We make it clear that they can't be forced to participate against their will. The bill includes the right of sports leagues to say "Not us." It gives them an opt-out.

IGN: And how will the new bill work in relation to the UIGEA?

BF: It cuts back on that bill. It does allow licensing--to get the license from the financial enforcement network--so that you can use credit cards. So it undoes the bill, basically, for those who follow the procedures.

IGN: In recent weeks, it has been widely reported that your bill actually repeals the UIGEA. Is that accurate?

BF: If you're a person who wants to gamble, you wouldn't feel any difference, but it's not a straight repeal. It creates the licensure. You have to apply for one. So, it deals with the money laundering and drug money argument, which I think was always kind of artificial, but you've got to deal with them.

IGN: Opponents to legalized online gambling have made the money laundering argument a lot over the years, but I've never seen it substantiated. Have you?

BF: No, people just do it because they don't like gambling

IGN: The World Trade Organization has ruled that the United States' blocking of online gambling services is not in compliance with international trade agreements. How would your proposal affect this situation?

BF: My bill, I think, would put us back in compliance.

IGN: So then it would also allow foreign countries to offer their services to US players?

BF: That's what this bill is about. You can't use your credit card (to gamble online), and that makes it hard to run a gambling operation. This would restore the ability of American gamblers to participate with offshore sites.

IGN: When will your bill come up in committee?

BF: Sometime in June.