PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 19, 2003
Unlawful Internet Gambling Funding Prohibition Act - Directs Federal functional regulators to prescribe and enforce regulations requiring any designated payment system to establish policies and procedures reasonably designed to identify and prevent restricted transactions. Defines a "restricted transaction" as any transaction or transmittal to anyone engaged in the business of betting or wagering in connection with another person's participation in unlawful Internet gambling of credit, electronic fund transfers, checks, or the proceeds of any other form of financial transaction as regulators may prescribe. Requires regulators to consider exempting restricted transactions if the regulators find that it is not reasonably practical to identify and block, or otherwise prevent, such transactions.
People & committees
Rep. Bachus, Spencer [R-AL-6] · R–AL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
The Clerk was authorized to correct section numbers, punctuation, and cross references, and to make other necessary technical and conforming corrections in the engrossment of H.R. 2143.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 319 - 104 (Roll no. 255).
House roll call 255 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 319 - 104 (Roll no. 255).
House roll call 255 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 2143.
DEBATE - Pursuant to H. Res. 263, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with twenty minutes of debate on the Sensenbrenner amendment.
Subsequently, Ms. Jackson-Lee asked unanimous consent to withdraw her request for a recorded vote. Without objection her request is agreed to and the Chair announced that the amendment failed by voice vote.
POSTPONED VOTE - At the conclusion of debate on the Jackson-Lee, (TX) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Jackson-Lee, (TX) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to H. Res. 263 the Committee of the Whole proceeded with ten minutes of debate on the Jackson-Lee (TX) amendment.
DEBATE - Pursuant to H. Res. 263 the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Kelly amendment.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 2143.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Lee Terry to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 263 and Rule XXIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2143 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. After general debate, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. Makes in order only those amendments printed in House Report 108-145. Provides that the amendments may be considered only in the order printed, offered only by a Member designated in the report, considered as read, debatable for the time specified, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, not be subject to amendment, and not be subject to a demand for a division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. Waives all points of order against the amendments.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 263. (consideration: CR H5136-5153; text of measure as reported in House: CR H5145-5146)
Rule H. Res. 263 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 263 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2143 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. After general debate, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule.
Supplemental report filed by the Committee on Financial Services, H. Rept. 108-133, Part II.
Supplemental report filed by the Committee on Financial Services, H. Rept. 108-133, Part II.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 68.
Reported by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 108-133, Part I.
Reported by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 108-133, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2143 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2143 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2143 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2143 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.