Our voices are heard and I have a plan

[addictontilt]

Look at this article - great job everyone, plan below

http://www.theagitator.com/

[addictontilt]

Okay - Status update - Full tilt has beed emailed as to the poker tourney, need advice for buy ins: Less than $20 1500 chips, over $20 3k in chips, I vote $20 buyin but I'd like comments.

How about half to whomever is going to benefit? And half to the tourney winner? Discussions on this would be nice too.

I'll post ad rates for St Louis in a bit, but we have an issue...who is going to take the money from the tourney and other donations and pay for the ad? Affialate? PPA, Seen the poker Ace guy posting, need suggestions on this too, as I develop info I'll post, I cannot check my email for tourney until tonight, so lets get this hammered out.

This action the tourney and the ad,and possible money for people running aganst the incumbent is to protest what they (the incumbents) did, nothing more nothing less. I am a hard core republican and will cross party lines, not because I agree with the democrats, but because I intend to punish the incumbents at every level. We will get more support if we approach it this way, everyone agreed?

if you want background, look at these threads, this is not about political parties, its about the issue. We need to keep on message

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...e=1#Post7785392 (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=7785392&an=0&page=1#Post 7785392)

and
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...e=0#Post7770567 (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=7770567&an=0&page=0#Post 7770567)

[addictontilt]

Update on ads for St louis. All I am getting is voice mails, i do not think we have time to pull this off, and it will look thrown together, and make our image worse.

Suggestion: Use the poker tourney idea to raise money for the presidential election coming up, we will have time to develop a PAC like (stress like) moveon.org or the swiftboat thing - monthly tourneys help to fund it, and then use that money to get the message out, its a long term strategy but the best one I can think of...Thoughts?

[rabiddog]

I doubt Presidential race would be a good idea. I mean, Hillary Clinton or Bill Frist? I wouldnt want either in there running our country.

Frist is just an idiot. And Hillary would have Monica under her desk all the time.

[addictontilt]

Its about being heard in the presidential election not necessarily supporting candidates unless they actively come out for us, its about getting our voices heard, we don't have time to do it, in just two weeks, it will come off as a disorganized and not unified message, that is what I meant. Traditionally more people vote in the pres elections than others

[NorthDakota]

Poker Tournement Funding... Great Idea... Any Idea is a good one if it unites instead of divides... Kudo's to your enthusiasm addictontilt...

Everyone think about this for a minute...

Get the word out and hold a Weekly tournament were the INCREASED rake goes to the Cause... It would take the very thing trying to be prevented by congress and used against them... This idea has legs... It may be too late in the game for this election but in 2 years a nice bankroll could be built up... I'd forget about the Presidential Election but there will be plenty of seats up in 2 years.. And the Bankroll could be built up with a weekly tourney...

We need a partnership with Full Tilt or Pokerstars of course... Would any of them step forward??? And we would need an administrator for the Tourney and therefore The Organization to decide how money raised is spent...

Great Idea... money raised and everyone has a good time...

[SamJake]

This is a wonderful idea...

[addictontilt]

Ummm....I got a question for the mods....once I get home, I will most likley have an update on tourney sched - can I post the info here and a link to my blog without getting banned????

[ericicecream]

[ QUOTE ]
Get the word out and hold a Weekly tournament were the INCREASED rake goes to the Cause...

[/ QUOTE ]

Why just the INCREASED rake? Surely FullTilt can afford to let a tourney go by where they don't pocket anything.

Brings up another question. Will Full Tilt be motivated to do this, seeing that so far they have actually BENEFITTED from the new law by increased business?

[addictontilt]

Update on Full tilt - they are reviewing the request - i proposed a $20 buy in half for money prizes and the other half for PPA or whomever we choose, also proposed a weekly tourney, which will help with long term goals of taking our issue to the streets

Thoughts?

[U2ForNow]

I think this is a great idea. I could have some banners made up that can be posted at various websites.

[addictontilt]

banners would be greatly appreciated, I have a blog that can
take em, too. I can let other bloggers in on it, and maybe we can get something going

[U2ForNow]

Once it is setup just send me the info. I have two friends that make professional advertising banners. We need to think of a message. Maybe something like:

“Help Save Internet Poker” – with the tourney date and estimated prize pool.
Any suggestions on this?

Also, what about Poker Magazine and other publications? Both electronic and print. They may be willing to provide us with ad space supporting the cause.

Let me know what I can do to help.

[Poofler]

[ QUOTE ]
Update on Full tilt - they are reviewing the request - i proposed a $20 buy in half for money prizes and the other half for PPA or whomever we choose, also proposed a weekly tourney, which will help with long term goals of taking our issue to the streets

Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that is the right approach. No way better to consolidate 'donations' than to make it as simple as just click 'register for tourny'.

First, I think you need to make the end goal very clear. I donate occasionally, and I would not do so unless I knew what my money was going towards. Massing $ in the name of poker rights isn't going to be good enough for some players.

I also think you would be better served to try to beat the clock in this election cycle, rather than wait for the Presidential elections. We have no idea who will be running, and there is a good chance that person isn't even a Senator who had anything to do with this bill. Saying "Republicans did this to our rights" and advocating against a man simply because his party affliation is the same may not hit home too hard. In this cycle, you are actually targeting culprits and sympathizers within Congress. There is a lot more relevance, and the issue isn't as stale.

[addictontilt]

in the email I got from tilt - "they want to consider it" it will take time to pull this off, we need to figure out where the money is going to go really quick, if its the PPA (i am not entirely comfortable with this) a dialogue needs to occur and quickly, bottom line I need help with this, IMO we cannot affect this election with a sound strategy, but we sure as hell can affect the next one, and the sessions, there was discussions of setting up a PAC.

As far as the party thing goes - if we don't stick to the issue - which I intrepret as our freedoms being attacked, the message and the followers may get lost

[U2ForNow]

Why don’t we approach the founders of twoplustwo and ask them to head up an organization. This could be setup in a few days and they can be trusted to control the money properly. Mr. Sklansky is an industry icon and I believe would be respected by all.

That being said, I do agree that we should still target this election. We can still stay organized after the election and focus in on 2008, but we may be able to organize this quickly enough to have an impact on the November elections.

[Poofler]

I'm also not comfortable giving it to the PPA. I would want every cent going to something tangible (an ad, for example), not to overhead of organizations that mysteriously fight for our rights. I also doubt the PPA would be as politically aggressive as we might word our own ad. You know, like the Republican fear mongering ads, or the Missouri Democratic ads where a convulsing Michael J Fox explains that Senator Jim Talent voted against legislation that would help people with Parkinsons.

[Sean Fraley]

[ QUOTE ]
I also think you would be better served to try to beat the clock in this election cycle, rather than wait for the Presidential elections. We have no idea who will be running, and there is a good chance that person isn't even a Senator who had anything to do with this bill. Saying "Republicans did this to our rights" and advocating against a man simply because his party affliation is the same may not hit home too hard. In this cycle, you are actually targeting culprits and sympathizers within Congress. There is a lot more relevance, and the issue isn't as stale.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, using this money to "punish" any given candidate is a bad idea for the following reasons:

1) Congressmen and Presidents are reticent to take any action that would provide legitimacy for any fund-raising or lobbying group that states a clear intent on taking punitive action against a candidate or office holder. This is due to the fact that such groups have a distinct possibility of being a double edged sword if the candidate or office holder must later take a course of action that said group would be against. It is normally more politic to steer clear of such groups.

2) Getting an incumbent replaced does not necessarily mean that his replacement gives a damn about doing anything positive for poker. It is quite likely that the new officeholder would at best do nothing to overturn UGEIA or do anything else useful for us.

It is actually a better idea to state from the very beginning that the funding raised by such tournies would specifically go to candidates that either have taken action in the past or are publicly taking action now that in some distinct fashion has a positive impact on our cause. If you examine the majority of the political actions taken by the NRA and other groups with a significant political clout, this is how they function. It avoids the first problem I stated above by restricting itself to positive reinforcement of it's political agenda. It addresses the second problem mentioned above by turning a poker lobby into a group to be actively courted by a candidate, instead of one simply to avoid pissing off.

In addition to the two problems mentioned above, any lobbying group formed by us American poker players would currently have little political clout. In other words, we would be currently to damn small for any candidates to actually fear pissing us off. On the other hand, if we grew over the course of a couple election cycles, and began to have candidates in office who were elected or re-elected in part to our efforts, we would be a group with some weight to throw around.

[addictontilt]

okay its official we need to figure out who and how to donate

[addictontilt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

It is actually a better idea to state from the very beginning that the funding raised by such tournies would specifically go to candidates that either have taken action in the past or are publicly taking action now that in some distinct fashion has a positive impact on our cause. If you examine the majority of the political actions taken by the NRA and other groups with a significant political clout, this is how they function. It avoids the first problem I stated above by restricting itself to positive reinforcement of it's political agenda. It addresses the second problem mentioned above by turning a poker lobby into a group to be actively courted by a candidate, instead of one simply to avoid pissing off.

[/ QUOTE ]

OMG /images/graemlins/cool.gif i'll run the tourneys you set up the PAC

[Sean Fraley]

One of the good reasons to form a new political action group is due to there being a cap on donation of funds to political campaigns. While I can't remember the exact numbers off of the top of my head, I believe the max is $100,000.00. In other words, if the only group is the PPA, then any given candidate could only get $100k. If there are two groups, each could donate $100k.

[Poofler]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, using this money to "punish" any given candidate is a bad idea for the following reasons:

1) Congressmen and Presidents are reticent to take any action that would provide legitimacy for any fund-raising or lobbying group that states a clear intent on taking punitive action against a candidate or office holder. This is due to the fact that such groups have a distinct possibility of being a double edged sword if the candidate or office holder must later take a course of action that said group would be against. It is normally more politic to steer clear of such groups.

2) Getting an incumbent replaced does not necessarily mean that his replacement gives a damn about doing anything positive for poker. It is quite likely that the new officeholder would at best do nothing to overturn UGEIA or do anything else useful for us.

It is actually a better idea to state from the very beginning that the funding raised by such tournies would specifically go to candidates that either have taken action in the past or are publicly taking action now that in some distinct fashion has a positive impact on our cause. If you examine the majority of the political actions taken by the NRA and other groups with a significant political clout, this is how they function. It avoids the first problem I stated above by restricting itself to positive reinforcement of it's political agenda. It addresses the second problem mentioned above by turning a poker lobby into a group to be actively courted by a candidate, instead of one simply to avoid pissing off.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I don't think we are trying to start a multi-million dollar poker lobby here. I was under the impression the PPA is supposed to be doing what you describe. As a collection of pissed off citizens, and not an organization, you very often see 'punishment' advertising. We see it every election year. I think the goal of this is to impact one election, not to create a sustaining political force. Maybe we should focus our efforts on an incumbent who voted against us, and is now opposed by someone who supports us. There is certainly more utility there. But, if this is going to be more of a low budget cut n' run to affect a race or two, the NRA type lobbying will not be effective. 'Punishment' advertising at least has the chance to sway a few votes.

[CallYNotRaise06]

this is an awesome idea.

[addictontilt]

I am a little upset that the only one that wants to donate to my charity fund is me. looking into setting up pacs now, darn it!!!!

[Sean Fraley]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, I don't think we are trying to start a multi-million dollar poker lobby here. I was under the impression the PPA is supposed to be doing what you describe. As a collection of pissed off citizens, and not an organization, you very often see 'punishment' advertising. We see it every election year. I think the goal of this is to impact one election, not to create a sustaining political force. Maybe we should focus our efforts on an incumbent who voted against us, and is now opposed by someone who supports us. There is certainly more utility there. But, if this is going to be more of a low budget cut n' run to affect a race or two, the NRA type lobbying will not be effective. 'Punishment' advertising at least has the chance to sway a few votes.

[/ QUOTE ]

If we could get a weekly tourney started, with lets say 1000 entrants per week at a $20 buy-in, and a 50/50 split between the winner and the political action fund, that amounts to $520,000 per year in funds to use. The potential for long term positive influence on the federal and state elections that would bring is in my opinion to great to not capitalize on.

[Poofler]

[ QUOTE ]
I am a little upset that the only one that wants to donate to my charity fund is me. looking into setting up pacs now, darn it!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.fec.gov/ans/answers_pac.shtml

[addictontilt]

interesting

To set up a smokefree PAC in your community or state, contact your secretary of state or your
state’s fair political practices commission for the necessary paperwork, ethics guidelines, and
statement of economic interest. Many states hold workshops and seminars explaining the most
efficient way to organize a PAC. (Note: The name of the commission may vary by state.)
Recruit a lawyer experienced in campaign finance issues for your steering committee to act as
the advisor for all the group’s activities.

[addictontilt]

There is no limit on aggregate expenditures for PACs. But, PACs that lobby pay a tax on
expenditures of $5,000 or more on this activity. For that reason, most PACs avoid lobbying.
Tax rates on lobbying vary by state, usually ranging from 10% to 30%. When developing your
PAC’s budget and strategic plan, factor in whether or not your PAC will lobby.

more

[addictontilt]

from here

http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/pac.pdf

I know its smoke free pac, but the gist is the same

[addictontilt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am a little upset that the only one that wants to donate to my charity fund is me. looking into setting up pacs now, darn it!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.fec.gov/ans/answers_pac.shtml

[/ QUOTE ]

Yours is better looking into this

[Poofler]

[ QUOTE ]
If we could get a weekly tourney started, with lets say 1000 entrants per week at a $20 buy-in, and a 50/50 split between the winner and the political action fund, that amounts to $520,000 per year in funds to use. The potential for long term positive influence on the federal and state elections that would bring is in my opinion to great to not capitalize on.

[/ QUOTE ]

If we could generate that revenue, I agree. But the goal sounds pretty lofty. If you played in the tournament every other week, you would be donating $260 to the PAC every year. Are there really enough people who 1) care, and 2) are willing to donate that kind of cash (ie: be a regular entrant)? I hope so, but I'm skeptical. No way to find out until we start I guess.

[addictontilt]

would it be better to lower the buy in to attract a wider audience?

[mttsemipro]

best way to build a prize pool and let everyone play is a rebuy tourney. is that possible?

[Poofler]

[ QUOTE ]
would it be better to lower the buy in to attract a wider audience?

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably. Firstly, this needs to be done on Stars. Stars tournys dwarf FTP. Advertising with banners will help, but we will be relying heavily on fish traffic that stumble across the tournament. NL tournys of $10 or less fairly regularly break the 1K player mark. Maybe $10 would be best?

If the poker site is receptive, they might let you set up a one-time benefit tournament. If you propose ongoing tournys, they will not let us regularly distract their traffic from paying rake. So, we might be able to have them list a weekly/twice weekly/whatever benefit tournament, if entrants pay standard tournament fees. I don't know if they will agree to this, but it would probably be the only way to sustain PAC cash. Even if all this happens, I wouldn't count on anything close to 500K a year. Realistically, I'd be surprised if we got more than 100K out of this. I'm not that well versed on PACs, but we might be overestimating the revenue here.

[addictontilt]

don't have an account on stars, can you feel them out poofler? Only issues is I know of several blogger tourneys that have moved from stars to tilt, do to they support private tourneys better

[Poofler]

[ QUOTE ]
don't have an account on stars, can you feel them out poofler? Only issues is I know of several blogger tourneys that have moved from stars to tilt, do to they support private tourneys better

[/ QUOTE ]

Closed my account and moved to FTP a couple weeks ago. Anyone else?

[NorthDakota]

someone will have to look into the current goofy law that was passed...

Make sure no one gets nailed by the feds for Collecting Money in this fashion...

Still a good idea tho...

[Sean Fraley]

[ QUOTE ]
If the poker site is receptive, they might let you set up a one-time benefit tournament. If you propose ongoing tournys, they will not let us regularly distract their traffic from paying rake. So, we might be able to have them list a weekly/twice weekly/whatever benefit tournament, if entrants pay standard tournament fees. I don't know if they will agree to this, but it would probably be the only way to sustain PAC cash. Even if all this happens, I wouldn't count on anything close to 500K a year. Realistically, I'd be surprised if we got more than 100K out of this. I'm not that well versed on PACs, but we might be overestimating the revenue here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm rather new to online poker, so I have no idea how many people would actually enter on a weekly basis. I was just making a guess based on a quick glance at the number of entrants to tournaments that were about to start on PokerStars. As for the issue of whether or not to have the tournies on FT or PS, is there any reason that you couldn't have tournaments on both?

[okietalker]

I think it is in Stars or FT's best interest to help us. After all, once the feds get the reg's in place it might just dry up the new money coming in.

That being said, I think the rebuy idea has the most potential. Heres why, we can have a 10 or 20 buy in tourny and the site wants the standard rake. But, if we have a rebuy of say 3 or 4 the site only rakes the initial buy-in (someone correct me if I am wrong since I am definately not a tourney donk myself). Just seems to me that a smaller buy-in in a rebuy tourney will help us get the most net into the coffers.

Oh, THIS IS A GREAT IDEA!!!!

[coachkf]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
would it be better to lower the buy in to attract a wider audience?

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably. Firstly, this needs to be done on Stars. Stars tournys dwarf FTP. Advertising with banners will help, but we will be relying heavily on fish traffic that stumble across the tournament. NL tournys of $10 or less fairly regularly break the 1K player mark. Maybe $10 would be best?

If the poker site is receptive, they might let you set up a one-time benefit tournament. If you propose ongoing tournys, they will not let us regularly distract their traffic from paying rake. So, we might be able to have them list a weekly/twice weekly/whatever benefit tournament, if entrants pay standard tournament fees. I don't know if they will agree to this, but it would probably be the only way to sustain PAC cash. Even if all this happens, I wouldn't count on anything close to 500K a year. Realistically, I'd be surprised if we got more than 100K out of this. I'm not that well versed on PACs, but we might be overestimating the revenue here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not approach BOTH Stars and FTP? Approach any online poker room that was receptive to private tourneys and against this jackass law. I believe that would include them all? ;]

Almost all of them run satellites to WSOP, WPT, etc., and I've seen many run charity events for things like "Katrina"... no reason at all asking them to jump on board here can hurt.

[aislephive]

Good luck with this guys, this is a very good idea. I think some of the money should go to running ads on TV, both promoting the tournament and letting people know how stupid and hypocrit the bill / it's supports are.

[addictontilt]

Update: -

1. Full tilt still on the fence, I can only check my email from home, no other update yet.

2. I do not have an account on stars, if someone does and gets info, please PM me with details, if they want to do it, etc. I'd rather be on tilt, because I can help attract fellow bloggers there.

3. I can run the tourneys, and update a blog, or my blog with this stuff, i cannot run a PAC - need help on that, PM me and lets get it organized, I'd like to be on the board and help as much as I can, but I cannot take the lead on this one.

Thats all I got, thoughts?

[addictontilt]

Update: Indy is checking into stars for tourney - lets not bomboard them - still need thoughts on the PAC

[okietalker]

I can help with a PAC. But, I can not be relied upon to be a full timer as I still have an actual day job, at least until April. But, I have enoughg free time to do quite a bit of legwork.

Someone step up and give me some directions.

[addictontilt]

okie - check your PM box

[addictontilt]

Looks like we are getting organized, many thanks for the PM's keep em coming, we have Okie and another person researching the PAC, Indie is looking into stars, and the poll seems to be supporting making our own PAC, and not my charity fund (rats!). Seriously, awesome jobs guys, keep the pms' coming and we will put this togethter, I should know more about tilt, when I get home later

[Quanah Parker]

[ QUOTE ]
Update: -

1. Full tilt still on the fence, I can only check my email from home, no other update yet.

2. I do not have an account on stars, if someone does and gets info, please PM me with details, if they want to do it, etc. I'd rather be on tilt, because I can help attract fellow bloggers there.

3. I can run the tourneys, and update a blog, or my blog with this stuff, i cannot run a PAC - need help on that, PM me and lets get it organized, I'd like to be on the board and help as much as I can, but I cannot take the lead on this one.

Thats all I got, thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

In.

Frigging great idea. It doesn't matter to me which place the money goes, I know which side your on...and that's enough for me.

I'll admit to being jaded about the potential of poker players to organize effectively. Poker is not a team sport, after all. I've been a long time believer in the fact that our gov't is corrupt and does not have the people's best interest in mind. I've always voted, and still doubt it makes a difference...

...but a poker tourney to raise money is beautiful in it's simplicity I am in awe. If we would play Party's Monster, then this is the same, and for a much better reason.

A old saying comes to mind:

If we don't all hang together,
we will all hang seperately.

[addictontilt]

i wanted to make something clear, I have an issue with taking credit for something that is not my idea - the poker tournament Idea was proposed by Arcturus in the McCaskell thread, I just started to run with it, sorry for getting the credit for your idea Arcturus, that is not what I wanted.

With that said, this is still a good idea that obviously has legs, I think the next step whil the PAC is being researched thanks Okie and others, is that we name our PAC.

Thoughts?

[NorthDakota]

Not to slow you down addictontilt... But, Have you looked into the legislation itself...

I don't mind people running into walls at full speed for the cause but I would feel bad if someone got jail time for Collecting Money in this fashion... The Offshore sites may be out of jurisdiction but the money collected could violate the stupid idiotic legislation.

An offshore site is not in the DOJ jurisdiction... But, Tournament organizers who end up collecting money on American Soil could run into trouble... Please check the Legislation!!!

Not trying to slow you down... Run on young man... It's a beautiful idea and ironic at the same time... But, Look into it please...

I like having people like you around and not in prison...

[addictontilt]

wow...thanks North Dakota... LOL, that might be something to research. If I remember my gambling 101 class - the house is liable for providing a gambling environment or establishment if it benefits (rake, etc) thats why home games are legal.

It's certainly an interesting point, and one that I would call on for legal types to wade in. The risk is going to be whomever's name is on the recieving account (not mine, as I stated before I don't have the time to run the PAC) If I understood the UIGEA correctly it was more targeted toward the transfers TO gambling websites?

real answer is IDK, but it certainly needs some research

[JOHNY CA$H]

That's a good idea. I don't think the administation counted on having to compete with T.V ads.

Mine is the second letter...

[demon102]

I like this idea a lot and I think the tournament will have the highest traffic at stars. Id rather it be on full tilt but the reason stars is so big is cuz of its tournament base. As for where the money goes and where we put our efforts into I would have vote for the PPA. They have sent big name poker players to DC to talk to lawmakers trying to get poker taxed and regulated in the states and have some pros plus the PPA's president have gone on tv right after this bill past a few times and have talked about this bill and about trying to get a carve out for poker. I am now interested in being an active member of their oganization and not just a donator, I think I am gonna look into it in the next couple of days. I have to say I am not a tourney play at all but no matter where the funds go to I will take part in this tourney. I vote for a $10 buy in with rebuys.

[CallYNotRaise06]

10$+ rebuy sounds great. ill probly spend like 200 on rebuys /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[addictontilt]

ok update _

No news - still waiting on updates from everyone, PAC is in progress, tilt and stars have been queried, figured we might as well go with a vote for the sites and see who wants what

[Cubswin]

Addict-

I am currently in discussion with several individuals from this board and elsewhere about forming a Poker Player's PAC. It is really too late this election cycle to get the PAC up and going so planning is being done for the future. I think we really need to focus and work together so we have one, focused voice going forward. Please contact me at gamblingsauce@hotmail.com . We need to get the troups in place to do battle in the future!

With regards to a poker charity poker tourny with a portion of the proceeds going to a PAC... the FEC would not like this too much. Among other things, he FEC needs to know who exactly is giving the money and needs to confirm that individuals making contributions are US citizens.

[addictontilt]

Cubs - email sent

[addictontilt]

Alright troops last update for the night...tourney funding a pac is going to be an issue, but there are workarounds /images/graemlins/smile.gif and we are working on them.

I have not heard from Full tilt yet, and indy has not said anything about stars. As soon as I know more you will.

I hope I win the first tourney, I have spent WAY too much time on this board, updating ya'll, LOL, and not making any money

Thanks for all the support and we will get something going,

[okietalker]

I see no way for us to collect funds from poker and use them in a PAC. We need lots of verification in regards to where every penny that comes into our coffers comes from.

But I do have an idea.......

Let me run this by my buddy, "The Crooked Lawyer"

[addictontilt]

Okie - You're findings pretty much confirm what Cubs and I discussed last night, due to the transparency of PAC's, the short story is that us citizens that are willing to pretty much "certify" themselves can donate to a PAC.

The way to semi-fund a PAC is this:

Set up a nonprofit org like PPA (i said LIKE PPA, lol), use the tourney proceeds to fund the non profit, which can then contribute to the operating expenses of the PAC.

The other option I can think of is this - Honor system donations, winners agree pretty much on their honor to donate half their winnings from the tourney.

That's all I got at the moment, let's discuss and see where we end up.

[BugsBunny]

Another option, since we're looking for future cycles. Land based tournaments. Instead of fund-raising lunches etc have fund raising tournaments in B&M locations. Naturally prize structure and locations would depend on state laws here, so it's more research involved - but it's a possibility. If the winner was to receive nothing except a trophy (for example) it would probably fly in almost any jurisdiction (although I'm guessing at that).

So a possible structure would be:
Buy-in for x dollars (say $500 for arguments sake). For that you get to enter the tournament, get "free" food and drink, and winner gets a trophy. In areas where it might be legal winner(s) can actually make some money. (Las Vegas night type deals such as churches and other non-profits can run, with proper permits)

Also instead of/in addition to a PAC it might also be useful to create a 527 organization (unless these become banned, which they currently are not, although there are some bills pending, currently in conference (S2349), which would effect them)

527 organizations deal with soft money, where PAC's deal with hard money. The reporting requirements for 527's are much easier, and they are able to get donations in any amount, from any source. The downside is that they can't contribute directly to a candidate, but it can spend for "issue advocacy".

No matter what we'll need a lawyer that knows his way around the applicable laws to advise down the road (sooner rather than later). The initial money raised should probably go to pay for such a lawyer. That would at least help us clarify reasonable options for the future.

[addictontilt]

Bugs - thanks for the insight - Is moveon.org and the swift boat guys, are those the 527's? if they are, then ads could be run from them, I don't think they can donate directly to candidates though - i think that happens with the PAC, this may be a two pronged effort here.... Thoughts?

[BugsBunny]

Looking at their site moveon.org seems to be a PAC that also has an associated 501(c)(4) organization (that's a type of non-profit setup).

The Swift Boat Veterans were, indeed, setup as a 527 organization.

And you are correct that 527's can't donate directly to a candidate. The operative word there being directly (see what Swift did in regards to Kerry, although the rules may have changed somewhat since then). PAC's can contribute up to 5K per election to a given candidate (wth a primary and a general election being 2 elections, for example). Individuals can contribute both to a PAC and to a candidate.

This site may be a bit helpful in explaining some basic differences.
http://www.opensecrets.org/527s/types.asp

A 2 pronged approach may, indeed, be best. With a PAC to contribute directly to candidates and a 527 to go for general issue advocacy. The 527 would be able to get basically unlimited funds, if I understand things correctly (which I may not). This includes funds from non-US entities. And 527's are tax-exempt (although contributions are not tax deductible, I don't think).

But we really need someone who understands all the ins and outs. I don't. I just know that it can get complicated, and going in the wrong direction to start would make things more difficult.

[addictontilt]

Frigging IT nazis - apparently that is a NSFW link for me, i'll look at it at home i guess.

This dovetails with the conversation/brainstorming with cubswin last night.

Here are the next steps we need to take IMO:

1. Nail down the tourney, location, site, buy in, etc. Seems like the vote is in for stars - Indy is on this one

2. find a lawyer to help us set up this 527 thing, and then get that started, initial cost estimates would be nice - I think okie is somewhat on this, let us know what you find out, okie .

3. Fund the 527 thru the touneys and general fund raising -A funding mechanism like actblue.com would be nice, however that one is too partisan for what I think we should be doing- need someone to poke around on this if possible - PM or posts would be great.

4. Once the 527 is funded - use those funds to start a PAC correctly so no one ends up in jail (thanks north dakota for reigning me in).

5. PAC donates to candidates and solicits hard money donations

6. 527 still continues to recieve funding from tourneys etc and when balancs are high enough begins ads most likely during pres election (it's gonna take awhile to get the cash to do this.)

7. So that the same mistakes are not made, there needs to be an email newsletter, or some type of daily - weeekly update for complete transparency - we are entering the game late troops - to take number one, we cannot make the same mistakes.

Thoughts?

[Poofler]

Wow, this certainly snowballed. Newspaper ad to a two-pronged political organization. I commend your effort and enthusiasm, it's a great idea, but you may not want to jump so head first here. We're not targeting this election, so we have time. There can be no PAC without sufficient revenue. We don't know how successful this will be until you actually get a tournment listed. If Stars declines to list regular tournaments, or sit n' gos, or whatever, this won't succeed. We need regular old fish seeing these and sitting down, the private tournament route won't sustain revenue without mega-buy ins. Obviously, legal poker is in their interest, but there are several reasons they might say no to us for regular tournaments. ASSUMING they say yes, I think we need to run a few to see how much action we are actually getting. From there you might get an estimate of how much $ to expect, and to know what plan of action is feasible/logical with those funds. Just a thought, as I wouldn't want everyone wasting a lot of time and resources if we get stopped by the first roadblock.

[addictontilt]

Great points Poofler, and I agree that we need to run a few to test the waters, however, at the current design of the idea, a 527 or some non profit org, has to be set up to accept the incoming revenue (not sure if that is the right word, donations?)some of the things that I outlined were definately long term strategy and maybe I should have set up two sections, short term vs. long term -

Short term goals:

1. See what site wants the tourney

2. Set up the 527 to accept the funds (better word I think)

Long term strategy.

3. Fund the 527 thru the touneys and general fund raising -A funding mechanism like actblue.com would be nice, however that one is too partisan for what I think we should be doing- need someone to poke around on this if possible - PM or posts would be great.

4. Once the 527 is funded - use those funds to start a PAC correctly so no one ends up in jail (thanks north dakota for reigning me in).

5. PAC donates to candidates and solicits hard money donations

6. 527 still continues to recieve funding from tourneys etc and when balancs are high enough begins ads most likely during pres election (it's gonna take awhile to get the cash to do this.)

7. So that the same mistakes are not made, there needs to be an email newsletter, or some type of daily - weeekly update for complete transparency - we are entering the game late troops - to take number one, we cannot make the same mistakes.

Is that a better way to look at it?

I'm open to strategy dicussions either by posts or by PM.

[Poofler]

Makes sense. ActBlue is a Federal PAC, so if you're looking for online donations to a 527 without using a PAC intermediary, I'd suggest setting up a Paypal account. Many charities accept donations that way.

[addictontilt]

Okay - this looks like what we want -- who wants to head this up?

Because 527 organizations do not make expenditures to directly advocate the election or defeat of any candidate for federal elective office they avoid regulation by the Federal Elections Commission. The line between issue advocacy and candidate advocacy is the source of heated debate and litigation.

Many 527s are run by special interest groups and used to raise unlimited amounts of money to spend on issue advocacy and voter mobilization.

Examples of 527s include Americans for Dr. Rice, Americans for Honesty on Issues, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, Texans for Truth, The Media Fund, America Coming Together, the Moveon.org Voter Fund, the Progress for America Voter Fund, and the November Fund.