Online casinos are posing as threats to the land based casinos. This has led to their presence being opposed in form of bills introduced to make them illegal. Currently, there is another draft bill, which has been drafted in Washington DC to ban online casinos. The bill is being circulated to politicians to seek support.

According to reliable sources, the bill whose origin is not clear is similar to the ones backed by Adelson, which are before the Congress. The only difference in this bill is that online poker is not included in the ban. It also has other exemptions such as interstate horse racing and interstate lottery transactions. This is intended to reduce the opposition to the bill. The Graham – Chaffetz bill had blanket banning for all games in online casinos and therefore, had a lot of opposition. The bill is also similar to the one that was being worked on by Nevada senator earlier this year.

The draft bill, which is titled Internet Gambling Prohibition and Control Act 2014, is being formulated to strengthen and update the 1961 wire act. The Wire Act does not consider online casino and poker illegal. This is based on the decision that was made in December 2011 by the Department of Justice, which decided that only sports’ betting is illegal.

It is on this note that the bill is intending to make the Act strong so that it can include even online casino in the list of illegal gambling. This means that the bill has similar objectives to those of the Graham Chaffetz bills.

The online poker seems to be controversial in this case. The language used on the bill is cautious on the autonomy of the states and tribal groups. It states that the exemption applies to bets on poker between states and Indian tribes, which have expressly authorized the activity. This is also in pursuant to agreements between tribe to state, and state-to-state.

American Gaming association announced that it would not take part on the online gambling issue since it is divisive in nature. Adelson is opposing the move with threats to exit the association. With the bill being more Nevada centric, there is speculation that deals are being done behind closed door to have the bill legalized.

If there are deals to pass the bill, they will find strong opposition. This is because there is opposition to the Congress in interfering with states’ rights. This means that if the Congress were to pass the bill, they would be interfering with the rights of the states, and this would be greatly opposed.

There are also those who have made large investments in online gambling, especially in markets such as Delaware, New Jersey, and Nevada. These would also oppose the bill since they would stand to lose many of their investments if online casinos are made illegal.

In as much as the bill may be drafted, it is bound to receive opposition from the states and the investors who would stand to lose. This is made more difficult by the fact that this is an election year.