PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 223.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 19, 1997
Internet Gambling Prohibition Act of 1997 - Amends the Federal criminal code to provide penalties against any person who, while engaged in the business of betting or wagering, knowingly uses a communication facility for the transmission or receipt in interstate or foreign commerce of bets or wagers, information assisting in the placing of bets or wagers, or a communication that entitles the transmitter or receiver to receive money or credit as a result of bets or wagers. Provides a smaller penalty for those engaging in such activities who are not in the business of betting or wagering. Provides prohibition exceptions. Authorizes the Federal Communications Commission to enforce against interstate computer service providers regulations prohibiting the interstate or foreign transmission of gambling information. Authorizes injunctive relief against such carriers or providers. Expresses the sense of the Senate that the Federal Government should have extraterritorial jurisdiction over the transmission to or receipt from the United States of gambling information as well as any communication that entitles the transmitter or recipient to receive money or credit as a result of bets or wagers. Requires a report from the Attorney General to the Congress concerning the enforcement of such gambling regulations and related recommendations and information.
People & committees
Sen. Kyl, Jon [R-AZ] · R–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 223.
Committee on Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Judiciary. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Committee on Judiciary. Committee consideration and Mark Up Session held.
Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism, Government. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 105-182.
Referred to Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism, Government.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism, Government. Hearings held prior to introduction and/or referral. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 105-122.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S2560-2561)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. 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 S.474 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 S.474 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 S.474 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 S.474 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.