I passionately back the PPA, and I'm optimistic that they are defending the rights of every poker player.

On the other hand, I saw some censure against Frank's bill and the PPA's support of it, and I concur with the squabble of ...

UIGEA is the setback. Why is the government authorizing the banks to impose financial limits on online gambling dealings between US citizens and private foreign organizations? In fact, PPA is supposed to be working on a repeal of the UIGEA, and that should conclude the opening order of business.

The supporters of Frank's bill, and Frank himself, fight openly on those principles. "If someone wants to gamble, I may think that is a bad decision, but it shouldn't be the job of the federal government to prevent you from making poor choices".

From a personal view and I concur with it hundred percent, However the hitch is, the anticipated legislation does NOT align with those ideals.

No aberrant child support players
No credit cards
No unauthorized sites
No receiving of sporting wagers by certified sites
21 and above
Maintain a record of illegal online gambling sites to support implementation of the UIGEA

As of many have different views. This bill never tries to take in hand the personal freedom concerns the UIGEA caused. It's MORE limits and even assist ENFORCE the UIGEA.

Let's begin with the difficulty, and let's carry on promoting personal freedoms