Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Weekly action thread

[TheEngineer]

Welcome to the master weekly action thread. Are you still tired of having your rights trampled on by grandstanding politicians? I am. Guys, we've had some successes since UIGEA passed, including the following:

- Frist is gone, as is Leach
- Barney Frank (D-MA, Chairman of the Financial Services Committee) has publicly taken our side. He'll introduce legislation around 4/18 in favor of online gaming. I think our support may have helped this, at least a little.
- Ron Paul (R-TX) sent several of us emails (even those of us not in his district) specifically stating he'll support Barney Frank's efforts. Coincidentally, that's EXACTLY what we asked him for in one of our weekly action items.
- Shelley Berkley (D-NV) and Jon Porter (R-NV) have proposed legislation to study legalized and regulated online gambling. Again, one of our action items hit the mark. While they likely would have done this anyway, our support gave them some additional ammo to proceed forward.
- The WTO ruled in favor of Antigua over the U.S. in the issue of the U.S. banning online gaming.
- Banks are bitching about being the UIGEA's enforcers.
- Al D'Amato joined PPA (great news overall, I think...folks concerned about the focus of PPA should join for free and tell PPA that they wish PPA to fight for all online gaming).

Seems this is the time to fight. After all, the UIGEA-driven regs haven't been put in place yet, stuff is moving in our favor, and we're being heard. Given all this, I'd like to ask everyone here to participate each week. Thanks.

-----------------------------------

Prior Action Plan threads:

Fight UIGEA!! -- Action plan for week of 2/26 (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=9300584&an=0&page=2#Post 9300584)
Fight UIGEA!! -- Action plan for week of 3/5 (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=9397718&an=0&page=2#Post 9397718)
Fight UIGEA!! -- Action plan for week of 3/12 (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=9508311&an=0&page=2#Post 9508311)
Fight UIGEA!! -- Action plan for week of 3/19 (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=9600378&an=0&page=0#Post 9600378)
Fight UIGEA!! -- Action plan for week of 3/26 (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=9697336&an=0&page=0#Post 9697336)
Fight UIGEA!! -- Action plan for week of 4/2 (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/5495584/page/1#Post5495584)
Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 4/9 & 4/16 (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=9880993&an=0&page=0#Post 9880993)

[TheEngineer]

Barney Frank says he needs to hear more from us ( Barney Frank article (http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSL1242054520070412?src=041207_1303_FEATURES_int ernet)), so let's continue last week's action plan.

-------------------------------------------------


As Barney Frank will be submitting legislation in the next two weeks to the House Financial Services Committee, let's focus there this week. Even if you've written to these folks some time ago, please do so again, this time simply requesting that they cosponsor Frank's legislation. We asked Ron Paul specifically for that and he responded affirmatively. Let's get more congressmen to do the same.

<font color="brown">Primary Action:
- contact the majority and minority offices of the House Financial Services Committee and the Financial Institutions Subcommittee (one phone call AND one snail mail letter...see the next post for contact info).
- send thank-you letters to Barney Frank and Ron Paul for their support. They're going out on a limb not for constituents, lobbyists, or donors, but solely because they believe in freedom....our freedom. They get nothing at all except for our gratitude. Let's give it to them. The letters will go a long way in showing that Americans want this repealed.
- if you haven't yet, contact your representative and ask him/her to cosponsor Frank's repeal efforts

The letters don't have to be fancy. All they have to do is ask the members to support Frank's legislation. This is easy.

Additional Actions:
- ask your poker site to contribute to PPA like FullTilt recently did.
- write a short letter to your local newspaper about your desire for the U.S. to give us freedoms others, including even Russians and Eastern Europeans, take for granted.
- if feeling ambitious, print out letters for your friends to sign and mail</font>

Please see Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 4/9 &amp; 4/16 (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=9880993&amp;an=0&amp;page=0#Post 9880993) for contact info.

Thanks to everyone who participates. I'm looking forward this week's fight for our rights. Please reply to this thread if you participate. Thanks!

[Sniper]

/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[TheEngineer]

Reply from my congressman:

April 9, 2007

Thank you for your continued correspondence about legislation related to Internet gambling that passed in the 109th Congress. I appreciate the opportunity to respond.

As you know, H.R. 4411, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act signed into law as part of a larger bill package on October 13, 2006. The internet gambling provisions will prevent the use of credit cards and fund transfers for unlawful internet gambling and block financial transactions associated with illegal gambling.

While many Americans have the misimpression that internet gambling is legal because of the easy access to online casinos based offshore, it is not. The new provisions do not change the law, but rather provide new enforcement tools to help law enforcement and financial services companies crack down on this already illegal activity, This legislation received endorsements from the religious community, family groups, financial services groups and all the major professional sports organizations.

American dollars account for half of the $12 billion bet worldwide on the internet. FBI and Justice Department experts have warned that internet gambling websites are vulnerable to being used for money, laundering, drug trafficking and terrorist financing, As a member of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities, my colleagues and I have taken a particular interest in this issue. I have serious concerns about terrorist financing and the possibility of terrorists laundering money through unregulated, offshore online casinos.

House Financial services Chairman Barney Frank [MA-04] has expressed an interest in reprieving this issue. As a member of the Committee, I will take your support for a repeal of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act into consideration should the issue come up again.

Thanks again for sharing your thoughts on internet gambling. Also, you can sign up for the _____ District’s E-Mail Newsletter by visiting my website at http://__________.house.gov/emailsignup.aspx.

Sincerely,

xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx

-----------------------------------------------------

My reply:

April 13, 2007
The Honorable **** ****
United States House of Representatives
**** **** House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Congressman ****:

I thank you for your April 9th letter where you responded to my request that you work to restore the right of Americans to play Internet poker and other casino games in the privacy of their own homes by cosponsoring Barney Frank’s upcoming Internet gambling legislation. I’d like to share with you my humble opinion on the matter.

By way of introduction, I’m an engineer with one of the area’s larger employers. After a long day at work, I enjoy playing a little poker on occasion, and I prefer playing in the comfort of my own home with my wife at my side to playing in a smoky casino in [the neighboring state]. I happen to be skilled enough at the game to win significantly more than I lose, but that’s not really the point. Poker is an enjoyable game of skill, much as golfing or fishing. In fact, poker is one of the great American pastimes. Presidents, generals, Supreme Court Justices, members of Congress and average Americans have enjoyed the game for more than 150 years. It’s an honorable game.

As a conservative Republican, I share some of your concerns about online gambling. However, it’s not obvious that federal laws restricting our freedoms and liberties will solve these issues. After all, online gambling will continue internationally. In fact, the WTO has recently ruled the U.S. violated international trade law by prosecuting online gambling cases. As such, I urge you to support legalization with regulation. A regulated Internet gambling environment will facilitate age verification and collection of federal and state taxes. It will also reduce any potential vulnerability of gambling websites to being used for money laundering, drug trafficking, or terrorist financing. With regulation, potential problems can be controlled without taking freedoms from Americans. After all, Russians and Eastern Europeans can gamble online; it seems the U.S. should trust its citizens at least as much as Russia trusts theirs, right?

You mentioned the endorsements H.R. 4411 received from the religious community, family groups, financial services groups and all major professional sports organizations. I hope you’ll consider the fact that these groups do not necessarily represent the majority of voters in our district (or even the majority of Republicans in our district). As for religious and family groups, there is no prohibition against gambling in the Bible. As a Christian, I personally find it offensive that so many so-called religious folks are willing to give away our freedoms, especially in pursuit of a goal not even defined in the Bible. As for financial services groups, some credit card issuers may like UIGEA (due only to the risk of losing players refusing to pay up), but I don’t believe banks wish to be the enforcers of UIGEA. As a result, I think you’ll find financial services groups to be net losers as a result of UIGEA. Finally, I believe the concerns of the major professional sports organizations relate only to sports betting. A regulated online gaming environment can address that concern.

Online gaming will continue to exist with or without the participation of the United States. We’re losing our opportunity to control the games via regulation as well as the opportunities for U.S. companies to operate the games both domestically and internationally. This is costing America jobs and tax revenue.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[TheEngineer]

Please post below once you've contacted (phone or letter) either the House Financial Services Committee or the Financial Institutions Subcommittee (either Majority or Minority). Thanks.

I think we need eighty of us here (plus 20 at BJ21.com) particpating to claim the synergy of a group effort. Fewer than that and there's probably little reason to try to coordinate our efforts. We can drop to biweekly if that would help. Many here have posted with support, so I think we may be close.

Anyway, let's stick to this action plan until there are eighty affirmative replies to this post. Thanks for your support.

[TheEngineer]

bump....who's in?

[va1halla]

Nice letter, keep up the good work.
Hope you don't mind if I use it.

[Moneyline]

[ QUOTE ]
Primary Action:
- contact the majority and minority offices of the House Financial Services Committee and the Financial Institutions Subcommittee

[/ QUOTE ]

Who are these Congressmen?

Also, how does one get in contact with Congressman Frank's office. I went to his website to send him an email, but it only provides a means for people who live in his district to contact him.

[Zele]

Called Frank and Gutierrez.

Moneyline, call instead. They seldom ask where you are from.

[TheEngineer]

Contact Info:

House Committee on Financial Services (http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newcommittee.cgi?)
Majority (Democrats)
Rayburn House Office Building 2129
Washington, D.C. 20515
202-225-4247

Minority (Republicans)
Rayburn House Office Building B-371A
Washington, D.C. 20515
202-225-7502

----------------------------------------------

House Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit (http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newcommittee.cgi?)
Majority (Democrats)
Rayburn House Office Building 2129D
Washington, D.C. 20515
202-225-4247 (same as parent committee)

Minority (Republicans)
Rayburn House Office Building B-301C
Washington, D.C. 20515
202-225-2258

---------------------------------------------

Congressman Barney Frank
2252 Rayburn H.O.B.
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5931


Congressman Ron Paul
203 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone Number: (202) 225-2831

[TheEngineer]

Some discussion points:

- America is a free country. We should be as free to play poker at home as British, Russians, and Eastern Europeans are. Moralists shouldn't be able to force their ideas of morality on others through force of law in a free country.

- This bill forces U.S. banks to act as the moral police of America; it shifts the costs to them as well.

- Stockholders in banks should complain about being forced to foot the bill for this.

- American companies are at risk of being completely shut out of the Internet gaming market. Existing Internet companies have already developed business models that don't rely on American players. America is losing a lot of potential revenue.

- The U.S. should desire a regulated market. That way, the U.S. can set and enforce the age limits. Also, money-laundering issues can be monitored.

- Compliance with the latest WTO ruling

[TheEngineer]

My letter to the subcommittee Republicans (my letter to the full committee is virtually identical):

April 8, 2007

House Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit
Minority (Republicans)
Rayburn House Office Building B-301C
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Representatives:

I'm writing to ask you to restore the right of Americans to play Internet poker and other casino games in the privacy of their own homes. The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) is big government nanny-statism at its worst. I believe the outrage of my fellow poker players contributed strongly to the Democratic win in the last election. It's not just me; many Republican core supporters do not support the big government nanny state. That's why the Contract with America was so enthusiastically received by the Republican rank-and-file. In the interests of freedom and bipartisanship, I ask the committee to support Chairman Barney Frank’s upcoming Internet gambling legislation.

The impact of UIGEA includes the following:

· This law forces American banks to function as the moral police of America. It shifts the costs and other burdens of enforcement to them as well.

· As a result of this law, Americans are now less free than even Russians and Eastern Europeans.

· The Department of Justice has elected to act outside the scope of existing federal law. The recent heavy-handed DOJ arrests of the founders of Neteller and the seizure of pending EFT transfers from Neteller to American citizen are outrages. It seems the DOJ has a vendetta against U.S. online gamblers who broke no federal laws by playing. In other words, although they are part of the executive branch, they’ve elected to create their own laws – laws that have not been introduced through your subcommittee or approved by Congress.

· The House Subcommittee on Financial Institutions should desire a regulated market. That way, the U.S. can set and enforce age limits while establishing procedures for money-laundering monitoring.

· The U.S. should comply with the recent WTO ruling that concluded that our restrictions on Internet gambling constitute an unfair restraint of trade.
Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TE

[Sniper]

WSEX GM post on how you can help, on behalf of the Antigua Online Gaming Association (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Number=10028289)

[Sniper]

Your action plan should include picking one thread and sticking with it... /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Your action plan should include picking one thread and sticking with it... /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm trying. I think too many people view these as "flat" and cannot see where each week's plan is.

[TheEngineer]

<font color="brown">Primary Actions:

1. Let's join the WSEX action plan this week and next. It's good that the sites are fighting back, so we should support that, I think. When writing these letters, I think we'll want to be careful to tailor them to the specific representatives and senators, of course.

In addition to contacting individual members of Congress, let's contact both the majority and the minority offices of the House Subcommittee on Trade (http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newcommittee.cgi?site=ctc&amp;lang=&amp;commcode=hways_tra de). </font>

[ QUOTE ]
This email is being sent to all World Sports Exchange customers as a courtesy to the Antigua Online Gaming Association.

Greetings Players,

As you may be aware, online gaming has been under attack by the United States for the last decade. The Government of Antigua and Barbuda has successfully challenged the malicious prosecution of Antiguan operators in the World Trade Organization. The WTO has found that the US's application of its laws against Antiguan entities is protectionist and in violation of the General Agreement on Trade in Services.

Now that Antigua has won the legal battle, it can use political support in Congress. Here's how you can help. Please email and phone your Representative in the House of Representatives and your two Senators. Remind them that the United States needs to abide by the decision in the Antigua-Gaming matter if they expect other countries to comply with WTO decisions in favor of the United States.

Here is a link to a letter to the USTR from Representative Ros-Lehtinen, the ranking Republican on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs:

http://www.antiguawto.com/LettertoUSTR.pdf

Rep. Ros-Lehtinen eloquently noted, "...our failure to resolve this dispute may harm our credibility as we seek to press countries like China regarding their violations on a range of issues, including intellectual property protection, subsidies, and currency manipulation." She further warned, "In the event the United States fails to reach a satisfactory resolution of the Antigua dispute, it could provide China with an argument to ignore a WTO decision favorable to the United States."

Please send the link above to your Representative and Senators. Ask them to send similar letters to the United States Trade Representative. Let them know you vote, you pay taxes, and you think the United States should comply with the decision in the Antigua-Gaming matter.

To contact your Representative and two Senators, follow the links below or call the Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and give them your zip code. Make sure you call three times.

http://www.house.gov
http://www.senate.gov


We will continue to fight the legal battle, please help us with the political fight.

Thank you,

Antigua Online Gaming Association
www.aoga.ag (http://www.aoga.ag)

[/ QUOTE ][b]

<font color="brown">2. Sen. John Kyl grilled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales at last week's hearings not about the issue with the fired attorneys general, but about enforcement of UIGEA! He seems to think his anti-gambling platform enjoys 100% support.

Sen. Kyl bragging about UIGEA on his website, calling it the 'Kyl Internet Gambling Ban'! (http://kyl.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=264269)

Let's contact Sen. Kyl and Atty Gen Alberto Gonzales (if he still has a job next week) and tell them we support freedom to choose to gamble online. Kyl will not change his mind, but he needs to know there's a political price to pay for his positions. I'm going to write to him to criticize his big-government solution to the "problem" of people deciding on their own to play poker online and to inform him that I'll contribute to his next opponent (yeah, I know that's five years away, but many of us are not AZ residents and we need something actionable). Another benefit to writing this one letter is that we'll have templates for future letters to anti-freedom members of Congress.

Thanks everyone! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[TheEngineer]

This one should be starightforward, as we had a similar action just a few weeks ago. Looks like we can just tweak those letters up a bit and send them out.

[Maulik]

TheEngineer,

I think you should also start a blog even if you copy&amp;paste what you're posting here. You'll allow others a chance through google to help support our cause.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
TheEngineer,

I think you should also start a blog even if you copy&amp;paste what you're posting here. You'll allow others a chance through google to help support our cause.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks, but I think I'll need a lot more participation here before expanding the effort. After all, if WE don't care, why will the random googler?

If Barney Frank's new bill gets folks here motivated I'll consider a blog. I have a site available if we get that far.

I feel pretty good about folks jumping in to support Frank's bill. Let's kick some ass!!!

[TheEngineer]

Everyone: PLEASE contact your representative and senators THIS WEEK and ask him/her to support Frank's upcoming legalization legislation (Frank plans bill to undo Net-gambling ban (http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/story.aspx?guid=%7B4AF5B08B%2D7234%2D4B84%2D889D%2 D7BB98F36B13F%7D&amp;dist=rss)).

The bill should have a number the morning of 4/26. Thanks!!! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[TheEngineer]

My letter to Kyl:


April 25, 2007

Senator Jon Kyl
United States Senate
730 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Kyl:

I’ve been following your efforts to restrict the ability of Americans to choose play Internet poker and other casino games in the privacy of their own homes. I’d like to share with you my humble opinion on the matter.

By way of introduction, I’m an engineer with one of the nation’s larger companies. After a long day at work, I enjoy playing a little poker on occasion, and I prefer playing in the comfort of my own home with my wife at my side to playing in a smoky casino. I happen to be skilled enough at the game to win significantly more than I lose, but that’s not really the point. Poker is an enjoyable game of skill, much as golfing or fishing. In fact, poker is one of the great American pastimes. Presidents, generals, Supreme Court Justices, members of Congress and average Americans have enjoyed the game for more than 150 years. It’s an honorable game.

As a fellow Republican, I share some of the concerns you’ve mentioned about online gambling. However, it’s not obvious that federal laws restricting our freedoms and liberties will solve these issues. After all, online gambling will continue internationally. In fact, the WTO has recently ruled the U.S. violated international trade law by prosecuting online gambling cases. As such, I urge you to support legalization with regulation, rather than prohibition. A regulated Internet gambling environment will facilitate age verification and collection of federal and state taxes. It will also reduce any potential vulnerability of gambling websites to being used for money laundering, drug trafficking, or terrorist financing. With regulation, potential problems can be controlled without taking freedoms from Americans. After all, Russians and Eastern Europeans can gamble online; it seems the U.S. should trust its citizens at least as much as Russia trusts theirs, right?

On the topic of freedom, it seems the Republican Party has chosen to be the party of social conservatism only. The party now supports big, powerful government as long as it promotes the party’s social agenda. As such, it appears limited-government Goldwater/Reagan Republicans like myself are no longer welcome in the party. However, without us, it’s hard to see how the Republican Party can win in the West (or anywhere but the South). Do you like being in the minority, as you are today? What about when a libertarian-conservative Democrat runs against you on a platform of a smaller federal government? Ironic (at least at one time), but very foreseeable now. As an aside, when that does happen, the way things stand now he’ll likely receive a lot of donations from poker players around the nation. Also, many younger voters will wake up and turn out like they did against Rep. Leach.

Proponents of online gambling prohibition often mention endorsements UGIEA received from some in the religious community, some family groups, some financial services groups and some professional sports organizations. I hope you’ll consider the fact that these groups do not necessarily represent the majority of voters in our nation (or even the majority of Arizona Republicans). As for religious and family groups, there is no prohibition against gambling in the Bible. As a Christian, I personally find it offensive that so many so-called religious folks are willing to give away our freedoms, especially in pursuit of a goal not even defined in the Bible. As for financial services groups, some credit card issuers may like UIGEA (due only to the risk of losing players refusing to pay up), but I don’t believe banks wish to be the enforcers of UIGEA. As a result, I think you’ll find financial services groups to be net losers as a result of UIGEA. Finally, I believe the concerns of the major professional sports organizations relate only to sports betting. A regulated online gaming environment can address that concern.

Online gaming will continue to exist with or without the participation of the United States. We’re losing our opportunity to control the games via regulation as well as the opportunities for U.S. companies to operate the games both domestically and internationally. This is costing America jobs and tax revenue.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[KotOD]

This seems more relevant now than ever...

http://www.actblue.com/page/poker#604

[KotOD]

[ QUOTE ]
This seems more relevant now than ever...

http://www.actblue.com/page/poker#604

[/ QUOTE ]

We should make it a goal of the fight to kick up 10k for the Chairman's campaign.

[nextgenneo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This seems more relevant now than ever...

http://www.actblue.com/page/poker#604

[/ QUOTE ]

We should make it a goal of the fight to kick up 10k for the Chairman's campaign.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would donate thru this but it looks like a possible scam

[TheEngineer]

"I would donate thru this but it looks like a possible scam "

You can always donate directly. The added benefit to that is that you'll know Rep. Frank knows why he got the money.

[KotOD]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This seems more relevant now than ever...

http://www.actblue.com/page/poker#604

[/ QUOTE ]

We should make it a goal of the fight to kick up 10k for the Chairman's campaign.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would donate thru this but it looks like a possible scam

[/ QUOTE ]

Go back through the actblue website -- it's not a scam.

[Maulik]

All,

Progress has been made:
Press Release
For Immediate Release: April 26, 2007

Frank Introduces Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/financialsvcs_dem/press042607.shtml

[nerdking]

Just got off the phone with Blumenauer's office and Frank's office. Accidentally referred to Kyl as Rep and not Sen. I be dmb. In other news:

for those of you living on Oregon, here are the names and numbers of your State Representatives:

01 David Wu (West Portland) (202) 225-0855
02 Greg Walden (202) 225-6730
03 Earl Blumenauer (East Portland) (202) 225-4811
04 Peter A. DeFazio (202) 225-6416
05 Darlene Hooley (202) 225-5711

call your representative, tell them you vote (because I hope you do &gt;:( ) and let's get this bill passed.

ps. if you do nothing else, at least call Rep. Frank's office at (202) 225-5931 and THANK HIM FOR PUTTING IN THE EFFORT FOR US.

[Colm]

i think the master weekly action thread should be stickied at the top of every forum. i am sure most people aren't hitting this forum.

[KotOD]

[ QUOTE ]
i think the master weekly action thread should be stickied at the top of every forum. i am sure most people aren't hitting this forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. I know that HSNL has a sticky now, PM bomb the rest of the mods!

[Kodfish]

Thanks so much for all of your efforts TheEngineer. We need people like you to help focus us at times.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks so much for all of your efforts TheEngineer. We need people like you to help focus us at times.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks! It's great we all fought together. We'll have a lot more fighting to go, of course. I hope everyone will join in now that there's a bill out there.

[TheEngineer]

My letter to the Daily Show:

To: thedailyshow@comedycentral.com
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 7:31 PM
Subject: Rep. Barney Frank would be a great guest!


Dear Sir/Madam,

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) would be an outstanding guest on The Daily Show under any circumstance, but he'd be awesome now that he's introduced a new bill (HR 2406) to allow online gambling. It would be entertaining television to listen to Jon and Rep. Frank discuss the self-righteousness of the people who wish to ban online gambling.

Thanks for your consideration.

TheEngineer

[Kodfish]

[ QUOTE ]
My letter to the Daily Show:

To: thedailyshow@comedycentral.com
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 7:31 PM
Subject: Rep. Barney Frank would be a great guest!


Dear Sir/Madam,

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) would be an outstanding guest on The Daily Show under any circumstance, but he'd be awesome now that he's introduced a new bill (HR 2406) to allow online gambling. It would be entertaining television to listen to Jon and Rep. Frank discuss the self-righteousness of the people who wish to ban online gambling.

Thanks for your consideration.

TheEngineer

[/ QUOTE ]

That's an awesome idea, engineer...I would love to see that and wouldn't be suprised to see that happen. Frank loves tv time and Stewart would be all over this self righteous crap.

Kodfish

[DrewOnTilt]

I just stole your idea and emailed David Letterman's generic email box:

[ QUOTE ]

Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 23:52:39 -0500 (CDT)
From: Me!
Subject: guest suggestion for David Letterman - Barney Frank
To: cbsmailbag@aol.com

Hello Dave and company,

First off, great show! I can't get enough of it. After all these years, it is still funny and entertaining.

I would like to suggest that an invitation be extended to Barney Frank to appear on your show. Though I don't always agree with Mr. Frank, I have found him to have a razor-sharp wit, and think that he can be very entertaining. He has recently introduced a bill to allow Internet gambling, which has stirred up some debate. The man is not afraid to speak his mind, and I think that giving him some face time with David Letterman would provide some great entertainment.


[/ QUOTE ]

[Colm]

larry king would be a great forum as well.

[Colm]

message sent to larry king.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I just stole your idea and emailed David Letterman's generic email box:

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent! I sent one to Colbert as well.

I also sent copies of Frank's press release to many media outlets, as it seemed to not get much coverage yesterday. I sent the version that explained the controls on underage gambling and all that, of course.

[TheEngineer]

I guess everyone knows what we need to do now. Write, call, email, repeat. Push for support of HR 2046. Write to our friends, uncommitted politicians, and our enemies. Write to newspapers, television shows, and any other media. Thanks.

This is our chance to get what should already be ours. Time to fight for what's right! Take no prisoners!! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[TheEngineer]

Well, what an excellent week. Barney Frank introduced HR 2046: To amend title 31, United States Code, to provide for the licensing of Internet gambling facilities by the Director of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and for other purposes (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-2046) . And, it picked up 11 cosponsors right off the bat!

It seems there's a lot we can be doing right now. And, we really need to do it RIGHT NOW, before these politicians make up their minds. So, let's do the following:
<font color="brown">
1. Contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail. Ask them to support and cosponsor HR 2046. Maybe comment on that fact that this bill protects from underage gambling and money laundering while protecting the rights of adults. Also, mention that you just want to play poker (if that's the case). Even though this wouldn't make a difference in a perfect world, non-gamblers can understand poker over online roulette. Also, this way it's easy to end the call with something like "come on...all I want to do is play a little poker".

2. Contact the majority and minority offices of the House Financial Services Committee (that's where the bill is now) and the Financial Institutions Subcommittee (one phone call AND one snail mail letter...see the next post for contact info).

3. Contact (write and call) the majority and the minority offices of the House Subcommittee on Trade. Remind them of our WTO obligations relative to our loss to Antigua in the recent online gambling case. This will act as a moral lever, as we have treaty obligations with the WTO. The Frank bill doesn't meet the requirements of the WTO, but the final resolution of the WTO case may coincide with the Frank bill being in some state of approval, making it easier to loosen up either in the Senate or in conference. Without a win, there's a risk of the U.S. complying by eliminating all online betting (even the precious f'ing horses /images/graemlins/crazy.gif).

4. Let's thank the 11 (to date) cosponsors of HR 2046. This can be via a short phone call, a handwritten letter, or a donation if you feel compelled (I'll give a little something this week). They are:

Rep. Gary Ackerman [D-NY]
Rep. Shelley Berkley [D-NV]
Rep. Michael Capuano [D-MA]
Rep. Julia Carson [D-IN]
Rep. William Clay [D-MO]
Rep. Luis Gutiérrez [D-IL]
Rep. Steve Israel [D-NY]
Rep. Peter King [R-NY]
Rep. Ronald Paul [R-TX]
Rep. Melvin Watt [D-NC]
Rep. Robert Wexler [D-FL]

We've focused on almost half of the 12 (counting Frank), so it looks like we've been doing the right things so far, given our size.

5. Write to your local newspaper, media outlets, television shows, websites, and any other media you can think of to promote our cause. </font>

Thanks everyone!

[TheEngineer]

Contact Info:

House Subcommittee on Trade
Majority (Democrats)
Longworth House Office Building 1104
Washington, D.C. 20515
202-225-6649

Minority (Republicans)
Longworth House Office Building 1106
Washington, D.C. 20515
202-225-6649 (yes, same number for both)

--------------------------------------------

House Committee on Financial Services
Majority (Democrats)
Rayburn House Office Building 2129
Washington, D.C. 20515
202-225-4247

Minority (Republicans)
Rayburn House Office Building B-371A
Washington, D.C. 20515
202-225-7502

----------------------------------------------

House Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit
Majority (Democrats)
Rayburn House Office Building 2129D
Washington, D.C. 20515
202-225-4247 (same as parent committee)

Minority (Republicans)
Rayburn House Office Building B-301C
Washington, D.C. 20515
202-225-2258

---------------------------------------------

Congressman Barney Frank
2252 Rayburn H.O.B.
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5931


Congressman Ron Paul
203 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone Number: (202) 225-2831

Other members:

www.house.gov (http://www.house.gov)
www.senate.gov (http://www.senate.gov)

[Sniper]

Eng, maybe we can start a scorecard for who is and is not supporting this, based on feedback received?

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Eng, maybe we can start a scorecard for who is and is not supporting this, based on feedback received?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure. In the House, we know of 12 (Frank + the 11 cosponsors of HR 2046) for sure. We can add to that the 77 opponents of HR 4411 who are still in the House who haven't yet sponsored/cosponsored, for 89 (out of 435). They are:

Abercrombie, Neil [D] HI-1
Ackerman, Gary [D] NY-5
Andrews, Robert [D] NJ-1
Baca, Joe [D] CA-43
Baldwin, Tammy [D] WI-2
Becerra, Xavier [D] CA-31
Berkley, Shelley [D] NV-1
Berman, Howard [D] CA-28
Brown, Corrine [D] FL-3
Capps, Lois [D] CA-23
Capuano, Michael [D] MA-8
Carnahan, Russ [D] MO-3
Carson, Julia [D] IN-7
Clay, William [D] MO-1
Conyers, John [D] MI-14
Cummings, Elijah [D] MD-7
Davis, Danny [D] IL-7
Delahunt, William [D] MA-10
Dingell, John [D] MI-15
Dreier, David [R] CA-26
Engel, Eliot [D] NY-17
Eshoo, Anna [D] CA-14
Farr, Sam [D] CA-17
Filner, Bob [D] CA-51
Flake, Jeff [R] AZ-6
Fossella, Vito [R] NY-13
Frank, Barney [D] MA-4
Gonzalez, Charles [D] TX-20
Grijalva, Raul [D] AZ-7
Gutiérrez, Luis [D-IL]
Hastings, Alcee [D] FL-23
Hastings, Doc [R] WA-4
Holden, Tim [D] PA-17
Honda, Michael [D] CA-15
Hoyer, Steny [D] MD-5
Inslee, Jay [D] WA-1
Israel, Steve [D] NY-2
Jackson, Jesse [D] IL-2
Jackson-Lee, Sheila [D] TX-18
Johnson, Eddie [D] TX-30
Kennedy, Patrick [D] RI-1
Kildee, Dale [D] MI-5
Kilpatrick, Carolyn [D] MI-13
Kind, Ronald [D] WI-3
King, Peter [R-NY]
Kucinich, Dennis [D] OH-10
Lee, Barbara [D] CA-9
LoBiondo, Frank [R] NJ-2
Lofgren, Zoe [D] CA-16
Mack, Connie [R] FL-14
Markey, Edward [D] MA-7
Matsui, Doris [D] CA-5
McDermott, James [D] WA-7
McGovern, James [D] MA-3
Miller, George [D] CA-7
Nadler, Jerrold [D] NY-8
Napolitano, Grace [D] CA-38
Neal, Richard [D] MA-2
Olver, John [D] MA-1
Pastor, Edward [D] AZ-4
Paul, Ronald [R] TX-14
Poe, Ted [R] TX-2
Porter, Jon [R] NV-3
Rangel, Charles [D] NY-15
Reyes, Silvestre [D] TX-16
Rohrabacher, Dana [R] CA-46
Rothman, Steven [D] NJ-9
Roybal-Allard, Lucille [D] CA-34
Rush, Bobby [D] IL-1
Sanchez, Linda [D] CA-39
Sanchez, Loretta [D] CA-47
Schakowsky, Janice [D] IL-9
Schiff, Adam [D] CA-29
Scott, Robert [D] VA-3
Serrano, José [D] NY-16
Solis, Hilda [D] CA-32
Stark, Fortney [D] CA-13
Tauscher, Ellen [D] CA-10
Tiberi, Patrick [R] OH-12
Tierney, John [D] MA-6
Towns, Edolphus [D] NY-10
Udall, Tom [D] NM-3
Velazquez, Nydia [D] NY-12
Watson, Diane [D] CA-33
Watt, Melvin [D] NC-12
Weiner, Anthony [D] NY-9
Wexler, Robert [D-FL]
Woolsey, Lynn [D] CA-6
Young, Donald [R] AK-0

It might be a good idea for people in these districts to write to represenatives who voted against HR 4411 but aren't yet cosponsoring HR 2046 and ask them to do so.

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
It might be a good idea for people in these districts to write to represenatives who voted against HR 4411 but aren't yet cosponsoring HR 2046 and ask them to do so.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a good idea... people should also post up here, responses they receive from their contact...

[TheEngineer]

One very positive outcome of all this is positive media. The "poker boom" was getting positive coverage, but it seemed online gambers were treated as degenerates by the mainstream press, at least IMHO.

Here are a few of the articles:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2124017,00.asp
http://tech.msn.com/news/articlecnet.aspx?cp-documentid=4797708
www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2007/04/12/frank_attacks_online_gambling_ban/ (http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2007/04/12/frank_attacks_online_gambling_ban/)
http://business.bostonherald.com/businessNews/view.bg?articleid=197093&amp;srvc=biz
http://business.bostonherald.com/businessNews/view.bg?articleid=196976
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18338166/
http://money.cnn.com/2007/04/26/news/economy/bc.congress.gambling.update.reut/index.htm
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/27/frank_legislation_uigea_repeal/
http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2007/04/12/frank_attacks_online_gambling_ban/
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&amp;refer=home&amp;sid=aQ3mofEJv4z8
http://news.yahoo.com/s/cmp/20070428/tc_cmp/199202213
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/25/barney_frank_uigea_repeal/
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,131271-c,internetnetworking/article.html
http://www.daylife.com/story/09eTeqn9s7cKr/news/all/1/redundant?lead_article=101000000020611018
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2007-04-27-internet-gambling-bill_N.htm
http://news.findlaw.com/andrews/bt/sel/20070501/20070501_legislations.html
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2007/04/30/barney-frank-the-occasional-libertarian/

[Emperor]

I found a website where you can send messages to newspaper editors in your state (and others if you wish), and your representatives.

Take Action (http://action.citizen.org/pickMedia.jsp?letter_KEY=199)

I wrote every newspaper listed in Ohio, and my reps (again).

[TheEngineer]

Rep. Spencer Bachus, the top Republican on the House Financial Committee, is an anti-Internet gambling zealot on the order of Kyl or Goodlatte. Here's a quote"

[ QUOTE ]
"There have been studies by Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania, McGill University in Canada, American Psychiatric Association -- all of these say the younger someone starts gambling, the more likelihood that they become a compulsive gambler. Addicted to gambling, just like addicted to drugs. So there is a correlation between drug dealers and gambling sites." - October 2006, CNN

[/ QUOTE ]

While I don't even hope to change this guy's mind, I do wish him to know that we're no longer his punching bags. He can no longer restrict our freedoms and speak against us with no downside.

Maybe his past few months in the minority have helped clarify things in his mind. Anyway, here's my letter to him:

May 3, 2007

The Honorable Spencer Bachus
2246 Rayburn Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Congressman Bachus:

I’ve been following your efforts to restrict the ability of Americans to choose play Internet poker and other casino games in the privacy of their own homes. I’d like to share with you my humble opinion on the matter.

By way of introduction, I’m an engineer with one of the nation’s larger companies. After a long day at work, I enjoy playing a little poker on occasion, and I prefer playing in the comfort of my own home with my wife at my side to playing in a smoky casino. I happen to be skilled enough at the game to win significantly more than I lose, but that’s not really the point. Poker is an enjoyable game of skill, much as golfing or fishing. In fact, poker is one of the great American pastimes. Presidents, generals, Supreme Court Justices, members of Congress and average Americans have enjoyed the game for more than 150 years. It’s an honorable game.

As a fellow Republican, I share some of the concerns you’ve mentioned about online gambling. However, it’s not obvious that federal laws restricting our freedoms and liberties will solve these issues. After all, online gambling will continue internationally. In fact, the WTO has recently ruled the U.S. violated international trade law by prosecuting online gambling cases. As such, I urge you to support the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007 (HR 2046).

HR 2046 provides real regulation, rather than a porous prohibition. A regulated Internet gambling environment will facilitate age verification and collection of federal and state taxes. It will also reduce any potential vulnerability of gambling websites to being used for money laundering, drug trafficking, or terrorist financing. With regulation, potential problems can be controlled without taking freedoms from Americans. After all, Russians and Eastern Europeans can gamble online; it seems the U.S. should trust its citizens at least as much as Russia trusts theirs, right?

On the topic of freedom, it seems the Republican Party has chosen to be the party of social conservatism only. The party now supports big government as long as it promotes the party’s social agenda. As such, it appears limited-government Goldwater/Reagan Republicans like myself are no longer welcome in the party. However, without us, it’s hard to see how the Republican Party can be a majority party again. Do you like being in the minority, as you are today? What happens when a libertarian-conservative Democrat runs against you on a platform of a smaller federal government? Ironic (at least at one time), but very foreseeable now. As an aside, when that does happen, the way things stand now he’ll likely receive a lot of donations from poker players around the nation. Also, many younger voters will wake up and turn out like they did against Rep. Leach.

Proponents of online gambling prohibition often mention endorsements UIGEA received from some in the religious community, some family groups, some financial services groups and some professional sports organizations. I hope you’ll consider the fact that these groups do not necessarily represent the majority of voters in our nation (or even the majority of Alabama Republicans). As for religious and family groups, there is no prohibition against gambling in the Bible. As a Christian, I personally find it offensive that so many so-called religious folks are willing to give away our freedoms, especially in pursuit of a goal not even defined in the Bible. As for financial services groups, some credit card issuers may like UIGEA (due only to the risk of losing players refusing to pay up), but I don’t believe banks wish to be the enforcers of UIGEA. As a result, I think you’ll find financial services groups to be net losers as a result of UIGEA. Finally, I believe the concerns of the major professional sports organizations relate only to sports betting. A regulated online gambling environment, like the one created by HR 2046, addresses that concern.
Online gambling will continue to exist with or without the participation of the United States. We’re losing our opportunity to control the games via regulation as well as the opportunities for U.S. companies to operate the games both domestically and internationally. This is costing America jobs and tax revenue.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I found a website where you can send messages to newspaper editors in your state (and others if you wish), and your representatives.

Take Action (http://action.citizen.org/pickMedia.jsp?letter_KEY=199)

I wrote every newspaper listed in Ohio, and my reps (again).

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for posting the link. Did any of your letters get published?

[whangarei]

Awesome letter, Engineer. The one thing I thought I would see in there was the statement that PPA's membership is 400,000+ and growing. I mentioned this when I called my congressman this week. It is a powerful number that dramatically quantifies the opposition to congressman like this.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Awesome letter, Engineer. The one thing I thought I would see in there was the statement that PPA's membership is 400,000+ and growing. I mentioned this when I called my congressman this week. It is a powerful number that dramatically quantifies the opposition to congressman like this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks!

Good point about the PPA. I'll add that to my next letter.

[TheEngineer]

bump

[iponnet]

here is a response I got from my congresswoman (pre barnys bill) its somewhat encouraging, I have also sent her a snail mail and I am probably gona send her another one:

Thank you so much for sharing with me your thoughts on internet gaming. I appreciate hearing from you and apologize for the delayed
response. Each week, I receive more than 1,000 letters, faxes, and e-mails and cannot always personally respond as quickly as I
would like.

I agree with you that existing regulation of online gaming is extremely confusing and can occasionally be even contradictory. The
recent moves by gaming websites to route their activities through offshore servers also adds a new layer of complexity to this
issue. The arguments you make in your letter for uniform, federal legislation is compelling and I will make sure to share them with
my colleagues in the House of Representatives.

You may be interested to know that in the last Congress, Rep. Jon Porter introduced the Internet Gambling Study Commission Act (H.R.
5474) which would have created a Commission to study existing federal legislation and make recommendations to the President and
Congress. Unfortunately, Congress was not able to consider this bill before it adjourned in December 2006.

In the current Congress, I will follow this and other similar legislation closely and remember your very sensible recommendations as
we begin debate on this important issue.

Once again, thank you for contacting me. As your representative, I both need and value your perspective. Please sign up for my
E-Newsletter at my website www.house.gov/susandavis (http://www.house.gov/susandavis), if you would like to receive regular updates about what is happening in
Congress.

With warm regards,

Susan A. Davis
Member of Congress


and here is a response from my senator, this B**** is gona get an angry snail mail pretty soon,

Thank you for contacting me regarding Internet gambling. I
appreciate you taking the time to contact me on this important topic and I
welcome the opportunity to respond.

There is no doubt that the Internet and related technologies have
had a remarkable effect on the U.S. economy in recent years. Commerce
on the Internet has enhanced American industry's ability to distribute
goods economically and efficiently. The continuing development of this
industry in California has provided hundreds of thousands of new, well-
paying jobs, and I am committed to strengthening online commerce and
preserving and expanding this vital job base.

While the advent of the Internet has clearly been beneficial to
American society, the same cannot be said for Internet-based gambling
activity. Internet gambling has become too easily accessible to minors,
subject to fraud and criminal misuse, and too easily used to evade state
gambling laws. Please know that I have supported legislation aimed at
curbing Internet gambling during my tenure in the Senate. For example,
I supported the SAFE Port Act, passed into law as Public Law 109-347,
which included (as Title VIII) Internet gambling restrictions. I will
certainly keep your thoughts in mind should additional legislation on this
issue be considered by the Senate in the 110th Congress.

Again, thank you for your letter. I hop you will continue to keep
me informed on issues of importance to you. Best regards.






Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

[autobet]

Bump, please write your congressman and ask them to support HR 2406.

[TheEngineer]

More good press! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

LA Times endorses Frank's bill while chastising the US for ignoring the WTO ruling:

LA Times Editorial: Gambling hypocrisy (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-online5may05,0,4666097.story?coll=la-news-comment-editorials )

[BluffTHIS!]

Engineer,

Perhaps a new action thread should be devoted to contacting members of Congress re the stance of the US Trade Rep on the WTO ruling and stressing the potential negatives of same such as paying compensation to ALL who demand same (not just Antigua as refereced in Jay's thread by a poster), and the harm it could do to other US issues before the WTO in the future. Also, it could be suggested that the members of the appropriate oversight committees in each house subpoena that Trade Office dick and ask him to explain his actions and the potential liabilities entailed.

[TheEngineer]

Well, what an interesting two weeks. Barney Frank introduced HR 2046: IGREA (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-2046) . And, it picked up 11 cosponsors right off the bat! However, in anticipation of losing the WTO final appeal, last week the USTR has apparently announced that the U.S. would withdraw from the gambling portion of the GATS agreement.

So, it seems there's a lot we can be doing right now. And, we really need to do it RIGHT NOW, before these politicians make up their minds. So, let's do the following:
<font color="brown">
1. Contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail. Ask them to support and cosponsor HR 2046. Maybe comment on that fact that this bill protects from underage gambling and money laundering while protecting the rights of adults. Also, mention that you just want to play poker (if that's the case). Even though this wouldn't make a difference in a perfect world, non-gamblers can understand poker over online roulette. Also, this way it's easy to end the call with something like "come on...all I want to do is play a little poker". Additionally, let's ask our representatives and senators to honor our commitments to the WTO in this matter.

2. Contact the majority and minority offices of the House Financial Services Committee (that's where the bill is now) and the Financial Institutions Subcommittee (one phone call AND one snail mail letter).

3. Contact (write and call) the majority and the minority offices of the House Subcommittee on Trade. Remind them of our WTO obligations.

4. Let's thank the 11 (to date) cosponsors of HR 2046. This can be via a short phone call, a handwritten letter, or a donation if you feel compelled (I'll give a little something this week). They are:

Rep. Gary Ackerman [D-NY]
Rep. Shelley Berkley [D-NV]
Rep. Michael Capuano [D-MA]
Rep. Julia Carson [D-IN]
Rep. William Clay [D-MO]
Rep. Luis Gutiérrez [D-IL]
Rep. Steve Israel [D-NY]
Rep. Peter King [R-NY]
Rep. Ronald Paul [R-TX]
Rep. Melvin Watt [D-NC]
Rep. Robert Wexler [D-FL]

We've focused on almost half of the 12 (counting Frank), so it looks like we've been doing the right things so far, given our size.

5. Write to your local newspaper, media outlets, television shows, websites, and any other media you can think of to promote our cause. </font>

Thanks everyone!

[TheEngineer]

Rep. Shelley Berkley [D-NV] introduced HR 2140, an Internet gambling study bill. It looks like a bill we can get behind. It already has 60 cosponsors. If you support it, please tell your congressman. Thanks.

H.R. 2140: To provide for a study by the National Academy of Sciences to identify the proper response of the... (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-2140)

[TheEngineer]

"A coalition of major amateur and professional sports leagues is urging members of the House Financial Services Committee to oppose legislation unveiled by Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) that would undo last year’s crackdown on illegal online gambling."

I think we should all write to the NFL, the NBA, and the MLB (especially the NFL) and ask them to at least sit this one out. They really have no business actively working and campaigning against our rights. Remind them that they frequently come to the taxpayers for stadiums and other freebees.

Also, let's write to their advertisers, such as Budweiser. We can tell Anheuser-Busch and Miller Brewing Co. that this prohibition is no more just than the Prohibition of the '20s. The good thing here is that we KNOW advertisers are very sensitive to their customers' opinions, so they'll read these letters. Also, we're their target market. They care more about us than they do about Kyl's crowd, by far.

Sports leagues mobilize against Frank’s gaming bill (http://thehill.com/business--lobby/sports-leagues-mobilize-against-franks-gaming-bill-2007-04-30.html)

[Sniper]

Eng, What do you think is the likelihood of getting a bunch of poker players to stop supporting Sports and Beer? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Eng, What do you think is the likelihood of getting a bunch of poker players to stop supporting Sports and Beer? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Zero. Fortunately, all we have to do is switch brands for a bit and TiVo through the commercials. Budweiser sucks anyway.

[TheEngineer]

Here's my note to my congressman. As it's like my 8th note this year, it's short and to the point:

The Honorable My Rep
United States House of Representatives
1108 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-1704

Dear Congressman xxx:

I'm writing to request that you vote for HR 2140, Rep. Shelley Berkley's Internet gaming study bill. While the opponents of online gaming have made a list of potential issues purported to be caused by online gaming, there’s never been a study that either verifies the validity of these claims or examines potential mitigations. It seems this should be done prior to even considering a federal prohibition of Internet gambling, especially as this activity is legal in much of the rest of the world.

If Americans are to be less free than Europeans, perhaps we should at least have some substantiation to justify a federal power grab of this magnitude.

Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Eng, What do you think is the likelihood of getting a bunch of poker players to stop supporting Sports and Beer? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, I wasn't talking about a boycott at all. Rather, when we get used for punching bags, there should be a price to pay, even if it's a small one. After all, we don't want to give our opponents "free cards".

The beer companies are having problems just like we are. Now, a bunch of state attorneys general have asked them to advertise only where 85% of the audience is over 21 (the current level is 70%)! This nanny-state government is really getting out of control. Anyway, we shouldn't let the NFL have free shots at us. We shouldn't spend a lot of time on this, of course.

Times Article (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/08/business/media/08adco.html)

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I wasn't talking about a boycott at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well if you weren't talking about a boycott, what action plan related to sports and beer were you thinking about?

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, I wasn't talking about a boycott at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well if you weren't talking about a boycott, what action plan related to sports and beer were you thinking about?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just a few letters. At least put a bug in their ear that we care about our freedoms. There's not much else we can do, really, but we should do something. At least their PR depts will have to craft a form letter in response.

[TheEngineer]

Last night, Barney Frank was interviewed on Holdemradio.com. He asked us to do two things: write to our represenative and both senators, and get at least six friends to do the same. He said if we can get 500 supporters in each House district to send their represenative a letter, he'll be able to get IGREA through his committee. Fortunately, PPA sent out an email today ( link to letter (http://links.emessages.pokerplayersalliance.org:80/servlet/MailView?ms=NTcwNDIxS0&amp;r=NDI0NjQxNDA4NwS2&amp;j=ODQ4OT I4NjYS1&amp;mt=1) ) asking everyone to write. Hopefully we'll all be able to do our part. Thanks.

--------------------------------

Dear Fellow PPA Member:

I have wonderful news to report! On Thursday, April 26, Rep. Barney Frank introduced HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007. HR 2046 will lift the prohibition on playing poker online. Your efforts are making a difference!

Representative Frank is the Chairman of the important House Financial Services Committee. And he understands the injustice that we have suffered. When he introduced the bill, he told reporters that “The existing legislation is an inappropriate interference on the personal freedom of Americans and this interference should be undone”.

But he can’t do this job alone. Now, we need to help Congressman Frank build support for his bill.

You can regain your right to enjoy safe, secure online poker – but only if you stand up for your rights. And PPA is here to help you do just that.

This is a landmark day for freedom. But it is only the first step of the process. Join me in celebrating this milestone – and take action to build support for HR 2046.

Click here or below to make your voice heard in our nation’s Capitol.

Sincerely,
Michael Bolcerek
President
Poker Players Alliance

[TheEngineer]

Here's the PPA form letter ( PPA auto-mailer (http://activate.pokerplayersalliance.org/start.php?rindex=1) ):

As a constituent and voter in your district, I am writing to ask you to support and co-sponsor HR 2046 – the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007.

In 2006, my right to play poker -- a legendary game of skill that dates back centuries -- was assaulted simply because I chose to exercise that right online. Now, that right will be denied permanently unless Congress takes action. I am counting on you to help restore my rights by supporting HR 2046.

If HR 2046 passes into law, online poker will be safe, secure and regulated. The bill creates stringent licensing regulations for poker operators, so it will protect consumers and poker players alike.

The bill also has rigorous protections against illegal gambling, underage gambling, and compulsive gambling. But it doesn’t force any state to accept online gaming – it will simply allow any currently legal gaming to take place online. States and sports leagues can opt out completely if they wish.

What’s important to me is your support for restoring my rights. Please respond to this letter, and let me know if you will support and co-sponsor HR 2046. I will be watching your actions on this bill closely. I hope that I -- and thousands of other poker fans in your district -- can count on your support.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[ama0330]

What can us Europeans do to help? Anything?

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
What can us Europeans do to help? Anything?

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps you could write to your government and express disappointment in the U.S. decision to ignore the WTO. I know it sounds a little weak, but I guess most of the action will come from U.S. citizens. Still, your government should know how its citizens feel. After all, our next president (regardless of who wins) won't be so unilateral in our dealings with the world.

Anyone else have ideas for ama0330?

[Emperor]

[ QUOTE ]
I found a website where you can send messages to newspaper editors in your state (and others if you wish), and your representatives.

Take Action (http://action.citizen.org/pickMedia.jsp?letter_KEY=199)

I wrote every newspaper listed in Ohio, and my reps (again).

[/ QUOTE ]

Here is a repost of FoxNews Email Addys. Please send your opinions to FoxNews as well.

Comments@foxnews.com, AmericasNewsroom@foxnews.com, Beltway@foxnews.com, Myword@foxnews.com, Bigstory-weekend@foxnews.com, Bigstory-weekend@foxnews.com, Bullsandbears@foxnews.com, Cash@foxnews.com, Cavuto@foxnews.com, Fncimag@foxnews.com, Forbes@foxnews.com, Friends@foxnews.com, Comments@foxnews.com, Feedback@foxnews.com, Jamie@foxnews.com, Feedback@foxnews.com, Fncspecials@foxnews.com, FNS@foxnews.com, Newswatch@foxnews.com, Foxreport@foxnews.com, Foxreport@foxnews.com, Atlarge@foxnews.com, Hannityandcolmes@foxnews.com, Heartland@foxnews.com, JER@foxnews.com, Lineup@foxnews.com, Martha@foxnews.com, Ontherecord@foxnews.com, Oreilly@foxnews.com, Redeye@foxnews.com, Special@foxnews.com, Studiob@foxnews.com, Comments@foxnews.com, Cavuto@foxnews.com, Hemmer@foxnews.com, colonelscorner@foxnews.com, Comments@foxnews.com, Fatherjonathan@foxnews.com, Drmanny@foxnews.com, Lisonlaw@foxnews.com, Housecall@foxnews.com

Also Email these people:

Rush Limbaugh - Rush@eibnet.com - Small Government Conservative (No flaming me please)

Neal Boortz - http://boortz.com/cgi-bin/mail.cgi?id=boortz
Neal has spoken for our cause MANY times on his radio show.

American Thinker - editor@americanthinker.com - These guys get quoted all the time on the radio

Matt Drudge - drudge@drudgereport.com - Small Government Conservative (No flaming me please)

[Grey]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This seems more relevant now than ever...

http://www.actblue.com/page/poker#604

[/ QUOTE ]

We should make it a goal of the fight to kick up 10k for the Chairman's campaign.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would donate thru this but it looks like a possible scam

[/ QUOTE ]It is not. I made the page. If it helps in any way, I can send a few k to a moderator to hold until you're all convinced it's not a scam.

[TheEngineer]

Well, things still look good. IGREA is gaining some steam. It remains to be seen if it can clear the House Financial Services Committee, but its mere existence is keeping our opponents at bay, as Frank stated in this interview (http://www.holdemradio.com/podcasts/media/mp3s/BarneyFrank.mp3). Also, Rep. Shelley Berkley [D-NV] introduced HR 2140, an Internet gambling study bill that already has 60 cosponsors. Unfortunately, as we all know, in anticipation of losing the WTO final appeal the USTR announced that the U.S. will withdraw from the gambling portion of the GATS agreement.

So, it seems there's a lot we can be doing right now. And, we really need to do it RIGHT NOW, before these politicians make up their minds. So, let's do the following:
<font color="brown">
1. If you haven't yet, please contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail. Ask them to support and cosponsor IGREA and HR 2140. Additionally, let's ask our representatives and senators to honor our commitments to the WTO in this matter. The PPA has an automailer at http://activate.pokerplayersalliance.org/start.php?rindex=1 . As you've probably already done this, please tell your friends. Barney Frank asked us each to get six others to write to their congressmen in support of IGREA. Perhaps post the PPA automailer web address in blogs (where it pertains to the topic, of course), or spam your friends and family. This isn't about IGREA as much as it is demonstrating political support for freedom to choose to gamble online.

2. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online gaming.

3. We've been focusing on the federal government to date, but there's a state component to this as well. Please write to your state representatives this week and ask him/her to sponsor a bill legalizing Internet gambling within your state. </font>

Thanks everyone!

[/ QUOTE ]

[TheEngineer]

Here are my letters to Attorney General Gonzales and Secretary Paulson. This was an item from two weeks ago. I think you should consider doing this if you haven't yet, as our opponents have been. Thanks.

----------------------------------

May 15, 2007

The Honorable Alberto Gonzalez
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001

Dear General Gonzales:

On behalf of millions of law-abiding Americans, I am writing to ask you use care when drafting the regulations to implement the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, so as not to exceed the specific requirements of the Act.

Many Americans oppose the UIGEA in its current form. It “passed” the Senate not by a majority vote on its merits, but by being sneaked into the Safe Ports Act, where it was safe from debate and discussion. As a result, reform measures like HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, have already been introduced, and others are sure to follow.

However, the UIGEA is law, and your department is tasked with enforcing it as written. As such, I humbly ask that you to just that – write regulations that address the legislation as written. I understand that some who advocate restricting the rights of Americans to choose to play poker online have been lobbying your department for regulations that are well beyond the scope and authority of UIGEA. For example, although recent court decisions have defined the scope of the Wire Act of 1961 as covering wagering on only sporting events and races, in your last Senate appearance Sen. Jon Kyl specifically asked you for regulations affecting all Internet gambling, even Internet poker. It seems that if Congress wanted to outlaw Internet poker, they would have passed an act that did so. They did not. I urge you to resist the efforts of individual politicians who would use your department as a “back-door” means of creating laws that they were unable to create legislatively.

Internet poker is not illegal under any federal law. I ask you to keep this in mind as you draft the UIGEA regulations. Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

----------------------------------

May 15, 2007

The Honorable Henry Paulson
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220

Dear Secretary Paulson:

On behalf of millions of law-abiding Americans, I am writing to ask you use care when drafting the regulations to implement the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, so as not to exceed the specific requirements of the Act.

Many Americans oppose the UIGEA in its current form. It “passed” the Senate not by a majority vote on its merits, but by being sneaked into the Safe Ports Act, where it was safe from debate and discussion. As a result, reform measures like HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, have already been introduced, and others are sure to follow.

However, the UIGEA is law, and your department is tasked with enforcing it as written. As such, I humbly ask that you to just that – write regulations that address the legislation as written. I understand that some who advocate restricting the rights of Americans to choose to play poker online have been lobbying your department for regulations that are well beyond the scope and authority of UIGEA. For example, although recent court decisions have defined the scope of the Wire Act of 1961 as covering wagering on only sporting events and races, in Attorney General Gonzales’ last Senate appearance Sen. Jon Kyl specifically asked him for regulations affecting all Internet gambling, even Internet poker. It seems that if Congress wanted to outlaw Internet poker, they would have passed an act that did so. They did not. I urge you to resist the efforts of individual politicians who would use your department as a “back-door” means of creating laws that they were unable to create legislatively.

Internet poker is not illegal under any federal law. I ask you to keep this in mind as you draft the UIGEA regulations. Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[TheEngineer]

Here the "sports coalition's" letter:
http://www.citizenlink.org/pdfs/fosi/gambling/Sports_Coalition_Letter.pdf

---------------------

March 22, 2007

The Honorable Alberto Gonzalez
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001

The Honorable Henry Paulson
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220

Dear General Gonzales and Secretary Paulson:

On behalf of our respective professional and amateur sports organizations, we are writing to urge you to issue strong regulations to implement the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006.

Our sports organizations each have strict policies against sports betting, because wagering on sports can corrupt athletic contests or create the appearance of corruption. Internet gambling also runs directly contrary to federal and state statutes against sports gambling, particularly the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992. Though Internet gambling on sports has never been legal, easy access to offshore Internet gambling websites has created the opposite impression among the general public, particularly before this law was passed. Congress has also found, as have others who have examined this issue, that Internet gambling serves as a vehicle for money laundering, and that it has contributed to both underage and compulsive gambling.

We are gratified by recent reports from sports gambling insiders indicating that the new law has already caused wagering on the Super Bowl and “March Madness” to decline by over a third, even though there are no implementing regulations in effect yet. However, some of the same industry insiders believe that sports gambling will return to its previous levels by next year. Effective regulations are essential to ensuring that sports gambling does not rebound, but continues to decline as Congress intended.

Internet gambling businesses seek to – and until the passage of the UIGEA were easily able to – evade U.S. prosecutors by operating offshore. Thus, the most effective way to curtail Internet sports gambling is to interrupt the flow of funds between U.S.-based gamblers and offshore website operators. In the new law, Congress gave the Treasury Department, together with the Federal Reserve and the Department of Justice, responsibility for writing regulations to guide different types of payment systems in identifying and blocking these financial transactions.

Some payment systems, such as credit cards, can use “coding” to block online gambling funds. But other types of payment systems, such as checking and Automated Clearing House (ACH) transfers, need a list of prohibited recipients or bank accounts in order to effectively block fund transfers. To prevent undue burden on financial institutions, such a list needs to be compiled and maintained by the government. The House Financial Services Committee Report clearly states that Congress intended law enforcement to provide financial institutions with the identities of illegal online gambling businesses or their financial accounts. The Committee Report also gave the agencies regulatory flexibility to develop alternative policies and procedures for “non-coded” transactions, consistent with the law’s goals.


We are asking you to commit the regulatory and law enforcement resources necessary to effectively implement the law. If proposed and final regulations are not strong, the illegal Internet gambling industry will once again see the U.S. market as a prime target for sports gambling operations.

Sincerely,

Rick Buchanan
Executive VP and General Counsel
National Basketball Association

Elsa Kircher Cole
General Counsel
National Collegiate Athletic Association

William Daly
Deputy Commissioner
National Hockey League

Tom Ostertag
Senior VP and General Counsel
Major League Baseball

Jeffrey Pash
Executive VP and General Counsel
National Football League

[TheEngineer]

Since the media don't give us much coverage, I like to post here and there to various blogs, such as USAToday's, just to very gradually get the word out into the mainstream consciousness. It's won't do much, but it doesn't take much, either. Here's a quick one from the story about Falwell kicking the bucket:

TheEngineer wrote: &lt;1m ago
It's fine that Falwell and his followers chose to live by a self-defined moral code, but I fail to understand his need to force this code on others via legislation, especially at the federal level. This extended to areas not even mentioned in the Bible, such as the ridiculous attempted ban on Internet poker. I enjoy playing poker, and I like the convenience of playing online. I don't know why these busybodies feel the need to tell me what to do in my own home.

Apparently Fallwell finished the work laid out in the Bible and started making up new stuff that sorf of sounded religious. Too bad the Republican Party will have to pay for this error until they rediscover their limited government roots.

[TheEngineer]

More message board stuff:

One more thing. We don't have to just sit here and take it. If we don't want the government to legislate one man's idea of morality, contact your congressman and senators at www.house.gov (http://www.house.gov) and www.senate.gov. (http://www.senate.gov.) To speak up for the right to play Internet poker, go to the Poker Players Alliance auto-mailer at http://activate.pokerplayersalliance.org/start.php?rindex=1. For other causes, Google is your friend. Sitting around doing nothing is your enemy.

It's time we tell the politicians to worry about managing the nation, rather than what we choose to do in our personal lives.

[kauffmanj]

I wrote to my Congressman in Missouri and his response has to do with the fact that there are many people with "gambling Problems". I would like to respond back but need some ideas on how to respond to his statement about people addicted to gambling. any ideas?

[autobet]

There are also people with cigerrette, alchohol, shopping/credit card and eating problems. Are we going to ban cigerrettes, alchohol, shopping/credit cards, refined sugar, trans fats, etc. because some people can't control themselves?

[TheEngineer]

My letter to Bush:


May 18, 2007

President George W. Bush
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

On behalf of millions of law-abiding Americans, I am writing to ask for your leadership in ensuring that the Executive branch departments responsible for drafting the regulations to implement the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 use due care, so as not to exceed the specific requirements of the Act.

Many Americans oppose the UIGEA in its current form. It “passed” the Senate not by a majority vote on its merits, but by being sneaked into the Safe Ports Act, where it was safe from debate and discussion. As a result, reform measures like HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, have already been introduced, and others are sure to follow. Also, the Poker Players Alliance was formed to advocate for the right to play poker online. The PPA, chaired by Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, now has 500,000 members!

However, the UIGEA is law, and the Executive branch is tasked with enforcing it as written. As such, I humbly ask that you to just that – ensure that the regulations address the legislation as written. I understand that some who advocate restricting the rights of Americans to choose to play poker online have been lobbying for regulations that are well beyond the scope and authority of UIGEA. For example, although recent court decisions have defined the scope of the Wire Act of 1961 as covering wagering on only sporting events and races, in Attorney General Gonzales’ last Senate appearance Sen. Jon Kyl specifically asked him for regulations affecting all Internet gambling, even Internet poker. It seems that if Congress wanted to outlaw Internet poker, they would have passed an act that did so. They did not. I urge you to resist the efforts of individual politicians who would use your departments as a “back-door” means of creating laws that they were unable to create legislatively.

Internet poker is not illegal under any federal law. I ask you to keep this in mind as the UIGEA regulations are drafted. Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[Jeffiner99]

[ QUOTE ]
There are also people with cigerrette, alchohol, shopping/credit card and eating problems. Are we going to ban cigerrettes, alchohol, shopping/credit cards, refined sugar, trans fats, etc. because some people can't control themselves?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because people have problem with something doesn't mean that the State gets to ban it. The Nanny State doesn't preserve our freedom or our liberty, something millions have died to protect. If you are going to ban something because it is not good for people then the next step will be to force people to do things that are good for them. And who gets to decide? This is a very dangerous line of thinking that seems to be pervading politics these days: people in power think they know what is best for others and then run their lives accordingly. The problem with that is, no one really knows what is best for someone. And don't we have the liberty to find out for ourselves?

Moreover, if you really truly believe that gambling can be bad and therefore needs to be banned then you MUST ban the stock market, lotteries, dog racing, horse racing and business and real estate investments. Let's not pretend that living does not involve taking a lot of risks with our time and money. We all take risks every day. But if you are going to be against one kind of gambling then you must be against them all. Many more fortunes have been lost in the stock market than all the poker games ever played combined. So let's stop the hypocrisy please.

[TheEngineer]

A post I made on a story about Fred Thompson from USAToday.com, at http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2007/05/noonan_fred_tho.html . I know it doesn't seem like much, but it's free media, and it takes only a minute, so why not?

--------------

TheEngineer wrote: 5m ago
What happened to the small-goverment conservatives? Seems the religious right has taken over the Republican Party, and no government is too big. These guys want federal laws to tell us what to do and when to do it. For example, only Ron Paul has come out and said we should be allowed to play Internet poker in our own homes. WTH does this even have to do with the feds?!?!?!? Nothing but a nanny state. Fred seems like more of the same.

Want change? Vote for Ron Paul.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]

1. If you haven't yet, please contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail. Ask them to support and cosponsor IGREA and HR 2140. Additionally, let's ask our representatives and senators to honor our commitments to the WTO in this matter. The PPA has an automailer at http://activate.pokerplayersalliance.org/start.php?rindex=1 . <font color="brown">As you've probably already done this, please tell your friends. Barney Frank asked us each to get six others to write to their congressmen in support of IGREA. </font> Perhaps post the PPA automailer web address in blogs (where it pertains to the topic, of course), or spam your friends and family. This isn't about IGREA as much as it is demonstrating political support for freedom to choose to gamble online.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just a reminder. Please try to get six friends or family members to write. Thanks! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[TheEngineer]

A Bob Novak article about Gonzalez at townhall.com (a conservative site) (http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=more_gonzales_grief&amp;ns=Robert DNovak&amp;dt=05/19/2007&amp;page=full&amp;comments=true#d0472c9e-ac55-463e-bc95-433be7e4d2d9)

One more blog post. I know these seem to be of small consequence, but it's free media and it gets the message out. Also, I'll reuse this a few times. Something to consider.

------------------------------

Another good article
It seems we conservatives have been too busy drinking our own bathwater (reading only conservative pubs, listening primarily to conservative radio, etc.) to see what's going on with our party. We were elected on the promise of LIMITED GOVERNMENT, especially at the federal level. Instead of that, we decided to spend and spend and spend some more. Then, we decided big government was fine, so long as it promoted a socially conservative agenda (one that Goldwater would not have even recognized, by the way). We don't like online poker? Fine...pass federal legislation mandating banks to comb through our financial transactions and mandating our ISPs nose in on our Internet sites (and also mandating that ISPs block access to certain sites, like in China or Iran). After all, we can't trust Americans to make wise choices, right? We don't like Democrat corruption? Fine, we have lots of hearings (as we should). Republican corruption? We'd better hide that and criticize reporters who mention it, then act surprised when we lose elections (and blame the liberals for our own transgressions).

It's time to take our party back. Limited government is just that. There's nothing conservative about big government, regardless of how much you love the laws it passes.

[Chaostracize]

I wrote this in the sticky in HSNL, but I'll write it here again. A really easy way to get the message out is through Facebook. You can create a flier that will send people to the auto-messager for $5 a day. That $5 will send the ad out to 10,000 people in your network. So for $35 you can send out 70,000 ads. I really think that's worth the investment, especially from people who just want to donate money. Well, this is how to do it.

[typically]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There are also people with cigerrette, alchohol, shopping/credit card and eating problems. Are we going to ban cigerrettes, alchohol, shopping/credit cards, refined sugar, trans fats, etc. because some people can't control themselves?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because people have problem with something doesn't mean that the State gets to ban it. The Nanny State doesn't preserve our freedom or our liberty, something millions have died to protect. If you are going to ban something because it is not good for people then the next step will be to force people to do things that are good for them. And who gets to decide? This is a very dangerous line of thinking that seems to be pervading politics these days: people in power think they know what is best for others and then run their lives accordingly. The problem with that is, no one really knows what is best for someone. And don't we have the liberty to find out for ourselves?

Moreover, if you really truly believe that gambling can be bad and therefore needs to be banned then you MUST ban the stock market, lotteries, dog racing, horse racing and business and real estate investments. Let's not pretend that living does not involve taking a lot of risks with our time and money. We all take risks every day. But if you are going to be against one kind of gambling then you must be against them all. Many more fortunes have been lost in the stock market than all the poker games ever played combined. So let's stop the hypocrisy please.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with this entirely, but it's not the best way to broach the issue with politicians, who need to convince their electorate. I would suggest to eloquently present the preceding points (which are critical ones), but also make the suggestion that the bill include some measure of support for problem gamblers. These can include an agency to regulate the industry, perhaps compelling sites to provide concrete services for problem gamblers, or implement a gambling tax whose proceeds can be used to implement support systems and whatnot. There are many constructive ways to address maladaptive behaviour (such as gambling addiction, or alcohol or drug addiction for that matter), apart from prohibiting them entirely. The latter approach did not work for alcohol, is not working for drugs, and will not work for gambling. What it will do, if history is any indication, is drive gambling underground and cause a whole new set of problems, take problem gambling to an entirely new level, and ultimately run up the bill for taxpayers without really addressing the problem.. Regulate and tax. What's the problem?

[TheEngineer]

Well, it's action item time. I'd like to post it Sunday at noon. What would you all like to do? Here are some suggestions to start with:
<font color="brown">
1. If you haven't yet, please contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail. IGREA has just picked up eight more cosponsors, so work it being done behind the scenes. Please do your part and ask them to support and cosponsor IGREA and HR 2140. Additionally, let's ask our representatives and senators to honor our commitments to the WTO in this matter. The PPA has an automailer at http://activate.pokerplayersalliance.org/start.php?rindex=1 . As you've probably already done this, please tell your friends. Barney Frank asked us each to get six others to write to their congressmen in support of IGREA. Perhaps post the PPA automailer web address in blogs (where it pertains to the topic, of course), or spam your friends and family. This isn't about IGREA as much as it is demonstrating political support for freedom to choose to gamble online.

2. Write to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Treasury Secretary Paulson (and anyone else responsible for implementing UIGEA). Sen. Kyl writes to them, so it seems we should be as well.

3. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online gaming.

4. We've been focusing on the federal government to date, but there's a state component to this as well. Please write to your state representatives this week and ask him/her to sponsor a bill legalizing Internet gambling within your state. </font>

[Ron Burgundy]

Could you explain what #2 would do? I highly doubt internet gambling regulations are what AG is spending much time on right now. Do they even care what people say?

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Could you explain what #2 would do? I highly doubt internet gambling regulations are what AG is spending much time on right now. Do they even care what people say?

[/ QUOTE ]

Kyl is taking the time to badger Gonzales about these requirements via letters to Bush and by actually asking during Gonzales' last Senate hearings. It's easy to write to our friends. Our opponents should hear from us as well, I think. Anyway, something to discuss. I sent mine earlier. Here they are:

----------------------------------

May 15, 2007

The Honorable Alberto Gonzalez
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001

Dear General Gonzales:

On behalf of millions of law-abiding Americans, I am writing to ask you use care when drafting the regulations to implement the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, so as not to exceed the specific requirements of the Act.

Many Americans oppose the UIGEA in its current form. It “passed” the Senate not by a majority vote on its merits, but by being sneaked into the Safe Ports Act, where it was safe from debate and discussion. As a result, reform measures like HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, have already been introduced, and others are sure to follow.

However, the UIGEA is law, and your department is tasked with enforcing it as written. As such, I humbly ask that you to just that – write regulations that address the legislation as written. I understand that some who advocate restricting the rights of Americans to choose to play poker online have been lobbying your department for regulations that are well beyond the scope and authority of UIGEA. For example, although recent court decisions have defined the scope of the Wire Act of 1961 as covering wagering on only sporting events and races, in your last Senate appearance Sen. Jon Kyl specifically asked you for regulations affecting all Internet gambling, even Internet poker. It seems that if Congress wanted to outlaw Internet poker, they would have passed an act that did so. They did not. I urge you to resist the efforts of individual politicians who would use your department as a “back-door” means of creating laws that they were unable to create legislatively.

Internet poker is not illegal under any federal law. I ask you to keep this in mind as you draft the UIGEA regulations. Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

----------------------------------

May 15, 2007

The Honorable Henry Paulson
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220

Dear Secretary Paulson:

On behalf of millions of law-abiding Americans, I am writing to ask you use care when drafting the regulations to implement the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, so as not to exceed the specific requirements of the Act.

Many Americans oppose the UIGEA in its current form. It “passed” the Senate not by a majority vote on its merits, but by being sneaked into the Safe Ports Act, where it was safe from debate and discussion. As a result, reform measures like HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, have already been introduced, and others are sure to follow.

However, the UIGEA is law, and your department is tasked with enforcing it as written. As such, I humbly ask that you to just that – write regulations that address the legislation as written. I understand that some who advocate restricting the rights of Americans to choose to play poker online have been lobbying your department for regulations that are well beyond the scope and authority of UIGEA. For example, although recent court decisions have defined the scope of the Wire Act of 1961 as covering wagering on only sporting events and races, in Attorney General Gonzales’ last Senate appearance Sen. Jon Kyl specifically asked him for regulations affecting all Internet gambling, even Internet poker. It seems that if Congress wanted to outlaw Internet poker, they would have passed an act that did so. They did not. I urge you to resist the efforts of individual politicians who would use your department as a “back-door” means of creating laws that they were unable to create legislatively.

Internet poker is not illegal under any federal law. I ask you to keep this in mind as you draft the UIGEA regulations. Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Could you explain what #2 would do? I highly doubt internet gambling regulations are what AG is spending much time on right now. Do they even care what people say?

[/ QUOTE ]

I just found out Focus on the Family has been writing to Bush and Paulson for tough UIGEA regs and against IGREA. The letter is at http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/cog/A000004244.cfm . The letter isn't on Focus on the Family's website, but they have a link to it, along with encouragement to participate. Here it is:

------------------------------------------------------

Internet Gambling Take Action
3-29-2007

by Chad Hills


In 2005, U.S. citizens illegally exported $6 billion dollars to unknown, unaccountable foreign online casinos. Congress passed legislation to stop Internet gambling in the U.S., but the Department of Treasury needs to hear your voice to keep this legislation strong.



Background

The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) was attached to the SAFE Port Act (H.R. 4954) and passed in 2006. This legislation delegated authority to the U.S. Department of the Treasury to determine the details and regulations pertaining to the Internet gambling portion of this legislation (Title VIII).

Needless to say, the foreign online gambling industry hired a number of lobbyists to influence this legislation and ultimately weaken the UIGEA. Foreign Internet casino operators lost an estimated $6 billion when Congress passed this legislation in 2006. They are intent on lobbying to reclaim their lost business by advocating porous Internet legislation and regulation.

The U.S. Department of Treasury is expected to release their regulations very soon, so voice your concerns today (see talking points listed below). Read the letter written by professional and amateur sports organizations that encourages strong regulations against Internet gambling.



Take Action

Send a message to President Bush:

Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
FAX: 202-456-2461 (most effective)
E-mail: comments@whitehouse.gov

Emphasize these points:

The Department of the Treasury is tasked with drafting strong and thorough regulations. Word from legislators working closely with this bill is that the regulations are too weak, and the law will may be undermined by the rules and regulations. A handful of federal agents could create and maintain a list of unlawful Internet gambling operations to existing Pro-family organizations and citizens must contact the White House and urge President Bush to direct the Treasury to create strong regulations to uphold this legislation.
A second concern is Rep. Barney Frank's (D-MA) bill, HR 2046. His bill would effectively repeal the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, reversing nearly a decade of Congressional efforts to keep families safe from the predatory online gambling industry. Citizens need to voice their opposition to the dangerous bill that would open the gates wide for all Internet casinos.
Citizens should also be aware that Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-NV) sponsored a bill that seeks to "study" the option of Internet gambling in the United States and ultimately justify its legalization. Oppose HR 2140, because more than 230 million Americans access the Internet, including children. We do not want thousands of virtual casinos tempting adults and children to gamble, nor can we verify whether these sites are funding criminals or terrorists. We don't have to study Internet gambling to know that risks are too great.

You can also contact Secretary Paulson, of the Department of Treasury. Express your concern for the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act regulations to remain strong.

The Honorable Henry M. Paulson

Secretary of the Department of the Treasury

1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, D.C. 20220

Phone - 202-622-1100

Phone - Department of the Treasury Main Switchboard - 202-622-1100

Fax - 202-622-6415

Web site: http://www.ustreas.gov/





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Talking Points:

(Choose three or four)

Internet gambling sites took approximately $6 billion out of the U.S. economy in 2005 and may have funded foreign terrorist groups or criminal organizations.
More than 2,500 foreign online virtual casinos were soliciting more than 230 million U.S. Internet users, without effective age verification, validation of payment sources and no financial accountability.
Internet gambling holds catastrophic potential for organized crime, funding terrorists and laundering money. Read more …
Betting on sports is illegal in the United States, with the exception of Nevada and Oregon (Montana and Delaware chose not to wager on sports). Online sports-betting sites were – and still are - making a mockery of U.S. legislation by violating federal Internet gambling laws daily.
The integrity of amateur and professional sports is compromised by the growing number of online sports-gambling sites (i.e. point shaving, player payoffs, corrupting coaches, etc). Read more ...
The American Psychological Association found high school and college-aged populations to be at an increased risk for Internet gambling addiction. [APA Advisory on Internet Gambling, March 17, 2002] See Advisory ...
Machines cannot verify your age, and children are at extreme risk for exploitation and addiction. Already, gambling addiction with adolescents and on college campuses is at epidemic proportions.
The National Gambling Impact Study Commission (NGISC) calculated that approximately 7.9 million adolescents have a problem or pathological gambling addiction. Imagine filling 113 NFL football stadiums to capacity; that's how many under-aged teens and children have gambling problems. Read more of the NGISC Report …
Four out of five students under the age of 18 say that going online is a vital part of their schoolwork. One in five adults says their children spend too much time on the Internet. This age group is extremely vulnerable to online solicitation and subsequent gambling addictions. [USC Annenberg School, 2005] Read more ...
Availability and accessibility are key components in creating addiction to gambling. The Internet is available and accessible 24/7 with no accountability. Addicted gamblers can remain anonymous and feed their addiction in secret. Pathological gambling addiction doubles within 10 to 50 miles of a casino – one can only imagine the addiction rates for 2,500 or more casinos within the reach of a mouse click. Read more …
Video gambling is the most addictive form of gambling in history. Research finds that addiction can occur in about one year, compared with gambling addictions to traditional slots and card games occurring in three to four years. Read more …
Taxpayers and the federal government should not be burdened with monitoring thousands of separate, foreign gambling sites for corruption, illegal activities or jeopardizing homeland security.
Effective and strong regulations are necessary to ensure that the online gambling industry does not infiltrate millions of homes, destroy children, ruin families and mock U.S. laws prohibiting Internet gambling.


"On the Internet, there is no regulation.' Nor is there any safeguard to keep people from gambling with money they don't have. - Rep. Jim Leach [Newsweek October 28, 2002]


More Information

· Internet Gambling Legislation Passed: A Victory For Families

· Link to the entire SAFE Port Act of 2006 (see Title VIII for Internet gambling legislation)

· Read the letter written by professional and amateur sports organizations encouraging strong regulations against Internet gambling

· Internet Gambling: The 'Perfect Storm' of Harm

· Facts compiled by Senator Jon Kyl's office

· John W. Kindt, Gambling With Terrorism: Gambling’s Strategic Socio-Economic Threat To National Security

· Testimony and Statement of Professor John Warren Kindt, Univ. Ill., Internet Gambling Prohibition Act of 2006: Hearing on H.R. 4777 Before the U.S. House of Representatives Subcomm. On Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security

· John W. Kindt &amp; Stephen W. Joy, Internet Gambling and the Destabilization of National and International Economies: Time for a Comprehensive Ban on Gambling Over the World Wide Web

· 'Clean' NCAA Playoff Games Sought [USA Today, March 27, 2007]

[autobet]

[ QUOTE ]


3. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online gaming.



[/ QUOTE ]

Online gaming or poker?

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


3. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online gaming.



[/ QUOTE ]

Online gaming or poker?

[/ QUOTE ]

Either/or. Whatever your game is. Poker is easiest for this, by far.

I cross post this on non-poker specific sites, so I try to be inclusive. However, as poker players are driving this movement, by far, we get the lion's share of the focus.

[TheEngineer]

Well, things look good. IGREA is gaining some steam. It has 19 cosponsors now. It remains to be seen if it can clear the House Financial Services Committee, but its mere existence is keeping our opponents at bay, as Frank stated in this interview (http://www.holdemradio.com/podcasts/media/mp3s/BarneyFrank.mp3). Also, HR 2140, Rep. Shelley Berkley's [D-NV] Internet gambling study bill, is progressing with 60 cosponsors. Unfortunately, as we all know, in anticipation of losing the WTO final appeal the USTR announced that the U.S. will withdraw from the gambling portion of the GATS agreement.

So, it seems there's a lot we can be doing right now. And, we really need to do it RIGHT NOW, before these politicians make up their minds. So, let's do the following:
<font color="brown">
1. If you haven't yet, please contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail <u>for each individual issue</u>. For example, if you sent a pro-IGREA letter but said nothing about the WTO decision, please send a letter about the WTO decision. Here are issues deserving of separate letters and phone calls:

- Repeal UIGEA
- Support/cosponsor IGREA
- Protest the U.S. withdrawal from the gaming sector of GATS
- Support and cosponsor HR 2140, the study bill

Again, the PPA has an automailer at http://activate.pokerplayersalliance.org/start.php?rindex=1 . And, please tell your friends. Barney Frank asked us each to get six others to write to their congressmen. Perhaps post the PPA automailer web address in blogs (where it pertains to the topic, of course), or spam your friends and family. This isn't about specific legislation as much as it is demonstrating political support for freedom to choose to gamble online.

2. Write to President Bush, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and Treasury Secretary Paulson. Ask them not to exceed the specific mandates of UIGEA when drafting legislation. Remind them that online poker is not illegal under any federal law. Focus on the Family is asking their members to write to Paulson and Bush to request tough regulations. See http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/cog/A000004244.cfm , an effort funded by Focus. We should counterbalance this effort. Also, Sen. Kyl asked Gonzales for tough regulations during the AG Senate hearings. We should counterbalance this as well.

3. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online poker/gaming.

4. We've been focusing on the federal government to date, but there's a state component to this as well. Please write to your state representatives this week and ask him/her to sponsor a bill legalizing Internet gambling within your state. </font>

Thanks everyone!

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Engineer what do u feel will honestly happen on July 10th. My personal feel is that poker will be the same july 10th of this year next year and following years just as it is now. I honestly dont think were in for any big surprises

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm glad you asked. Many here think this, for some reason. Of course, last year people said the same thing about online casino and sports betting. They were wrong.

So, why do you think poker will be the same ten years from now? The DOJ is actively chasing down U.S.-facing sports books. They aren't simply waiting for the CEOs to enter America, either. Rather, the DOJ is extraditing these CEOs from foreign, sovereign nations. Once they run out of sports books, you think they'll stop and allow poker? Nah...we're next.

Skallagrim believes U.S.-facing poker sites are breaking federal law; UIGEA prohibits banking for gambling activities that violate state gambling laws, even misdemeanor state laws. Right or wrong, the fact that the DOJ can craft an argument that a federal law is being violated means trouble. Also, despite contrary appellate court rulings, the DOJ believes poker-only sites violate the Wire Act of 1961. So, even without legislation in our favor, we're at risk. We can no longer sit back and stay silent as we have for so long, IMO. With a great offense, we may be right where we are now in ten years. Without, I personally doubt that anything good will happen.

The other risk is future legislation. HR 4411 passed the House by a wide margin. HR 4777, a bill that banned Internet poker, was cosponsored by 1/3 of the House. Without a good offense, it's hard to imagine these zealots not introducing a new bill. While social conservatives have been weakened politically and internally, they're still gung-ho to outlaw our activities. We shouldn't give them the opportunity this time. If they try another law, they should know they'll pay some political price.

[TheEngineer]

My HR 2140 letter:


April 13, 2007

The Honorable Congressman
United States House of Representatives
Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-1704

Dear Congressman:

I'm writing to request that you vote for and cosponsor HR 2140, Rep. Shelley Berkley's Internet gaming study bill. While the opponents of online gaming have made a list of potential issues purported to be caused by online gaming, there’s never been a study that either verifies the validity of these claims or examines potential mitigations. It seems this should be done prior to even considering a federal prohibition of Internet gambling, especially as this activity is legal in much of the rest of the world.

If Americans are to be less free than Europeans, perhaps we should at least have some substantiation to justify a federal power grab of this magnitude.

Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[TheEngineer]

My WTO letter.

-------------------------

The Honorable xxxx yyyy
United States House of Representatives
0000 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-1704

Dear Congressman xxxxx:

As a Republican constituent and voter in your district, I am writing to express my objection to the United States’ withdrawal from the gaming sector (Article 21) of the GATS agreement. This unprecedented withdrawal, made in response to our loss to Antigua in a dispute heard by the WTO over Internet gambling access, will have far-reaching ramifications for the U.S. While the federal government seems to feel there is some driving national interest in legislating the moral beliefs of a few on all Americans by preventing us from playing poker online, the fact is that we need the WTO now more than ever. We have many trade disputes worldwide. We need access to markets and other trade controls. We need the WTO to deal effectively with China. Should we sacrifice this to satisfy the very few social conservatives who, despite the lack of even a single negative reference to gambling in the Bible, feel they have to tell OTHERS not to play poker in their OWN homes on their OWN computers?

I think not. Please ask President Bush to rescind this withdrawal from GATS. We made the commitment, so we should stick to it. The word of the U.S. should be our bond.

Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[1meandog4u]

Would you have a problem if I give this letter to the members of the NCC (Neteller Customer Coalition)? They are itching for more action and this would get over 500 more angry Neteller customers to write their congressman..

thanks

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Would you have a problem if I give this letter to the members of the NCC (Neteller Customer Coalition)? They are itching for more action and this would get over 500 more angry Neteller customers to write their congressman..

thanks

[/ QUOTE ]

Please, go right ahead. Scroll up a few for some other letters as well. Also, PPA has a generic letter supporting IGREA at the link referenced in my action plan.

[delta k]

So July 10 is 'doomsday', or at least the day we find out what is going to happen?

I've sent the letter from the PPA, any other emails I should be sending?

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
So July 10 is 'doomsday', or at least the day we find out what is going to happen?

I've sent the letter from the PPA, any other emails I should be sending?

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for writing to your congressman.

Focus on the Family is having their members write to Bush and Paulson (the Treasury Secretary) to urge tough UIGEA regs. Scroll up a few posts and check it out at the Fight for Online Gaming post. I think we should all write to Bush and Paulson, plus Gonzales (the AG).

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So July 10 is 'doomsday', or at least the day we find out what is going to happen?

I've sent the letter from the PPA, any other emails I should be sending?

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for writing to your congressman.

Focus on the Family is having their members write to Bush and Paulson (the Treasury Secretary) to urge tough UIGEA regs. Scroll up a few posts and check it out at the Fight for Online Gaming post. I think we should all write to Bush and Paulson, plus Gonzales (the AG).

[/ QUOTE ]

As of 5-11-07, the regs were still unwritten. Sam Brownback met with Paulson, the Treaury Secretary, that day to try to browbeat him into regs that likely exceeded the mandate of UIGEA. So, there's time for us to write and call Paulson and Gonzales.

Here's an article from a Focus on the Family website:

------------------------------------

Treasury Department Delays Enforcement of Online Gambling Law
from staff reports
http://www.citizenlink.org/CLNews/A000004603.cfm

Drafting of regulations has dragged on for months.

The U.S. Treasury Department is dragging its feet in writing regulations to accompany a law designed to stop the use of credit cards to pay for Internet gambling.

Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., went to see Treasure Secretary Henry Paulson on Thursday to ask about the delay.

“Are they going to be committed to enforcing this law," Brownback asked, "and putting the personnel in place that it needs."

The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act passed last year, but the Treasury Department has yet to draft the rules for enforcement.

Chad Hills, gambling analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said writing them up shouldn’t be too burdensome.

“We estimate that about five federal employees working on this could keep and maintain a list of Internet gambling operations,” he told Family News in Focus.

Illegal Internet gambling is a $12 billion-a-year industry, and Tom McClusky of the Family Research Council said the pressure to water down the restrictions via the Treasury Department is intense.

"The gambling forces seem to have some friends in those departments that might have been helping write some of those regulations," he said. “It’s almost setting up a fourth branch of government – a bureaucracy branch – that decides what laws they want to enforce and what laws they want to basically rewrite.”

(Paid for by Focus on the Family Action)

[TheEngineer]

I sent this to Paulson a few minutes ago, via snail mail. I'll email and snail mail Gonzales the same one:

-----------------------------------------

June 2, 2007

The Honorable Henry Paulson
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220

Dear Secretary Paulson:

On behalf of millions of law-abiding Americans, I am writing to ask that you use care when drafting the regulations to implement the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, so as not to exceed the specific requirements of the Act, especially with regard to Internet poker.

Many Americans oppose the UIGEA in its current form. It “passed” the Senate not by a majority vote on its merits, but by being sneaked into the Safe Ports Act, where it was safe from debate and discussion. As a result, reform measures like HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, have already been introduced, and others are sure to follow.

However, the UIGEA is law, and your department is tasked with enforcing it as written. As such, I humbly ask that you to just that – write regulations that address the legislation as written. As you know, UIGEA does not make online gambling illegal. Rather, it provides legal mechanisms for enforcement of existing state and federal gambling laws. Well, Internet poker is not illegal under existing federal law. As for state laws, very few states have outlawed Internet poker. Conversely, the vast majority of states permit online “games of skill” (such as the money skill games on yahoo.com and other sites that are not affected by UIGEA), and I think we can agree that professional players like Doyle Brunson are certainly skilled. Given this, I believe the UIGEA regulations should exempt (or simply neglect to mention) Internet poker – if not nationwide, certainly for play in states where Internet poker is not expressly illegal. After all, should the federal government be in the business of enforcing ambiguous state laws? Should your department be drawn into litigation concerning interpretations of state laws? If states actually wished to ban Internet poker, it seems they would have done so in an unambiguous fashion … especially if they wished to have the federal government enforce it.

Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[TheEngineer]

I updated the Wikipedia Online Poker article, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_poker, to add the UIGEA repeal/reform efforts, including ours.

[ QUOTE ]
HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act (IGREA), was introduced by Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) on April 26, 2007. IGREA modifies UIGEA by providing a provision for licensing of licensing of Internet gambling facilities by the Director of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. The bill requires age verification and collection of federal and state taxes. It also requires Internet gambling facilities to verify that their sites are not used for money laundering or terrorist financing. It provides an "opt out" for states, Indian tribes, and sports leagues. If passed, online poker, as well as other online gaming, will be unambiguously legal in states and on tribal lands that do not opt out.

There is currently a strong grassroots effort to repeal UIGEA. The main advocacy group is the Poker Players Alliance, with 542,731 members (as of June 3, 2007). Another major grop is at the Legislation Forum of www.twoplustwo.com. (http://www.twoplustwo.com.) The Weekly Action Plan for the grassroots effort, authored by TheEngineer, is released every Saturday at http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...=0#Post9946416. (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=9946416&amp;an=0&amp;page=0#Post 9946416.)


[/ QUOTE ]

[TheEngineer]

Letters to Write THIS WEEK (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=10627857&amp;an=0&amp;page=0#Pos t10627857)

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="brown">3. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online gaming. </font>

[/ QUOTE ]
For this item, if I find a site where I can post a comment, I do. I try to write an intelligent post that mentions Inernet poker in a positive light, to get out the message in a casual way. Following the post, I save it to Word. then, I can reuse the same comment on multiple sites. I don't think we'll change the world with this, but it seems painless. Here's one I posted to an article on a conservative site (this is focused on the audience...one should write a left-leaning one for a left-leaning site, etc):

[ QUOTE ]
The Republican Party is divided. No real surprise, given that big government social conservative CINOs have totally abandoned any pretense of limited government. After all, it’s been more than a decade since President Bill Clinton announced that the era of big government is over. Too bad Bush has resurrected it form the dead. Under Bush, government has grown far bigger and far more intrusive. It spends more, it regulates us more, and it reaches more deeply into our daily lives than it did pre-1994. This is driven by a new brand of conservatism; one that believes big government can be used for conservative ends. It is a conservatism that ridicules Barry Goldwater while embracing Roosevelt (and I don’t mean TR). These guys really do have more in common with Ted Kennedy than with Ronald Reagan.

Under the guise of promoting conservatism, the "new" Republican Party is hard at work giving the federal government unprecedented power to legislate behavior. Look at the recent online poker "ban", where banks and ISPs are required to monitor American citizens at their homes for activities deemed inappropriate by the all-powerful federal government. It’s really the business of the federal government to concern themselves with people playing cards in their own homes? Look at most of Bush's initiatives. And now we have amnesty for illegal aliens. Of course Republicans are in open revolt.

Perhaps the social conservatives and liberals who believe big government is wonderful should form a new pro-government party. They can jointly spend like drunken sailors on programs like No Child Left Behind, McCain-Feingold, and the prescription drug program. The limited government (i.e., true) conservatives and pro-business folks can then take back the Republican Party. We’ll give rights back to Americans while enforcing our immigration laws (we're doing the reverse now). We’ll be pro-life, as our commitment is to respect the value of all individuals, and we’ll continue to keep government out of the lives of individuals. The funny thing is that this approach will result in improved morality and values. You see, our morals don’t come from Washington.

It's time for real Republicans to take the party back. Limited government is just that. There's nothing conservative about big government, regardless of how much one loves the laws it passes.
Everyone: Vote for freedom. Tell your Republican congressmen that they don't have to legislate everything they personally oppose. So-called big government conservatism isn't conservative. It's statist, and giving power to the state is a loser for freedom. Perhaps, some day, we'll have a government that leaves some decisions up to the individual.

[/ QUOTE ]

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="brown">3. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online gaming. </font>

[/ QUOTE ]
For this item, if I find a site where I can post a comment, I do. I try to write an intelligent post that mentions Inernet poker in a positive light, to get out the message in a casual way. Following the post, I save it to Word. then, I can reuse the same comment on multiple sites. I don't think we'll change the world with this, but it seems painless. Here's one I posted to an article on a conservative site (this is focused on the audience...one should write a left-leaning one for a left-leaning site, etc):

[ QUOTE ]
The Republican Party is divided. No real surprise, given that big government social conservative CINOs have totally abandoned ....

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

To further economize, I took that post and turned it into three letters...one to my rep and one to each of my senators. Here it is. Feel free to use it:

------------------------------------

The Honorable xxxx xxxxx
United States House of Representatives
xxxx Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-1704

Dear Congressman xxxxx,

The Republican Party is divided. No real surprise, given that big government social conservative CINOs have totally abandoned any pretense of limited government. After all, it’s been more than a decade since President Clinton announced that the era of big government is over. Too bad Bush has resurrected it form the dead. Under Bush, government has grown far bigger and far more intrusive. It spends more, it regulates us more, and it reaches more deeply into our daily lives than it did pre-1994. This is driven by a new brand of conservatism; one that believes big government can be used for conservative ends. It is a conservatism that ridicules Barry Goldwater while embracing Roosevelt (and I don’t mean TR). These guys have more in common with Ted Kennedy than with Ronald Reagan.

Under the guise of promoting conservatism, the "new" Republican Party is hard at work giving the federal government unprecedented power to legislate behavior. Look at the recent online poker "ban", where banks and ISPs are required to monitor American citizens at their homes for activities deemed inappropriate by the all-powerful federal government. It’s really the business of the federal government to concern themselves with people playing cards in their own homes? Look at most of Bush's initiatives. And now we have amnesty for illegal aliens. Of course Republicans are in open revolt.

Perhaps the social conservatives and liberals who believe big government is wonderful should form a new pro-government party. They can jointly spend like drunken sailors on programs like No Child Left Behind, McCain-Feingold, and the prescription drug program. The limited government (i.e., true) conservatives and pro-business folks can then take back the Republican Party. We’ll give rights back to Americans while enforcing our immigration laws (we're doing the reverse now). We’ll be pro-life, as our commitment is to respect the value of all individuals, and we’ll continue to keep government out of the lives of individuals. The funny thing is that this approach will result in improved morality and values. You see, our morals don’t come from Washington.

It's time for real Republicans to take the party back. Limited government is just that. There's nothing conservative about big government, regardless of how much one loves the laws it passes.

I urge you to vote for freedom. Congress does not have to legislate everything congressmen personally oppose. So-called big government conservatism isn't conservative. It's statist, and giving power to the state is a loser for freedom. Perhaps, some day, we'll have a government that leaves some decisions up to the individual.

Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[TheEngineer]

Minor typo (in case you use it):

[ QUOTE ]
The Honorable xxxx xxxxx
United States House of Representatives
xxxx Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-1704

Dear Congressman xxxxx,

The Republican Party is divided. No real surprise, given that big government social conservative CINOs have totally abandoned any pretense of limited government. After all, it’s been more than a decade since President Clinton announced that the era of big government is over. Too bad Bush has resurrected it from the dead. Under Bush, government has grown far bigger and far more intrusive. It spends more, it regulates us more, and it reaches more deeply into our daily lives than it did pre-1994. This is driven by a new brand of conservatism; one that believes big government can be used for conservative ends. It is a conservatism that ridicules Barry Goldwater while embracing Roosevelt (and I don’t mean TR). These guys have more in common with Ted Kennedy than with Ronald Reagan.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Uglyowl]

Bump since this has fallen to page two and is important. Can everyone make a few phone calls tonight for the June 8th hearing:

Here is the list of members of the financial services committee.

http://financialservices.house.gov/members.html

[TheEngineer]

Well, we're gaining some momentum! We have a long way to go, but it's great to see progress. Robert Wexler will introduce a "skills game" exception to UIGEA today. Also, IGREA is gaining some steam. The hearing is tomorrow, so there's some real progress. Also, HR 2140, Rep. Shelley Berkley's [D-NV] Internet gambling study bill, is progressing with 60 cosponsors. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has indicated his support for the study bill. Finally, the UIGEA regulations are due on 7/10. Our opponents are complaining that the regs aren't "tough" enough, so we have an opportunity there.

It seems there's a lot we can be doing right now. And, we really need to do it RIGHT NOW. So, based on our group discussions, let's do the following:
<font color="brown">
1. Please contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail and ask them to support and cosponsor the Wexler poker bill (let's wait until it's out first, so we don't look like we don't read things we endorse, of course).

2. Please contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail to praise the outcome of the 6/8 IGREA hearing and to encourage them to support the legislation.

3. Write to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Treasury Secretary Paulson. Ask them not to exceed the specific mandates of UIGEA when drafting legislation. Remind them that online poker is not illegal under any federal law. Focus on the Family is asking their members to write to Paulson and Bush to request tough regulations. See http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/cog/A000004244.cfm , a Focus site. We should counterbalance this effort. Also, Sen. Kyl asked Gonzales for tough regulations during the AG Senate hearings. We should counterbalance this as well.

I realize this was an action from last time, but since then the FBI now claims online gambling is illegal in the U.S., at http://www.fbi.gov/page2/june07/gambling060607.htm , so we really should speak up for ourselves, IMHO.

[ QUOTE ]
If you’ve ever thought about visiting a cyber casino, here’s something you should know: it’s illegal to gamble online in the United States.

“You can go to Vegas. You can go to Atlantic City. You can go to a racetrack. You can go to those places and gamble legally. But don’t do it online. It’s against the law,” says Leslie Bryant, head of our Cyber Crime Fraud unit at FBI Headquarters.

[/ QUOTE ] <font color="brown">

4. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online poker/gaming. </font> </font>

Thanks everyone!

[TheEngineer]

Dear Congressman xxxx:

I am writing in regard to this morning’s House Financial Services Committee hearing on Internet gambling. I was very impressed with the hearing, especially with the quality of the witnesses who testified in favor of regulated Internet gambling. I felt the expert testimony of Michael Colopy of Aristotle Inc, Jon Prideaux of Asterion Payments, and Gerald Kitchen of SecureTrading Ltd. proved that Internet gambling can be regulated effectively (and has been successfully regulated in Britain). This pleased me, as I do share your concerns for underage gambling, compulsive gambling, and other issues. Fortunately, this is an issue we can effectively address with technology and regulation, rather than with a “feel good” porous prohibition. America is far better off with effective regulation than with prohibition that relies on banks to snoop through our financial transactions and Internet service providers to snoop through our Internet usage history.

Further, I concurred completely with Radley Balko of Reason Magazine (and a regular Foxnews.com contributor) that what Americans do in their own homes with their own money is their own business. As a limited-government conservative in the tradition of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, I am distressed by the amount of government intrusion in our daily lives. I think many Americans feel the same way. I imagine you will consider the validity of Mr. Balko’s points relative to our freedoms and liberties, as I know you are a man who believes in these core American values.

I ask you to carefully consider the facts and to support HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007. It’s not about supporting gambling; rather, it is about supporting the right of adults to make their own decisions.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

------------------------------

Dear Senator xxxxx:

I am writing in regard to this morning’s House Financial Services Committee hearing on Internet gambling. I was very impressed with the hearing, especially with the quality of the witnesses who testified in favor of regulated Internet gambling. I felt the expert testimony of Michael Colopy of Aristotle Inc, Jon Prideaux of Asterion Payments, and Gerald Kitchen of SecureTrading Ltd. proved that Internet gambling can be regulated effectively (and has been successfully regulated in Britain). This pleased me, as I do share your concerns for underage gambling, compulsive gambling, and other issues. Fortunately, this is an issue we can effectively address with technology and regulation, rather than with a “feel good” porous prohibition. America is far better off with effective regulation than with prohibition that relies on banks to snoop through our financial transactions and Internet service providers to snoop through our Internet usage history.

Further, I concurred completely with Radley Balko of Reason Magazine (and a regular Foxnews.com contributor) that what Americans do in their own homes with their own money is their own business. As a limited-government conservative in the tradition of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, I am distressed by the amount of government intrusion in our daily lives. I think many Americans feel the same way. I imagine you will consider the validity of Mr. Balko’s points relative to our freedoms and liberties, as I know you are a man who believes in these core American values.

I ask you to carefully consider the facts and to support HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007, when it is introduced into the Senate. It’s not about supporting gambling; rather, it is about supporting the right of adults to make their own decisions.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[kidpokeher]

[ QUOTE ]

I realize this was an action from last time, but since then the FBI now claims online gambling is illegal in the U.S., at http://www.fbi.gov/page2/june07/gambling060607.htm , so we really should speak up for ourselves, IMHO.

[ QUOTE ]
If you’ve ever thought about visiting a cyber casino, here’s something you should know: it’s illegal to gamble online in the United States.

“You can go to Vegas. You can go to Atlantic City. You can go to a racetrack. You can go to those places and gamble legally. But don’t do it online. It’s against the law,” says Leslie Bryant, head of our Cyber Crime Fraud unit at FBI Headquarters.

[/ QUOTE ] <font color="brown">



[/ QUOTE ]

You can't believe how much this puts me on tilt. I wish I had the funds to afford the legal hassles. If I was a high stakes guy with a fat bankroll I'd be trying to get myself arrested right now.

Thanks again for everything, Engineer. You're doing a great job of keeping us all informed, motivated and mobilized.

[Riverrun]

hey all, posted this under the x-post in medium stakes, but realized probably more interest here:

article from today's ny times that sounds a little hopeful

http://www.nytimes.com/cnet/CNET_2100-10...70&amp;emc=eta1 (http://www.nytimes.com/cnet/CNET_2100-1028_3-6189857.html?ex=1182139200&amp;en=0fed6f2e914c794f&amp;ei= 5070&amp;emc=eta1)

[TheEngineer]

Great article!

[PokeReader]

Hey, re the regulation writing process I suggest everyone contact their banks. They will actually have much more of a voice at the table than anyone else we could hope to influence. I'll have to look it up but there will also be a banking trade association representing the individual banks during the reg. process. I would suggest that people's letters not be in the tone of "I play online poker and it's none of your business or the gov'ts either. Instead, the letters should argue against burdensome government regulations that will further restrain commerce and the free flow of liquidity. We should argue that we do not want banks restricting the use of lawfully possessed funds, the account-holder is entitled to the use of their money, and if they do something illegal with them it is up to the gov't to arrest them. However, to restrict the use of their funds without prosecting any underlying criminal act is unheard of, and sets a chilling and dangerous precedence for further financial restrictions in the future.

I don't know what kind of press coordination is going on generally, but if we need mass pushes for something like this we will need the different places poker players get information to coordinate. Generally, the gaming sites, web sites and forums, pro blogs, magazines, and ideally the tournaments (Ha!), should set up a coordinated contact system so that if something happens that needs player action there will be alot of place where they hear about it, and hopefully just have to hit through a pop-up to contact whoever. I admit trying to work on these kind of things at the end of the last electoral cycle was what made decide poker players were kind of hopeless as activists, but am dipping toe back in water now. Engineer definitely seems like superstar, made me feel guilty I'm not doing anything when I actually know these people.

[TheEngineer]

June 13, 2007

The Honorable Spencer Bachus
2246 Rayburn Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Congressman Bachus:

I’m writing in response to last Friday’s House Financial Services Committee hearing on Internet gambling (June 8, 2007: Can Internet Gambling Be Effectively Regulated to Protect Consumers and the Payments System?). I was very impressed with quality of the hearing, especially with the witnesses who testified in favor of regulated Internet gambling. I felt the expert testimony of Michael Colopy of Aristotle Inc, Jon Prideaux of Asterion Payments, and Gerald Kitchen of SecureTrading Ltd. proved that Internet gambling can be regulated effectively (and has been successfully regulated in Britain). This pleased me, as I do share your concerns for underage gambling, compulsive gambling, and other issues. Fortunately, this is an issue we can effectively address with technology and regulation, rather than with a “feel good” unconstitutional prohibition. America is far better off with effective regulation than with a prohibition that relies on banks to snoop through our financial transactions and Internet service providers to snoop through our Internet usage history.

Further, I concurred completely with Radley Balko of Reason Magazine (and a regular Foxnews.com contributor) in that what Americans do in their own homes with their own money is their own business. As a limited-government conservative in the tradition of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, I am distressed by the amount of government intrusion in our daily lives. I think many Americans feel the same way. In fact, it pains me to see our party acting as the agent of big government. I imagine you will consider the validity of Mr. Balko’s points relative to our freedoms and liberties, as I know you are a man who believes in these core American values regardless of your personal opinions concerning Internet poker.

Speaking of Mr. Balko, I was perplexed by your question to him concerning Ross Boatman and his biography on the FullTilt Poker web site. You seemed very concerned that, as a youth, Mr. Boatman played poker with his brother at the kitchen table, likely for pennies, baseball cards, or valueless chips used simply to keep score. Certainly you were not suggesting passing federal legislation to prevent brothers from playing poker at the kitchen table, were you? I certainly hope not, but one never knows, given recent Congressional history. Were you suggesting that Mr. Boatman was playing on the Internet with his brother when he was twelve? Certainly you understand no site ever permitted more than one player from the same IP address to play the same game, due to collusion. I assume you do, as you claim expertise in this area. Also, as Mr. Boatman is in his 40s, he would have been twelve back in the pre-Internet 1970s. Anyway, regardless of the point you were trying to make, fortunately for Mr. Boatman this was prior to the current era of big government Republicanism. As such, he was able to play poker for pennies at his kitchen table with his brother without federal intrusion.

As for the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, you noted that it does not make any gambling illegal that was not already illegal. Rather, it provides legal mechanisms for enforcement of existing state and federal gambling laws. Well, Internet poker is not illegal under existing federal law. As for state laws, very few states have outlawed Internet poker. Conversely, the vast majority of states permit online “games of skill” (such as the money skill games on yahoo.com and other sites that are not affected by UIGEA), and I think we can agree that professional players like Doyle Brunson are certainly skilled. It seems that if states wished to ban Internet poker, it seems they would have done so in an unambiguous fashion … especially if they wished to have the federal government enforce it.

HR 2046 provides real regulation, rather than a porous prohibition. A regulated Internet gambling environment will facilitate age verification and collection of federal and state taxes. It will also reduce any potential vulnerability of gambling websites to being used for money laundering, drug trafficking, or terrorist financing. With regulation, potential problems can be controlled without taking freedoms from Americans. After all, Russians and Eastern Europeans can gamble online; it seems the U.S. should trust its citizens at least as much as Russia trusts theirs, right?

Proponents of online gambling prohibition often mention endorsements UIGEA received from some in the religious community, some family groups, some financial services groups and some professional sports organizations. I hope you’ll consider the fact that these groups do not necessarily represent the majority of voters in our nation (or even the majority of Alabama Republicans). As for religious and family groups, there is no prohibition against gambling in the Bible, as was noted at the hearing. As a Christian, I personally find it offensive that some in the religious community are willing to give away our freedoms in pursuit of a goal not even defined in the Bible. As for financial services groups, some credit card issuers may like UIGEA (due only to the risk of losing players refusing to pay up), but I do not believe banks wish to be the enforcers of UIGEA. As a result, I think you’ll find financial services groups to be net losers as a result of UIGEA. Finally, I believe the concerns of the major professional sports organizations you mentioned relate only to sports betting. As HR 2046 permits them to opt out, this concern has been addressed.

In closing, I urge you to reconsider your strong opposition to allowing Americans to make their own decisions concerning playing poker in their own homes via the Internet. Online gambling will continue to exist with or without the participation of the United States. We’re losing our opportunity to control the games via regulation as well as the opportunities for U.S. companies to operate the games both domestically and internationally. This is costing America jobs and tax revenue.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer


Cc: My Congressman (on the Financial Services Committee) and Michael Duncan, Republican National Committee Chairman

[Merkle]

I recently wrote my first letter to a govt official and have jut received his reply. I will post his reply and my intended reply. If anybody notices any corrections I should make i my reply before sending it would be appreciated.

Dear Mr. xxxxx:

Thank you for contacting our office to express your support for H.R. 2046 the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act. I appreciate the time you took to share your views on this issue with me.

As you know, language preventing the use of payment instruments, such as credit cards and fund transfers, as well as prohibiting internet gambling, was passed by both houses of Congress as part of Safe Port legislation and signed into law by the President on October 13, 2006.

H.R. 2046 would provide for the licensing of Internet gambling facilities by the Director of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. The bill has been referred to the House Financial Services Committee and the Committee on Energy and Commerce where it is currently pending with no legislative consideration scheduled at this time. Please be assured that we will closely monitor the progress of this bill should it begin to move through the legislative process in the future.

Again, thank you for your e-mail. Please do not hesitate to contact our office on issues of concern to you in the future or if I can be of any further assistance.

Sincerely,


John Tanner, M. C.

And my planned response:

Thank you for your response to my message. And yes, I am very aware and very outraged at how the UIGEA bill was passed without debate in the Senate by tacking it on to a port security bill on the final day of last years session. That action led me to vote entirely democratic ticket in the last election for the first time in my life. In the past I have always voted Republican because I expect less government interference in my day to day life.

I am also aware that the UIGEA bill was in total disregard of our commitments under the World Trade Organization treaty and has potential ramifications not just with Antigua but with EU as well.

I rue the day when I have to look to a Democrat for less interference in my private life, but at least his bill will be a first step toward correcting our situation in regards to the WTO.

I am also aware that as a semi-professional chess player the UIGEA could be interpreted against online chess tournaments in which I have participated in the past. This is another reason I ask you to support Wexler's bill H.R. 2610.

By the way you do realize UIGEA did NOT make internet gambling illegal. After all it specifically allows horse race bets and lotteries as well as fantasy sports league gambling. We need H.R. 2046 and H.R. 2610 as the first steps toward correcting the poorly worded and thought out UIGEA bill. These issues need to be defined, regulated and taxed, not prohibited or left in limbo.

[TheEngineer]

Focus on the Family's new action item is to contact members of the House Judiciary Committee. Seems we should do the same for our next action item. Anyone have an opinion for or against?

[ QUOTE ]
FOF: Be sure to contact House Judiciary Committee members (202-225-3951) from your state and urge their opposition to Barney Frank's bill (HR 2046).

[/ QUOTE ]

[TheEngineer]

Sounds good. Thanks for taking the time to write and to share your letter. That encourages others here to fight back, too.

[Sniper]

Some people might find the free tools here (http://www.congressmerge.com/) useful.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
June 13, 2007

The Honorable Spencer Bachus
2246 Rayburn Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Congressman Bachus:

I’m writing in response to last Friday’s ...

Sincerely,

TheEngineer


Cc: My Congressman (on the Financial Services Committee) and Michael Duncan, Republican National Committee Chairman

[/ QUOTE ]

I found the carbon copy line was a good way to send out a lot of letters while having to write only one, so I share that with you all. With many letters I can simply change the recipient's name and reuse it. Others, like this one, work better by carbon copying. I sent this letter to Bush, Gonzales, my rep, both senators, the RNC chair, the House Judiciary Committee, the House Financial Services Committee, and to Paulson at the Treasury Dept. I thought that's a bit of mileage from one letter.

Here's some contact info:

Bush: comments@whitehouse.gov
Gonzales: AskDOJ@usdoj.gov
Paulson: 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW; Washington, D.C. 20220
Rep: www.house.gov (http://www.house.gov)
Senators: www.senate.gov (http://www.senate.gov)
RNC chair: Chairman@gop.com
DNC: http://www.democrats.org/page/s/contactissues
House Judiciary Committee: http://judiciary.house.gov/contact.aspx
House Financial Services Committee: 2129 Rayburn House Office Building; Washington, DC 20515

[TheEngineer]

A post I've made to a few conservative blogs:

CINOs want bigger government, as usual
TheEngineer
June 16, 2007

The neo-pub CINOs spend like Democrats; they just don't wish to tax for what they spent. Somehow, this is supposed to be fiscally conservative. I hope we real conservatives retake the party someday.

There are fissures in our party. Many Republicans, especially younger voters, are rebelling from the takeover of our party by big government, big spending social conservatives. This is no longer the party of Reagan, which celebrated limited government and optimism for America. Our party abandoned its roots, so its members are abandoning our party.

It seems we conservatives have been too busy drinking our own bathwater (reading only conservative pubs, listening primarily to conservative radio, etc.) to see what's going on with our party. We were elected on the promise of LIMITED GOVERNMENT, especially at the federal level. Instead of that, we decided to spend and spend and spend some more. Then, we decided big government was fine, so long as it promoted a socially conservative agenda (one that Goldwater would not have even recognized, by the way). We don't like online poker? Rather than simply choosing to not play, we instead passed federal legislation mandating banks to comb through our financial transactions and mandating our ISPs nose in on our Internet sites (and also mandating that ISPs block access to certain sites, as is done by China and Iran). After all, we can't trust Americans to make wise choices, right? We don't like Democrat corruption? Fine, we have lots of hearings (as we should). Republican corruption? We'd better hide that and criticize reporters who mention it, then act surprised when we lose elections (and blame the liberals for our own transgressions).

You want to see how bad Congressional Republicans are now with respect to limited government? The House Financial Services Committee had a hearing on June 8 to discuss the feasibility of effective regulation of Internet gaming. Hearing documents are on the committee website, at http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml ; the hearing webcast is at http://financialserv.edgeboss.net/wmedia/financialserv/hearing060807.wvx . However, despite the fact that the hearing clearly showed that Internet gambling can be effectively regulated (in fact, those favoring a ban on Internet gaming were embarrassed), Congressional Republicans like Spencer Bachus have decided that American adults cannot be trusted with the freedom to decide to play. Sad.

Perhaps the social conservatives and liberals who believe big government is wonderful should form a new pro-government party. They can jointly spend like drunken sailors on programs like No Child Left Behind and the prescription drug program. The limited government (i.e., true) conservatives and pro-business real Americans can then take back the Republican Party. We’ll give rights back to Americans while enforcing our immigration laws (we're doing the reverse now). We’ll be pro-life, as our commitment is to respect the value of all individuals, and we’ll continue to keep government out of the lives of individuals. The funny thing is that this approach will result in improved morality and values. You see, our morals don’t come from Washington.

It's time for real Republicans to take the party back. Limited government is just that. There's nothing conservative about big government, regardless of how much one loves the laws it passes.

Everyone: Vote for freedom. Tell your Republican congressmen that they don't have to legislate everything they personally oppose. So-called big government conservatism isn't conservative. It's statist, and giving power to the state is a loser for freedom. Perhaps, some day, we'll have a government that leaves some decisions up to the individual.

[TheEngineer]

Well, we're gaining some momentum! Robert Wexler introduced his "skills game" poker bill. Also, IGREA is gaining some steam. We demolished our opponents in the hearing, so there's some real progress. Also, HR 2140, Rep. Shelley Berkley's [D-NV] Internet gambling study bill, is progressing with 60 cosponsors. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has indicated his support for the study bill. Finally, the UIGEA regulations are due on 7/10. Our opponents are concerned that the regs won't be "tough enough", so we have an opportunity there.

It seems there's a lot we can be doing right now. And, we really need to do it RIGHT NOW. So, based on our group discussions, let's do the following:
<font color="brown">
1. Please contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail and ask them to support and cosponsor H.R. 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act. His approach is more consistent with existing state law. Many states ban or regulate games of "chance" but not games of "skill". In fact, one can play various "skill games" on MSN, AOL, and Yahoo for money in 36 states with no legal issues whatsoever. While many of us (me included) prefer full legalization of all online gaming simply on general principle, to be fair Wexler is sticking to existing precedent. It doesn't hurt other gaming, as it doesn't legitimize UIGEA or create additional laws. Rather, it defined poker as not being governed by UIGEA or by the Wire Act. If you're not a poker AP....it's time to learn if this bill passes, because websites will be MINTING CASH for anyone with half a brain!! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

2. Please contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail to praise the outcome of the 6/8 IGREA hearing (www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml (http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml); webcast archived at http://financialserv.edgeboss.net/wmedia/financialserv/hearing060807.wvx ) and to encourage them to support the legislation.

3. Write to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Treasury Secretary Paulson. Ask them not to exceed the specific mandates of UIGEA when drafting legislation. Remind them that online poker is not illegal under any federal law. Focus on the Family is asking their members to write to Paulson and Bush to request tough regulations. See http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/cog/A000004244.cfm, a Focus site. They say, "Representative Barney Frank, however, introduced dangerous legislation that would legalize Internet gambling and promote its expansion. The fight is on and we need your help to defend the family!" I think we all agree...the fight in on!!!

We should counterbalance FOF's effort. Whatever they do, we should do (unless it's stupid, of course). Also, Sen. Kyl asked Gonzales for tough regulations during the AG Senate hearings. We should counterbalance this as well.

I realize this was an action from last time, but since then the FBI now claims online gambling is illegal in the U.S., at http://www.fbi.gov/page2/june07/gambling060607.htm, so we really should speak up for ourselves, IMHO.

4. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online poker/gaming. Since we proved our position in the 6/8 House hearing, let's post that link wherever we can. I have. /images/graemlins/smile.gif I found one place that link isn't.....it's not on Spencer Bachus' web site!! </font>

Thanks everyone!

[TheEngineer]

The Honorable Henry Paulson
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220

Dear Secretary Paulson:

I understand that some who wish to prohibit law-abiding Americans from choosing to play online poker in the privacy of their own homes have been lobbying your department for UIGEA (Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006) regulations that would, in essence, create an Internet gaming prohibition. This concerns me greatly as a freedom-loving American and as a recreational poker player, as Congress did not ban any gaming with UIGEA. It seems anti-poker interest groups would have you disregard this fact and would use your department as a back door means of creating the prohibition they were unable to win legislatively.

As you know, UIGEA does not make Internet gaming illegal. Rather, it merely provides a means for enforcement of federal and state Internet gaming laws that were already in effect when UIGEA passed. Prohibitionists like Senator Kyl and Congressman Bachus are fond of saying this. However, what they neglect to mention is that Internet poker is not illegal under federal law (including the Wire Act of 1961, which covers only sports betting). As for state laws, very few states have outlawed Internet poker. Conversely, the vast majority of states permit online “games of skill” (such as the money skill games on yahoo.com and other sites that are not affected by UIGEA), and I think we can agree that professional players like Doyle Brunson are certainly skilled. Given this, I believe the UIGEA regulations should either exempt or simply neglect to mention Internet poker – if not nationwide, certainly for play in states where Internet poker is not explicitly illegal. After all, if states actually wished to ban Internet poker, they would have done so in an unambiguous fashion, especially if they wished to have the federal government take the unprecedented step of enforcing it.

As for other Internet gaming, Goldman Sachs held large positions in BetOnSports, SportingBet, and other offshore Internet gaming sites while you were CEO. Certainly they would have not held these positions during your tenure as CEO had you felt they either violated U.S. laws or were immoral. I believe you were correct to have authorized these positions and I commend you for it; Americans should have the freedom to make their own decisions with regards to online gaming.

Also, as you are undoubtedly aware, UIGEA has erected a trade barrier around the United States that purports to protect our land-based casinos, horse racing interests, and state lotteries from international competition. In fact, the WTO just ruled against the United States, again, regarding our closed gaming markets. Now your department is being asked by some to increase the height of this trade barrier even further. In fact, the controls some in Congress are suggesting, including having banks snoop through Americans’ financial transactions and having Internet service providers snoop through Americans’ Internet usage history, are more fitting for China or Iran than for America. As you are a well regarded and principled free trade advocate, I strongly urge you to support free trade in this matter by disregarding those who would have you exceed the specific UIGEA requirements.

Unfortunately, while these anti-gaming interest groups list various reasons to justify an online poker prohibition, these groups oppose effective regulations to address those concerns. On June 8, 2007, the House Financial Services Committee held a hearing, entitled Can Internet Gambling Be Effectively Regulated to Protect Consumers and the Payments System? (available on the committee website, at www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml (http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml) ). The purpose of this hearing was to discuss the feasibility of H.R. 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007. The hearing conclusively showed that Internet gambling can be effectively regulated for underage gambling, compulsive gambling, operator integrity, homeland security concerns, integrity of sporting, tax collection, and other issues. However, rather than working toward regulation that addresses their stated concerns, the opponents of Internet gambling prefer you to restrict the freedoms of Americans well beyond what was passed by Congress with UIGEA. It seems they simply dislike gambling and wish to impose their personal opinions on others. I trust you will not allow your department to further this unworkable system, especially when effective regulation is being eschewed.

While your department is clearly compelled to enforce the Act, I ask that you enforce only that which is specifically mandated by the bill. Again, UIGEA is not an online gaming prohibition, regardless of what the anti-gaming interest groups say.

Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[Dr_Jeckyl_00]

I am not sure where to post, so this thread looks good.

I sent my Congressman, the "Honorable" Chris Shays of CT the form letter found through PPA, and of course added some of my own verbiage to the letter. Shays basically said he supported UIGEA and has always been against gambling. His argument was to protect children and the poor people that are hurt most by having gamboling problems.

His letter was sent to me in snail mail format. I suppose I could post it, but I am not sure how.

Not sure what else I can do here in CT. sorry if this was the wrong thread.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I am not sure where to post, so this thread looks good.

I sent my Congressman, the "Honorable" Chris Shays of CT the form letter found through PPA, and of course added some of my own verbiage to the letter. Shays basically said he supported UIGEA and has always been against gambling. His argument was to protect children and the poor people that are hurt most by having gamboling problems.

His letter was sent to me in snail mail format. I suppose I could post it, but I am not sure how.

Not sure what else I can do here in CT. sorry if this was the wrong thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the right thread. Thanks for taking the time to write. Although Shays isn't with us, he now knows one more of his constituents isn't with him. If he knows opposing Internet poker isn't "free", he may back off a bit if enough of us write and call. This is especially true of Northeastern Republicans like Shays, who are rapidly becoming an endangered species.

[PokeReader]

Chris is a Christian Scientist. Fortuately, he is actually in a vunerable district. Won by like 7 points, if I remember correctly, and it was alot more than we thought it would be. He will definitely be on the target list for this year again. I haven't been paying attention to CT, so I'm not sure who the potential candiates are, (though it won't be Diane again), but I'll take a look. There is a local gaming issue with potential Indian casinos in the district.

What we really need to do is to come up with a target list. People who are against us who are in vunerable districts. Then we will have to try to influence the challengers with endorsements/contributions. This is the type of thing I would be happy to help with, I just need to not be publicly out there, especially this cycle. Not to say I can't arrange a meeting with somebody if it makes sense, I just can't become the internet poker playing campaign manager. Sadly, after this thing passed, it would limit my ability to work for different candidates.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
What we really need to do is to come up with a target list. People who are against us who are in vunerable districts. Then we will have to try to influence the challengers with endorsements/contributions. This is the type of thing I would be happy to help with, I just need to not be publicly out there, especially this cycle. Not to say I can't arrange a meeting with somebody if it makes sense, I just can't become the internet poker playing campaign manager. Sadly, after this thing passed, it would limit my ability to work for different candidates.

[/ QUOTE ]

I posted an analysis of where we stand relative to geography and political parties on a different thread. I think we'll learn a lot more as IGREA progresses, as it will separate the die-hard gambling opponents like Kyl from the folks like Emanuel Cleaver and Peter King (both voted for UIGEA, but are with us on IGREA....they're not anti-gambing; they are anti-unregulated, offshore, untaxed Internet gambling). We'll obviously want to take aim at Goodlatte, Bachus, and Shays. We'll be adding to the list as time goes on.

Maybe we should start a list of folks who are against us no matter what, on a new thread.

[PokeReader]

My point is that is that it is irrevalent if they oppose us if we cannot defeat them. We need to focus our efforts on a groups of not really more than twenty Congressional seats, maybe eight to ten Senate seats, though it would be better if it would be substantially less on the Senate side.

Groups like our gain power by showing definitively that they can effect election results. If we try to defeat everybody against us, regardless of their vunerability we will dilute our effectiveness. We need to focus on people who are against us, who we can possibly create an edge for defeating, who have a more gaming friendly candidate running against them, ideally in the general, but we could do a few viable challenger primaries. In the end writing letters is helpful, but if we don't have money and volunteers to change election results we will not be able to repeal this. Fact of life. If the sites had been lining pockets this legislation would never had happened. That sad fact is why I only work campaigns and not in the legislation side. Buying Congress is easy. Buying enough to repeal something though, that is not cheap. We now need majorities and leadership in both houses, and the Presidency. I personally think we should have a PAC that will endorse/contribute to candidates that will send questionaires to all the Presidential candidates now - when we need the money - and then we could hopefully find out where we stood.

The one thing this community has if it ever cared to use it is money. As a experienced political fundraiser, I would think at 2+2K max I could easily get 10million out of the poker world with a halfway decent list and a committment to support my candidate. Instead of plodding along the pros need to do what GE does when it wants a Pres. candidate to support something, open up their checkbooks. But just like my push to do this to gain the support of the Congressional Dems before the next election, it is time limited. Dollars after the nomination is secured are discounted, and you do not get the same attention. So, suggestion that would do something, set up PAC, hire fundraiser, send questionnaires, set up meetings with candidates, and pay to get an administration that will at least ignore enforcement of this law.

[TheEngineer]

Sounds good to me. Go for it.

[TheEngineer]

The following congressmen voted for HR 4411 and won reelection in 2006 with &lt;55% of the vote:

Rick Renzi (R-AZ) 54%
John Doolittle (R-CA) 49.9%
Brian Bilbray (R-CA) 53.2%
Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) 45.6%
Chris Shays (R-CT) 50.9%
Ric Keller (R-FL) 52.8%
Jim Marshall (D-GA) 50.5% (unlikely to be opposed by someone on our side, though)
John Barrow (D-GA) 50.3% (unlikely to be opposed by someone on our side, though)
Melissa Bean (D-IL) 50.9%
Mark Kirk (R-IL) 53.4%
Mark Souder (R-IN) 54.3%
Leonard Boswell (D-IA) 51.8%
Geoff Davis (R-KY) 51.7%
William Jefferson (D-LA) 30.1% (56.6% in run-off) [&gt;55%, but very vulnerable]
Charlie Melancon (D-LA) 55.0% (with us now!!! cosponsor of IGREA /images/graemlins/grin.gif )
Joe Knollenberg (R-MI) 51.6%
Thad McCotter (R) 54.1%
Lee Terry (R-NE) 54.7%
Mike Ferguson (R-NJ) 49.4%
Heather Wilson (R-NM) 50.2%
Jim Walsh (R-NY) 50.8%
Tom Reynolds (R-NY) 52.0%
Randy Kuhl (R-NY) 51.5%
Robin Hayes (R-NC) 50.1%
Steve Chabot (R-OH) 52.3%
Jean Schmidt (R-OH) 50.5%
Deborah Pryce (R-OH) 50.2%
Darlene Hooley (D-OR) 54.0%
Phil English (R-PA) 53.6%
Jim Gerlach (R-PA) 50.7%
Charles Dent (R-PA) 53.6%
Thelma Drake (R-VA) 51.3%
Dave Reichert (R-WA) 51.5%
Barbara Cubin (R-WY) 48.3%

[TheEngineer]

What do you all wish to do for the week of 6/25 (with regards to our fight)? Should we write to Congress and the USTR about the WTO decision? Should we continue to badger stragglers to get their letters to Paulson and Gonzales? Please post your thoughts here. Thanks.

[oldbookguy]

[ QUOTE ]
What do you all wish to do for the week of 6/25 (with regards to our fight)? Should we write to Congress and the USTR about the WTO decision? Should we continue to badger stragglers to get their letters to Paulson and Gonzales? Please post your thoughts here. Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

This week should be a push in ALL directions, USTR, Paulson, Gonzales and Bernanke.

I will start a thread (and a copy of a letter i presented them) on a meeting I had today with a rep from Sen. Rockefeller (D. WV) today that may / may not have some promise.

Also, that Cato thing I read, they should receive something from us as well.

The e-mail for the lady there is:
sjames@cato.org

obg

[Perseus]

[ QUOTE ]
What do you all wish to do for the week of 6/25 (with regards to our fight)? Should we write to Congress and the USTR about the WTO decision? Should we continue to badger stragglers to get their letters to Paulson and Gonzales? Please post your thoughts here. Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have we been sending letters or making phone calls to media outlets...it seems the best thing we could do now is get the public caught up on what the WTO decision could mean to economics in the US.

[oldbookguy]

Excellent idea. What say you engineer?
perhaps a list of media could be made and concentrate our efforts there with the absurdity of this whole mess over a simple game of cards (and present it that way?).

obg


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What do you all wish to do for the week of 6/25 (with regards to our fight)? Should we write to Congress and the USTR about the WTO decision? Should we continue to badger stragglers to get their letters to Paulson and Gonzales? Please post your thoughts here. Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have we been sending letters or making phone calls to media outlets...it seems the best thing we could do now is get the public caught up on what the WTO decision could mean to economics in the US.

[/ QUOTE ]

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What do you all wish to do for the week of 6/25 (with regards to our fight)? Should we write to Congress and the USTR about the WTO decision? Should we continue to badger stragglers to get their letters to Paulson and Gonzales? Please post your thoughts here. Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have we been sending letters or making phone calls to media outlets...it seems the best thing we could do now is get the public caught up on what the WTO decision could mean to economics in the US.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been all along...none published yet. The U.S. media hasn't picked up on any of this. They think "Internet gambling was banned....the end", at least from what I see. Hopefully the Antigua issue will wake them up.

I've had far better luck with simply posting to various blogs. I'll continue to write to the mainstream press, of course. I hope you'll consider doing the same. If you don't get published, at least you can spam lots of blogs and boards with your letter.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Excellent idea. What say you engineer?
perhaps a list of media could be made and concentrate our efforts there with the absurdity of this whole mess over a simple game of cards (and present it that way?).

[/ QUOTE ]

Writing to the media has been an action item for a couple of months, and I imagine we'll continue to have it there.

I encourage you to write to the media outlets of your choice.

[Perseus]

I have noticed it has been an action item. I am wondering what has been done besides your own letters...has anyone else been sending them? To what outlets have you been sending these letters? Maybe get a list of who exactly is doing what and the specifics of where letters are being sent.

In light of this weeks recent announcements I think this is a time to really jump on board with sending letters to newspapers and other forms of media...and not just Enginner or other select few, but everyone (including me).

[Tuff_Fish]

How about a quick primer on how to get something published or at least mentioned in newspapers and other media outlets. If someone who has been successful could tell us how to be effective it would be a big help to folks like me who have never tried any of this before.

Tuff

[Alchemist]

I've got Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) for my district (8th). He defeated Mort Meier 64-36% in the last election and voted Yes for HR4411 (Leach) and HR2143 (Bachus).

Can someone more knowledgable than me explain what this this (http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=V3871&amp;can_id=27015) vote is for that he voted No?

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I've got Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) for my district (8th). He defeated Mort Meier 64-36% in the last election and voted Yes for HR4411 (Leach) and HR2143 (Bachus).

Can someone more knowledgable than me explain what this this (http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=V3871&amp;can_id=27015) vote is for that he voted No?

[/ QUOTE ]

The amendment eliminated the UIGEA carve-outs (horses, fantasy sports, etc) to show the hypocrisy of the politicians in allowing some Internet gambling but not all. Some in the House felt it was a "poison pill" designed to break up the alliance of various interests that ended up supporting UIGEA. That's why the anti-gambling rights politicians supported it, while pro-gambling rights ones opposed it.

Some anti-gambling politicians, like Chris Shays, hate allowing citizens to choose to gamble so much that they supported the amendment.

[Legislurker]

Sometime today or tomorrow I am going to go back through all the AP et al articles on the WTO issue this year, make a list of all the reporters emails, write out 2-3 basic form letters, and see if we can get people to pick one and edit them, and send them out to reporters who have covered this before. If someone wants to aim one at editors, and we can send that as well to editors of papers who have published work on the Antigua issue.

[TheEngineer]

<font color="red">Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 6/25 </font>

<font color="brown">Based on our group discussions, let's do the following:</font>

1. Write to U.S. Trade Representative Susan C. Schwab (carbon copy your senators and President Bush) and let her know you object to U.S. actions relating to Antigua's online gambing access case. Please see posts within this thread for sample letters.

USTR Contact Info:
contactustr@ustr.eop.gov
600 17th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20508
WTO-Related Issues: 202-395-3063
www.ustr.gov/Who_We_Are/Contact_Us/Section_Index.html (http://www.ustr.gov/Who_We_Are/Contact_Us/Section_Index.html)

Your senators are at www.senate.gov (http://www.senate.gov)
Bush is at comments@whitehouse.gov

Others:
Justice Department: AskDOJ@usdoj.gov
Your representative: www.house.gov (http://www.house.gov)
Republican National Committee: Chairman@gop.com
Democratic National Committee: www.democrats.org/contact.html (http://www.democrats.org/contact.html)
Speaker Nancy Pelosi: AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov

We get a lot of “bang for the buck here”, as one letter will go to at least four individuals. Send one (email and hard copy) to Ambassador Schwab. Then, email the same letter to each senator (separately). Add “cc: Senator xxxx to the top line”. <u>Let’s each send one letter per month to the USTR and the copy recipients until this is resolved.</u>

2. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on advocating for the legislation. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. Since we proved our position in the 6/8 House hearing, let's post the link to the hearing webcast wherever we can.

Letters to the editor, Washington Post: letters@washpost.com
Letters to the editor, New York Times: letters@nytimes.com

3. Continue to contact your senators and representative. <u>Let’s call and send snail mail at least once every four to six weeks</u>. Let’s email at least once per week or biweekly. Some of these may be carbon copies of letters to others (like the USTR, Frank, Bachus, etc).

We have many issues, so we can focus on one item for each letter while rotating. It does not matter to our movement which items you choose; any communication against attempts to ban online gambling at the federal level work in our favor. After all, if IGREA fails due to lack of public support, it’s not like the media will report that people disagreed with giving power to the FinCEN or to issues relating to shutting out foreign operators. They’ll report, “Frank’s Attempt to End Online Gambling Ban (as if there is such a thing, but the media don’t care) Fails to Draw Public Support”. Our opponents will say, "see, Americans are happy we’re 'protecting the public'". If Wexler’s bill fails, the media won’t report that some felt it legitimized UIGEA. They’ll report that Americans didn’t even wish to legalize poker. This year, we’re all about generating support for our general position, which is that online gaming should not be prohibited. Let’s focus there. So, here are some issues we can rotate:

- Antigua’s WTO case
- IGREA
- Wexler’s bill: H.R. 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act
- Praise for the 6/8 hearing. www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml (http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml); webcast archived at http://financialserv.edgeboss.net/wmedia/financialserv/hearing060807.wvx
- Shelley Berkley's study bill

4. Write to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Treasury Secretary Paulson, and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke <u>at least once per month</u> until the UIGEA regs come out. Ask them not to exceed the specific mandates of UIGEA when drafting legislation. Remind them that online poker is not illegal under any federal law. Focus on the Family is asking their members to write to Paulson and Bush to request tough regulations. Also, Sen. Kyl asked Gonzales for tough regulations during the AG Senate hearings. We should counterbalance this.

Thanks everyone!

[TheEngineer]

Well, we keep improving our position. Things sure looked bad when UIGEA passed. I'm amazed at how we've improved week in and week out. We have a long way to go yet, but we're better at this point than anyone could have reasonably predicted last November.

The WTO ruled that the U.S. unfairly restrained Antiguan-owned online gambling sites from accessing the U.S. market, and the U.S. has exhausted all appeals. Antigua filed for $3.44 billion per year in damages, to be collected by suspending U.S. IP agreements (copyrights, patents, etc). Additionally, countries the U.S. regularly accuses of unfair trade practices, including the EU, China, Japan, and India, have signed on to Antigua's case. These nations will be pressing for remedies in the form of trade relief (likely in aerospace and agriculture). We lost our final appeal, but have hearings on appropriate remedies, so this will be interesting. It’s definitely time to write to the USTR and to our senators.

Additionally, there’s no word yet on UIGEA regulations. We need to make our feelings known here.

Finally, there are three pieces of pro-Internet gaming legislation in Congress. We need to keep pressing Congress to support these.

[TheEngineer]

From Autobet:

Here is a rough draft of a letter I plan on sending to my US reps and the US trade rep.

The Honorable Susan Schwab
United States Trade Representative
600 17th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20508

Dear Ambassador Schwab:

I am writing concerning the decision by the WTO on the case brought by Antigua and Barbuda against the United States entitled: “Measure Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Better Services” (WT/DS285). The WTO Appellate Body has found that the U.S. is not in compliance with its WTO obligations with respect to the provision of remote gambling services. Antigua, Costa Rica and the European Union are seeking or planning to seek billions in compensation. My understanding is Antigua has asked the trade body to target American Trademarks and Copyrights if the U.S. refuses to comply.

Besides facing sanctions, failure to comply with the WTO ruling will ruin our credibility around the world. If we refuse to comply, we are setting an example for every other country to follow. When we seek to press countries like China regarding their violations on a wide range of important issues including copyright violations, how can we expect them to comply if we do not lead by example and abide by the rulings of the WTO?

The best type of leadership is done by those who lead by example. I hope the United States steps up and abides by the ruling of the World Trade Organization regarding remote gaming.

Sincerely,

[TheEngineer]

My WTO letter to my conservative Republican congressman in a horse-friendly district:

June 22, 2007

The Honorable xxx xxx
United States House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515-1704

Dear Congressman xxx:

I am writing to express my concern regarding Antigua and Barbuda’s request to the WTO for $3.44 billion per year in commercial sanctions from U.S. businesses for our failure to comply with the World Trade Organization ruling that our Internet gambling restrictions violate our agreements per the gaming sector of the GATS agreement. It seems this filing has significant potential to harm (my state), particularly our equine industry, while gaining us nothing. As such, I ask you to help America honor our international commitments by supporting HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act.

One notable aspect of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) was its exemption of horse racing, consistent with the Interstate Horse Racing Act of 1977. This served to demonstrate to the WTO that the U.S. does not have a true moral objection to Internet gambling, as certainly one cannot argue that betting on horses is more moral than betting on cards. This played a large part in our loss at the WTO. I fear the opponents of allowing Americans to choose to play online poker may push to place the same prohibition on all interstate remote horse wagering. While this is more ideologically consistent, it would clearly harm our state’s equine industry.

Additionally, the WTO action could harm our agriculture and aerospace industries, as the European Union, Japan, China, and others have joined the action against us. The trade concessions they seek will certainly harm our industries while, again, gaining us nothing.

Many Americans wish to have the right to play poker online. Many more do not feel it is the federal government’s place to prohibit this. Some polls have shown 75% opposition to UIGEA. I do feel there will be a continued backlash in 2008 to this, especially as our party continues to fracture along ideological lines. For example, the Poker Players Alliance now has 572,274 members. I imagine these poker players will vote for freedom. I took a look at the 2006 election results for a quick analysis. Thirty-four congressmen who supported UIGEA won with less than 55% of the vote (including you). Of these, it appears roughly half are vehemently opposed to allowing Americans to decide for themselves if they can play poker after work (again, including you, at least to date). Of these, the fact that this region of the nation will be very competitive in the 2008 election leads me to conclude you would likely be in the top five of any gaming rights group’s list of legislators to actively oppose (somewhere after Chris Shays and Heather Wilson…perhaps ahead of Steve Chabot). I hope this does not happen. I support you on a number of issues, such as your strong support for the Second Amendment (another freedom issue about which many like me are passionate). I support your pro-life stance as well. However, I do share with you that many conservatives are willing to work for, and vote for, their freedoms, like we did in 1994.

I ask you to carefully consider the facts and to vote in favor of HR 2046. Let’s have a regulated, taxed, and legal Internet gaming industry (especially poker and other skill-based games). It’s not about supporting gambling; rather, it is about supporting the right of adults to make their own decisions while honoring our international commitments.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

[TheEngineer]

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Sometime today or tomorrow I am going to go back through all the AP et al articles on the WTO issue ...

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems that it's easier to get a letter published if it pertains to a prior article. In fact, the NY Times asks for the article referenced on their online form. Fortunately, there was an article on Caribbean/U.S. relations in Friday's Washington Post, at www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/21/AR2007062101743.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/21/AR2007062101743.html) . I think we could all piggyback on this article with our WTO letters. The Post also published an article on the Antigua claim for $3.4 billion per year, at www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/20/AR2007062002151.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/20/AR2007062002151.html) , so that can be referenced as well.

[TheEngineer]

Washington Post letters to the editor:

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/20/AR2007022000709.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/20/AR2007022000709.html)

Letters must be fewer than 250 words long and exclusive to The Washington Post; they may not have been submitted or posted to, or published by any other media or web outlet. They must include the writer's home address, e-mail address, and home and business telephone numbers. Anonymous letters will not be considered, nor does The Post permit the use of pseudonyms.

Due to space limitations, all letters are subject to abridgment. Because of the volume of letters we receive, we cannot respond individually to the authors of letters we are unable to use. However, we read every letter we receive, and we appreciate the interest and value the views of those who take the time to send us their comments.

To send a letter by e-mail, please send to letters@washpost.com. Do not send attachments; they will not be read. If you prefer to send your letter by surface mail, please send to the following address:

Letters to the Editor
The Washington Post
1150 15th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20071

---------------------------------

Submitting an op-ed:

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/opeds/submit/

Letters to the Editor should be sent by e-mail to letters@washpost.com as text within the body of the e-mail -- attachments will not be opened. Submissions for the Sunday Outlook section should be sent to outlook@washpost.com. You may not submit a piece to more than one section at a time. To submit comments and questions, and for all other correspondence, please click here.

Submission Guidelines
Op-ed submissions must be exclusive to The Washington Post and no longer than 800 words. There is no minimum length. Exclusive op-ed submissions will be reviewed by an editor within six business days. Articles sent to multiple media outlets or posted online, including on a personal blog, will not be considered for publication.

Due to space constraints, The Post must decline most op-ed submissions....

[autobet]

Sent. Referencing Trade Sanctions

Besides facing sanctions, failure to comply with the WTO ruling will ruin our credibility around the world. If we refuse to comply, we are setting an example for every other country to follow. When we seek to press countries like China regarding their violations on a wide range of important issues including copyright violations, how can we expect them to comply if we do not lead by example and abide by the rulings of the WTO? If we choose to opt out of the parts of the trade agreements we don’t like, shouldn’t we expect other countries to do the same?

The best type of leadership is done by those who lead by example. I hope the United States steps up and abides by the ruling of the World Trade Organization regarding remote gaming.

[oldbookguy]

Weekly letter - comments?

Note: Sorry to some it is geared with an eye on Poker only.....

Heading Edited to Gonzales &amp; Paulson.


Susan C. Schwab
Office U S Trade Representative
600 17th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20508
United States of America


Susan Schwab,

I am greatly disturbed that your office in conjunction with the White House and a few U. S. Senators has allowed the Antigua-Barbuda tiff over online gaming to potentially escalate into a real international incident affecting so many Americans and American businesses.

There really are many very important matters that need to be addressed and quite frankly under the circumstances bickering over what should amount in the end to a game of cards is beneath us all.

Granted and I agree that there are strict laws prohibiting sports betting and these laws have been in place many years.

However, the WTO ruling should not be dismissed out of hand. There are excellent merits to many points, points not even addressed in the WTO ruling that are important.

Many United States companies and affiliates offer INTERSTATE and INTERNATIONAL online wagering.

Companies such as AOL, MSN and YAHOO! are affiliates of companies such as World Winner. This company is based in Newton, Massachusetts.

These affiliates and World Winner offer games referred to as ‘SKILL’. These ‘SKILL’ games include but are not limited to card games such as Spades, Hearts, Solitaire and Free Cell.

Certainly anyone with average common sense will agree that the card game of poker is NO LESS a game of ‘SKILL’ as the referenced games.

Additionally these companies offering ‘SKILL’ gaming adhere to all U.S. income tax and banking laws.

A simple solution is to allow a limited incursion into the U.S. market by international companies offering poker so long as they agree to and abide by the same rules and regulations as American companies do.

Please, I implore you ALL to quickly settle this matter in a sensible and amicable way and move on to the REAL important issues you are facing; the DOHA Agreement, Advancing American Trade, Protecting American Interests abroad and more.

obg

[TheEngineer]

Sounds good obg. Thanks for posting.

As for comments, I'd personally probably refer to her as "Ambassador Schwab". Otherwise, looks great aside from some minor grammatical things that you'll catch in your final edit.

Nice job. Hopefully we'll fill her mailbox.

[oldbookguy]

We need to let the media know online wagering IS NOT banned directing the to the SKILL sites and links in letters telling them the farce is a game with more skill is being targeted and asking WHY?

My letter to Lou Dobbs www.loudobbs.com (http://www.loudobbs.com) (It will go to a few others with some modification).

Thank you for your efforts to expose this Immigration Bill for what it is, a shame.

If only someone like your self would look at another farce as well. The attempts by many in the federal government to limit Americans from playing cards on the Internet are silly and absurd.

No, not all cards, only Poker.

Allowed via AOL, MSN, and YAHOO! And others are card games such as Solitaire, Hearts, Spades and Free Cell. But these are American Companies offering wagering called ‘SKILL’. Whoa to the majority of online players who play the card game of ‘LUCK’ poker, though I see no difference.

This position has been challenged before the WTO and three times the U S government has lost.

The solution, withdraw from a portion of the GATS agreement EVEN though we may have to settle and let American companies pay upwards of 20 billion in trade sanctions.

Antigua-Barbuda, Japan, the E.U., India, CANADA and Costa Rica have all now filed trade violation claims over this silly position.

If it were not so serious it would be comical, a game of cards could lead to such a mess when there really is so much more serious stuff the president and congress need to worry about.

XXXXX
XXXXXX

obg


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What do you all wish to do for the week of 6/25 (with regards to our fight)? Should we write to Congress and the USTR about the WTO decision? Should we continue to badger stragglers to get their letters to Paulson and Gonzales? Please post your thoughts here. Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have we been sending letters or making phone calls to media outlets...it seems the best thing we could do now is get the public caught up on what the WTO decision could mean to economics in the US.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been all along...none published yet. The U.S. media hasn't picked up on any of this. They think "Internet gambling was banned....the end", at least from what I see. Hopefully the Antigua issue will wake them up.

I've had far better luck with simply posting to various blogs. I'll continue to write to the mainstream press, of course. I hope you'll consider doing the same. If you don't get published, at least you can spam lots of blogs and boards with your letter.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Merkle]

Two points:
1. I'm appalled at how little (shall we say non-existent) coverage there has been on the WTO developements. When I look at other headlines on Google, Yahoo, MSN there are many that are extremely trival in comparison. Can anybody give an answer why there is so little coverage, other than, "it is not of interest to the average American citizen" because there were a large number of articles in the world news sections that would be of even LESS interests to the average American.

2. While looking for these issues I noticed that msnbc.com has a gutcheck America section http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18826755/
This allows the readers to tell MSNBC what issues are important to them and why. This appears to be fourm where we could stress the importance of the situation and hopefully get some public recogntion of the ramifications of the US actions to date.

As noted on other threads all this hoopla over poker is trival. But the invasion of our rights as free citizens in the privacy of our homes partaking in an activity that is legal in so many areas and forms is an ugly precedent to set or to accept. And when that is coupled with our treaty violations, the high-handed manner that we have and are dealing with other countries that are acting in good faith, and the short-sighted denial of our growing reliance on a world community it becomes some what frightening.

&lt;grin&gt; my $.02 for the moment

[Legislurker]

I think a lot of the problem is that editors:
1) Don't fully understand the legality/illegality of online gaming.
2) Know almost nothing about the WTO arbitration process, and let's face it, neither did we before this.
3) It is hard to explain to people in soundbyte news stories.
4) News at the WTO today won't affect anyone for months or years. The US has been losing to Antigua for 4 years and nothing has happened. I think they want an event or a panicked statement from the administration. And, usually, a WTO dispute gets settled before anything drastic happens, and they know that. Its not impending doom and gloom(in their minds).

I don't think we can change this perception among news purveyors. I have had trouble explaining this to my more educated friends. Imagine a news editor trying to write a story/opinion peice on a 3rd grade reading level thats 250 words or less.

[Merkle]

Thanks for the response. Yes, it is hard to condense all the issues and potential ramifications into a few simple statements. I've definetly learned this by trying to explain it to friends and relatives.

[TheEngineer]

I wrote the the Washington Post on Sunday...nothing published yet. I guess we'll see what happens. I'll post it here if it doesn't get published next week.

Also, let's all remember to keep Wikipedia up to date. I've updated the Internet poker and Internet gambling pages with IGREA and the Wexler bill. We can always update Frist's page, Kyl's page, Leach's page, etc.

As an aside, some social conservatives created "Conservapedia", at www.conservapedia.com. (http://www.conservapedia.com.) Apparently, allowing unfettered editing somehow results in a liberal bias. /images/graemlins/confused.gif For example, on the "Kangaroo" article, it has a section on the origin on kangaroos that discusses how they got from Noah's ark to Australia. After that:

[ QUOTE ]
Other views on kangaroo origins include the belief of some Australian Aborigines that kangaroos were sung into existence by their ancestors during the "Dreamtime" [7] and the evolutionary view that kangaroos and the other marsupials evolved from a common marsupial ancestor which lived hundreds of millions of years ago.[8]

[/ QUOTE ]

Anyway, let's not discuss Conservapedia or evolution on this thread; I merely share this with you to illustatrate the mindset of our opponents, and to provide one more site we can edit (I did tweak their "gambling" article).

[TheEngineer]

Also, let's all sign the anti-UIGEA petition, at www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/306149419 (http://www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/306149419) . See Casino Gambling Web Representatives Headed to Washington! (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=10993010&amp;an=0&amp;page=0#Pos t10993010)

[TheEngineer]

Here's the letter I sent to the Washington Post last Sunday. No dice getting printed, though:

As stated in Friday’s op-ed, “On the Caribbean, 20/20 Blindness” (www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/21/AR2007062101743.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/21/AR2007062101743.html)), America has often demonstrated 20/20 blindness with regard to the Caribbean. The latest example is our failure to comply with a WTO ruling in a case brought by Antigua, where the WTO found America’s Internet gambling restrictions to be in violation of our WTO obligations (as reported by the Post on June 21 - www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/20/AR2007062002151.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/20/AR2007062002151.html)). Unfortunately, America refused to negotiate with Antigua. In fact, following the loss, in the twilight of their power the Republican Congress passed further restrictions on Internet gambling.

Now, Antigua is demanding commercial sanctions worth more than $3.4 billion each year. They will seek permission from the WTO to target American copyrights and patents. They don’t need America’s permission; they can simply legally pirate Hollywood movies and Microsoft software. The EU, Japan, China, India, and others have joined the case and will be demanding trade concessions of their own. So, the Bush administration’s unilateral foreign policy will cost us again. Not only will we lose money; we’ll also potentially lose an important tool in fighting various Chinese and EU unfair trade practices.

There is a solution. The House Financial Services committee has been debating a bill that regulates and taxes gambling on the Internet. They held a hearing on June 8 (www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml (http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml)) where they proved Internet gambling can be effectively regulated. Unfortunately, the administration prefers prohibition, in clear violation of our trade obligations with Antigua and with the world.

[Chino Brown]

Engineer, you are my hero!

[TheEngineer]

My letter to the USTR:

June 29, 2007

The Honorable Susan Schwab
United States Trade Representative
600 17th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20508

Dear Ambassador Schwab:

I am writing concerning “United States - Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services (WT/DS285)”, the WTO challenge to U.S. Internet gambling laws by Antigua and Barbuda. As you know, the WTO’s Appellate Body found that the U.S. is not in compliance with our WTO obligations with respect to allowing access to our remote gambling services market. Unfortunately, rather than trying negotiate in good faith with our fellow WTO members within the framework of our agreements, we instead decided to ignore our trading partners’ concerns by withdrawing from the gambling services sector of GATS. This has resulted in Antigua’s demand for $4.3 billion per year in compensation, to come from American intellectual property and copyrights. Additionally, the EU, Macau, India, Canada, Costa Rica and others are lining up for damages as well. It seems our action has significant potential to harm us in many areas while gaining us nothing (aside from the continuation of an unpopular prohibition).

It is very unfortunate that a quibble over a card game has led to this. Our credibility is now at stake, as our refusal to respect the rulings of the WTO has potential to harm our other trade initiatives, particularly with regards to issues of trade fairness with China and the EU. Also, if we choose to continue to disregard our obligations under the WTO, American companies will be stuck with the bill, both from Antigua as well as the repercussions from the trade concessions being sought by the EU and others. Additionally, the U.S. is a world leader in providing of gaming services, so we do need the WTO in this regard as well.

I urge you to reconsider this unprecedented move of withdrawing from the gaming sector of GATS. Instead, let’s keep our international commitments. Keeping out commitments is good for America. I ask that we renounce our withdrawal from the gaming sector of GATS and that we initiate negotiations with Antigua and Barbuda. After all, we made a commitment, and our word should be our bond.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

The Engineer

Cc: President George Bush, my senators, my rep, and Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV, Senate Majority Leader)

[TheEngineer]

<font color="red">Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 7/2 &amp; 7/9 </font>

<font color="brown">Based on our group discussions, let's do the following:

1. In addition to writing to U.S. Trade Representative Susan C. Schwab, let's also write to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada. Let them both know you object to U.S. actions relating to Antigua's online gambing access case. Please see posts within this thread for sample letters. </font>

USTR Contact Info:
contactustr@ustr.eop.gov
600 17th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20508
WTO-Related Issues: 202-395-3063
www.ustr.gov/Who_We_Are/Contact_Us/Section_Index.html (http://www.ustr.gov/Who_We_Are/Contact_Us/Section_Index.html)

Sen. Harry Reid is at http://reid.senate.gov/contact/email_form.cfm
528 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: 202-224-3542

Your senators are at www.senate.gov (http://www.senate.gov)
Bush is at comments@whitehouse.gov

Others:
Justice Department: AskDOJ@usdoj.gov
Your representative: www.house.gov (http://www.house.gov)
Republican National Committee: Chairman@gop.com
Democratic National Committee: www.democrats.org/contact.html (http://www.democrats.org/contact.html)
Speaker Nancy Pelosi: AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov

<font color="brown">We get a lot of “bang for the buck here”, as one letter will go to several individuals. Send one (email and hard copy) to Ambassador Schwab and Senator Reid. Then, email the same letter to each senator (separately). Add “cc: Senator xxxx to the top line”. <u>Let’s each send one letter per month to the USTR and the copy recipients until this is resolved.</u>

1a. Please sign the "Repeal UIGEA" online petition at www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/306149419 (http://www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/306149419) . The site is reputable, and the signatures will be hand-delivered to Capitol Hill by representatives of Casino Gambling Web in July (see http://www.prnewsnow.com/P.......20D.C. (http://www.prnewsnow.com/PR%20News%20Releases/Gaming%20And%20Casinos/Casino%20Gambling%20Web%20Representatives%20Headed %20to%20Washington%20D.C.)). Be sure to check the box to hide your name if you don't want it displayed on the website. Also be sure to deselect the boxes that offer to send regular updates if you don't want them. Focus on the Family is warning their members about this march, so it must be a good thing. See www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/cog/A000004244.cfm (http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/cog/A000004244.cfm) .

2. Please write to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Treasury Secretary Paulson, and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke <u>at least once per month</u> until the UIGEA regs come out. Day 270 will be July 13th or so. In case they're trying to meet this date, let's get out some mail this week (even if they don't read it in time to use it, you can still post the contents during comment period). Let's ask them not to exceed the specific mandates of UIGEA when drafting legislation. Let's ask them to exclude all ACH transactions (too burdensome for banks to filter). Also,remind them that online poker is not illegal under any federal law. We should ask them to require unambiguous state laws, so banks aren't in the position of trying to interpret state laws that may or may not apply to Internet gambing.

Focus on the Family is asking their members to write to Paulson and Bush to request tough regulations. Also, Sen. Kyl asked Gonzales for tough regulations during the AG Senate hearings. We should counterbalance this. </font>

Addresses:

The Honorable Alberto Gonzales
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov

The Honorable Henry Paulson
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220

The Honorable Ben S. Bernanke
Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Washington, D. C. 20551
http://www.federalreserve.gov/feedback.cfm

<font color="brown">3. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on advocating for the legislation. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. Since we proved our position in the 6/8 House hearing, let's post the link to the hearing webcast wherever we can.

Letters to the editor, Washington Post: letters@washpost.com
Letters to the editor, New York Times: letters@nytimes.com

4. Continue to contact your senators and representative. <u>Let’s call and send snail mail at least once every four to six weeks</u>. Let’s email at least once per week or biweekly. Some of these may be carbon copies of letters to others (like the USTR, Frank, Bachus, etc).

We have many issues, so we can focus on one item for each letter while rotating. It does not matter to our movement which items you choose; any communication against attempts to ban online gambling at the federal level work in our favor. After all, if IGREA fails due to lack of public support, it’s not like the media will report that people disagreed with giving power to the FinCEN or to issues relating to shutting out foreign operators. They’ll report, “Frank’s Attempt to End Online Gambling Ban (as if there is such a thing, but the media don’t care) Fails to Draw Public Support”. Our opponents will say, "see, Americans are happy we’re 'protecting the public'". If Wexler’s bill fails, the media won’t report that some felt it legitimized UIGEA. They’ll report that Americans didn’t even wish to legalize poker. This year, we’re all about generating support for our general position, which is that online gaming should not be prohibited. Let’s focus there. So, here are some issues we can rotate:

- Antigua’s WTO case
- IGREA
- Wexler’s bill: H.R. 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act
- Praise for the 6/8 hearing. www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml (http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml); webcast archived at http://financialserv.edgeboss.net/wmedia/financialserv/hearing060807.wvx
- Shelley Berkley's study bill </font>

Thanks everyone!

[TheEngineer]

June 29, 2007

The Honorable Ben S. Bernanke
Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Washington, D. C. 20551

Dear Chairman Bernanke:

I understand that some who wish to prohibit law-abiding Americans from choosing to play online poker in the privacy of their own homes have been lobbying you for UIGEA (Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006) regulations that would, in essence, create an Internet gaming prohibition. This concerns me greatly as a freedom-loving American, as Congress did not ban any gaming with UIGEA. It seems anti-poker interest groups would have you disregard this fact and would use the Federal Reserve System’s banking regulations as a back door means of creating the prohibition they were unable to win legislatively, while burdening our financial institutions with the enforcement duties.

As you know, UIGEA does not make Internet gaming illegal. Rather, it merely provides a means for enforcement of federal and state Internet gaming laws that were already in effect when UIGEA passed. Prohibitionists like Senator Kyl and Congressman Bachus are fond of saying this. However, they neglect to mention the fact that very few types of online gambling are illegal under federal law. Specifically, federal law covers only some sport betting. As for state laws, very few states have outlawed Internet gaming. Regarding other states, prohibitionists are trying to use ambiguous, arcane gambling laws to claim that some types of Internet gaming MIGHT be illegal in their states. To keep from placing an unfair burden on our banks, I ask that the upcoming UIGEA regulations apply only where laws are unambiguous in their application to the Internet and to specific forms of gambling illegal under those state laws. After all, if states actually wished to ban Internet gaming, they would have done so in an unambiguous fashion, especially if they wished to have the federal government take the unprecedented step of enforcing it.

Additionally, I ask that the regulations exclude the highly automated ACH system, as the addition of manual verification steps to ACH would be overly burdensome.

Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Engineer, you are my hero!

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks! I appreciate the compliment as well as your support for our actions.

[TheEngineer]

In case anyone uses this as a template, here are two typos I corrected before sending the letter, but not in time to edit.

[ QUOTE ]
My letter to the USTR:

June 29, 2007

The Honorable Susan Schwab
United States Trade Representative
600 17th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20508

Dear Ambassador Schwab:

I am writing ...Antigua’s demand for $3.4 billion ...(aside from the continuation of an unpopular prohibition).

I urge you ... Keeping our commitments ...After all, we made a commitment, and our word should be our bond.



[/ QUOTE ]

[TheEngineer]

Federal Reserve Reply

Dear *********:

Thank you for your thoughtful correspondence to Chairman Bernanke and for your suggestions concerning the Unlawful
Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006.

The Chairman receives a great number of letters daily. As a public figure with many daily responsibilities, he is
unable to reply to those letters personally. However, he appreciates receiving observations and advice that bear on
the Federal Reserve's responsibilities, particularly from people who have concerns about how the economy is
functioning.

As you know, the Federal Reserve and the Department of the Treasury are working actively on a proposed rule to be
published in the Federal Register. As with any regulatory rulemaking, input from the public is very important. The
agencies are considering a wide range of methods for preventing transactions related to unlawful Internet gambling in order to determine the methods that best address this goal. As the act requires, the Federal Reserve plans to consult with the Department of Justice to obtain their views on the proposed rule.

The agencies will carefully consider all comments submitted in response to the proposed rule in crafting the final
rule.

Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with us.

Sincerely,

JPD
Board Staff


IF YOU NEED TO REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, YOU MUST DO SO FROM OUR PUBLIC WEB SITE AT:
http://www.federalreserve.gov .

------------------------------------------------------------------------

[TheEngineer]

Conservative site Townhall.com has an article about politicians without testicles (yes, for real), at http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PhilH...p;comments=true (http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PhilHarris/2007/07/03/2008_-_a_year_to_focus_on_testicles?page=full&amp;comments=t rue), so it seemed a good opportunity for me to post about Sen. Kyl /images/graemlins/grin.gif . Free free to add on.

------------------------------------

Sen. Kyl has none!

Sen. Jon Kyl has been so overly concerned about figuring out how to apply his big government social consevative principles to the "horror" of law-abiding Americans choosing to play poker online in the privacy of their own homes that he completely neglected the problems with our borders. So, he decided to treat law-abiding American Internet poker players like criminals while making illegal immigrants legal! Way to prioritize Johnny!!

Everyone: Care about freedom and limited government? I do. Show your support by taking two minutes to sign the petition at www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/306149419 (http://www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/306149419) . This petition will be delivered to every congressman and every senator this month.

Thanks.

[oldbookguy]

Just took a minute to look at townhall, nice place, nice comment.

Going to explore it some, I think we can make some hay there as well.

Also, looking at setting up a online poker players group to give us a unique spot to ADD to the presence we have, any name suggestions?

I'm not a super great webmaster, but built in tecnology helps, lol.

Been playing around with some back office stuff on one of the sites below, should be easy to build.
A few I have built recently:

www.tylerlestermotorsports.com (http://www.tylerlestermotorsports.com)
www.bandbauction.com (http://www.bandbauction.com)
www.dickgraffauction.com (http://www.dickgraffauction.com)
www.westongoldrobbery.com (http://www.westongoldrobbery.com)

note: I built them, I am not in charge of keeping these up to date in all cases!

obg

[TheEngineer]

July 8, 2007

Senator John McCain
United States Senate
241 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator McCain:

I am writing regarding your recent slip in the presidential polls. I think perhaps some of this has come from a change in perception over what the Straight Talk Express stands for. If you were to refocus your campaign by acting as a spokesman for individual freedoms and limited government, I believe you could win back significant support. I hope you will – real conservatives desperately need a champion.

As a limited government conservative in the tradition of Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater, I and many like me are disappointed by the takeover of our party by big government social “conservative” CINOs (conservatives in name only) who seek federal legislation outlawing everything to which they are personally opposed while spending like drunken sailors on everything else. The Republican Party used to believe in limited government and in individual rights. However, the big spending, big government social conservatives won’t ever go back to that, now that they’ve tasted the sweet, tantalizing flavor of government power. It appears that it is up to the rest of the Republican Party to reclaim the limited government mantle that is rightfully ours.

I ask you to stand strong for limited government and individual rights. A great place to start is with Internet poker, as this issue in particular demonstrates the divide between real limited government conservatives and the big government CINO infiltrators. The CINO thought process is as follows: “I don’t like Internet poker, therefore I want federal legislation to ban it for everyone”. That’s not conservative by any definition of the term. The conservative mindset (of someone who does not play Internet poker) is: “I don’t play Internet poker, so I won’t play…problem solved, and it required no federal restrictions on the liberties of others”. This is especially true given that the June 8 House Financial Services Committee hearing on Internet gaming conclusively proved that Internet gaming can be effectively regulated for underage gambling, compulsive gambling, fairness, tax collection, and other issues. I urge you to publicly support the right of Americans to choose to play poker online.

Thank you for your consideration. I wish you the best of luck with your run.

Sincerely,

[Legislurker]

Also, we have hearing on Frank's bill Thursday(according to majorwager, haven't verified independently yet). A call earlier in the week, and a followup after would not be amiss.
I don't think anything posted snail mail will get there.

[oldbookguy]

that Bill, HR 2895 - Fair Housing has nothing at all to do with nor at this time is it linked to Poker though some reports (Igamingnews) stated it did.

Still something we could supoport as a way of spending the tax dollars they would get from poker though....

obg


[ QUOTE ]
Also, we have hearing on Frank's bill Thursday(according to majorwager, haven't verified independently yet). A call earlier in the week, and a followup after would not be amiss.
I don't think anything posted snail mail will get there.

[/ QUOTE ]

[TheEngineer]

Well, we're making progress. IGREA just picked up two more cosponsors, Rep. Anthony Weiner [NY-D] and Rep. Bennie Thompson [MS-D], bringing us up to 28 cosponsors plus Rep. Frank. The UIGEA regs didn't get published on schedule, despite their push to get them out by the 10th. This is either great news (banks complaining) or neutral (administration trying to get them toughened...good for us in that they're weak now and that stakeholders like it that way, bad for obvious reasons), but we'll still likely wish to respond the same way....writing to Bernanke, Paulson, Gonzales, and Steven D. Laughton (the regs' focal point).

So, it seems we have opportunities. What do you all want to do this week?

[Legislurker]

My goal for this week and next is to get a story on The Drudge Report. We need to be working what we can on the Republican side of the populace, and that is where the younger, net savvy conservatives go for news. Stories there are read, talked about, and blogged on more than anywhere else online.

[Emperor]

[ QUOTE ]

So, it seems we have opportunities. What do you all want to do this week?

[/ QUOTE ]

Military Coup?

[gringo]

Very good letter Engineer. A big Ditto!

[Uglyowl]

[ QUOTE ]
So, it seems we have opportunities. What do you all want to do this week?

[/ QUOTE ]

If that petition is getting delivered to all Congressmen, then maybe we make it a goal to get this link posted in other places (Digg, appropriate Yahoo! forums, liberterian sites, etc.).

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/306149419

[TheEngineer]

Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 7/16

<font color="brown"><u>Summary of actions:</u>
1. Contact Steven D. Laughton (the UIGEA Treasury Dept. focal point), Treas. Sec. Paulson, and Atty. Gen Gonzales, and Steven D. Laughton to advocate for minimum UIGEA regs.
2. Post the link to the "Repeal UIGEA" online petition at www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/306149419 (http://www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/306149419) wherever you can (blogs, libertarian sites, Wikipedia, etc.), as it will be hand-delivered to each senator and representative later this month.
3. Write to Congress
4. Write to newspapers and post to blogs</font>

--------------------------------------------------------

Based on our group discussions, let's do the following:

1. Contact Steven D. Laughton (the UIGEA Treasury Dept. focal point) via email or snail mail with our concerns over the impact of UIGEA. Info on Mr. Laughton is available at www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eoViewRule?ruleID=275050 (http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eoViewRule?ruleID=275050). Continue to contact Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Treasury Secretary Paulson, and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, of course. The regs were supposed to be out by now...the fact they they are not is probably good for us. I think a big push here on our part could really pay off.

Let's ask them not to exceed the specific mandates of UIGEA when drafting legislation. Let's ask them to exclude all ACH transactions (too burdensome for banks to filter). Also, remind them that online poker is not illegal under any federal law. We should ask them to require unambiguous state laws, so banks aren't in the position of trying to interpret state laws that may or may not apply to Internet gaming. Finally, there should be no "site blacklists".

Contact info:

Steven D. Laughton
Office of the Assistant General Counsel (Banking and Finance)
Room 2027B,1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.
Washington,DC 20220
Phone:202 622-8413
Email: steven.laughton@do.treas.gov

The Honorable Alberto Gonzales
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov

The Honorable Henry Paulson
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220

The Honorable Ben S. Bernanke
Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Washington, D. C. 20551
http://www.federalreserve.gov/feedback.cfm

Others:

Pres. Bush: comments@whitehouse.gov
Your senators: www.senate.gov (http://www.senate.gov)
Your representative: www.house.gov (http://www.house.gov)
Republican National Committee: Chairman@gop.com
Democratic National Committee: www.democrats.org/contact.html (http://www.democrats.org/contact.html)
Speaker Nancy Pelosi: AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: http://reid.senate.gov/contact/email_form.cfm


2. Post the link to the "Repeal UIGEA" online petition at www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/306149419 (http://www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/306149419) wherever you can (blogs, libertarian sites, Wikipedia, etc.). The site is reputable, and the signatures will be hand-delivered to Capitol Hill by representatives of Casino Gambling Web in July (see http://www.prnewsnow.com/P.......20D.C. (http://www.prnewsnow.com/PR%20News%20Releases/Gaming%20And%20Casinos/Casino%20Gambling%20Web%20Representatives%20Headed %20to%20Washington%20D.C.)). Be sure to check the box to hide your name if you don't want it displayed on the website. Also be sure to deselect the boxes that offer to send regular updates if you don't want them. Focus on the Family is STILL warning their members about this march, so it must be a good thing. See www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/cog/A000004244.cfm (http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/cog/A000004244.cfm).

3. Continue to contact your senators and representative. <u>Let’s call and send snail mail at least once every four to six weeks</u>. Let’s email at least once per week or biweekly. Some of these may be carbon copies of letters to others (like the USTR, Frank, etc).

We have many issues, so we can focus on one item for each letter while rotating. It does not matter to our movement which items you choose; any communication against attempts to ban online gambling at the federal level work in our favor. After all, if IGREA fails due to lack of public support, it’s not like the media will report that people disagreed with giving power to the FinCEN or to issues relating to shutting out foreign operators. They’ll report, “Frank’s Attempt to End Online Gambling Ban (as if there is such a thing, but the media don’t care) Fails to Draw Public Support”. Our opponents will say, "see, Americans are happy we’re 'protecting the public'". If Wexler’s bill fails, the media won’t report that some felt it legitimized UIGEA. They’ll report that Americans didn’t even wish to legalize poker. This year, we’re all about generating support for our general position, which is that online gaming should not be prohibited. Let’s focus there. So, here are some issues we can rotate:

- Antigua’s WTO case
- IGREA
- Wexler’s bill: H.R. 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act
- Praise for the 6/8 hearing. www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml (http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml); webcast archived at http://financialserv.edgeboss.net/wmedia/financialserv/hearing060807.wvx
- Shelley Berkley's study bill

4. Now that we have bills progressing, we should try to work on advocating for the legislation. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. Since we proved our position in the 6/8 House hearing, let's post the link to the hearing webcast wherever we can.

Letters to the editor, Washington Post: letters@washpost.com
Letters to the editor, New York Times: letters@nytimes.com

Thanks everyone!

[TheEngineer]

Steven D. Laughton
Office of the Assistant General Counsel (Banking and Finance)
Room 2027B, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.
Washington, DC 20220

Dear Mr. Laughton:

I understand that some who wish to prohibit law-abiding Americans from choosing to play online poker in the privacy of their own homes have been lobbying the Treasury Department for UIGEA (Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006) regulations that would, in essence, create an Internet gaming prohibition. This concerns me greatly as a freedom-loving American, as Congress did not ban any gaming with UIGEA. It seems anti-poker interest groups would have the Treasury Department disregard this fact and would use the Federal Reserve System’s banking regulations as a back door means of creating the prohibition they were unable to win legislatively, while burdening our financial institutions with enforcement duties.

As you know, UIGEA does not make Internet gaming illegal. Rather, it merely provides a means for enforcement of federal and state Internet gaming laws that were already in effect when UIGEA passed. However, very few types of online gambling are illegal under federal law. Specifically, federal law covers only some sport betting. As for state laws, very few states have outlawed Internet gaming. Regarding other states, prohibitionists are trying to use ambiguous, arcane gambling laws to claim that some types of Internet gaming MIGHT be illegal in their states. To keep from placing an unfair burden on our banks, I ask that the upcoming UIGEA regulations address areas only where laws are unambiguous in their application to the Internet and to specific forms of gambling. After all, if states actually wished to ban Internet gaming, they would have done so in an unambiguous fashion, especially if they wished to have the federal government take the unprecedented step of enforcing it.

Additionally, I ask that the regulations exclude the highly automated ACH system, as the addition of manual verification steps to ACH would be overly burdensome.

Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[TheEngineer]

A note to Sen. Mitch McConnell of KY (I ghost-wrote it for a buddy of mine living there).

--------------------------------------

Senator Mitch McConnell
United States Senate
361-A Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator McConnell:

I am a recreational poker player who is upset that nothing has been done in the Senate to introduce and advance HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act. Quite frankly, I find it ridiculous and shortsighted that Congress refuses to move this industry onshore, complete with regulation and taxation. Poker is, after all, an American institution. What I find truly absurd is the fact that it is still completely legal to place interstate wagers on horse races over the Internet. Surely the “problems” cited by the opponents of poker (a game of skill) exist in horse betting (which is mere chance). It seems quite hypocritical, at least to me, that one is expressly permitted while the other is not.

While I am a proud Kentuckian who values our commonwealth’s equine heritage, I also value my freedoms. Therefore, in the name of equitability, I ask you to either support HR 2046 or support the repeal of the Interstate Horse Racing Act of 1978. Many in Congress support eliminating this exemption for horse racing, including Rep. Shelly Berkley of Nevada, Rep. Julia Carson of Indiana, and Rep. Chris Shays of Connecticut. If my poker-playing friends at the 600,000 strong Poker Players Alliance and at the many poker web sites and blogs join in to insist that we should be treated at least as well as horses, I imagine we will be heard. At that point, various pro-family groups will likely join us to eliminate the horseracing loophole. After all, they are very consistent on this point, as you surely know.

My personal opinion is that we should choose to support both poker and our commonwealth’s equine industry. After all, we both know Internet gaming can be regulated for age verification and for prevention, compulsive behavior, and money laundering. This was proven conclusively at the June 8, 2007 House Financial Services committee hearings on the subject. I am glad you recognize that fact. After all, if you did not you would not have supported the horseracing exemption in last year’s Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA).

Many Americans wish to have the right to play poker online. Many more do not feel it is the government’s place to prohibit this. Some polls have shown over 75% opposition to UIGEA. I do feel there will be a continued backlash in 2008 to this, especially as our party continues to fracture along ideological lines.

I ask you to carefully consider the facts and to support HR 2046 and our equine industry. Let’s have a regulated, taxed, and legal Internet gaming industry. It’s not about supporting gaming; rather, it is about supporting the right of adults to make their own decisions.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

[TheEngineer]

Perhaps we should at least look like we're going to target the equine industry for repeal of the IHRA. At least we can maybe use the anti-gambling legislators for something.

Quote from McConnell:

[ QUOTE ]
Although I do not support widespread gambling, I will examine very closely any gambling legislation to ensure that it does not harm Kentucky by hurting our horse industry. Because I represent the entire state of Kentucky, I do what I can to support its horse farms, horse workers, and the economic good of our state. It has been estimated that the equine industry supports 50,000 jobs in Kentucky and generates $3.5 billion for our state's economy each year.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, it seems he cares. Perhaps we should get his attention. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Legislurker]

Is there a vulnerable House Rep in his state?

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Is there a vulnerable House Rep in his state?

[/ QUOTE ]

McConnell himself is now seen as vulnerable by the DNC (immigration + the war). They listed him with three other Republican senators for targeting via commercials.

As for the House, the whole northern KY, southern OH, eastern IN area is getting very competitive. Geoff Davis, Jean Schmidt, and Deborah Price come to mind. Check out Vulnerable House Internet Poker Opponents (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=10893612&amp;an=0&amp;page=0#Pos t10893612) for more info. Also, Gov. Fletcher (R) will lose handily to a pro-gambling (running on pro-gambling) Democrat, which is expected to weaken McConnell further.

Just a little bit of noise could echo throughout the state. After all, horse owners are spooked even more readily than are their precious [censored] horses.

[TheEngineer]

The Honorable Shelley Berkley
United States House of Representatives
405 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-4708

Dear Representative Berkley:

I am a recreational poker player who is as upset as you about last year’s Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA). Quite frankly, I find it ridiculous and shortsighted that Congress refuses to move this industry onshore, complete with regulation and taxation. Poker is, after all, an American institution. What I find truly absurd is the fact that it is still completely legal to place interstate wagers on horse races over the Internet. Surely the “problems” cited by the opponents of poker either exist in horse betting as well or do not exist in either sport. It seems quite hypocritical, at least to me, that one is expressly permitted while the other is not. The horseracing proponents did not even feel the horses required a study – the same one they refuse to give us.

It also seems hypocritical that games familiar to Nevadans are “sinful”, while gambling on horses is somehow considered “all-American”. I imagine this likely offends you and other Nevadans. I know it offends me.

So, in the name of equitability will you consider introducing legislation to repeal the Interstate Horse Racing Act of 1978? After all, it seems the horses should be subject to the same laws the rest of us are. We should be on equal footing. I also think it would be very effective to put the opponents of Internet poker in the spotlight of having to vote for Internet horseracing, just as it was last year when you introduced this as an amendment to UIGEA.

You can be assured the millions of Internet gaming enthusiasts will be with you and will be grateful. After all, we think we should be treated at least as well as horses.

Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

----------------------------------------

The Honorable Julia Carson
U.S. House of Representatives
2455 Rayburn HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Representative Carson:

I am a recreational poker player who is as upset as you about last year’s Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA). Quite frankly, I find it ridiculous and shortsighted that Congress refuses to move this industry onshore, complete with regulation and taxation. Poker is, after all, an American institution. What I find truly absurd is the fact that it is still completely legal to place interstate wagers on horse races over the Internet. Surely the “problems” cited by the opponents of poker either exist in horse betting as well or do not exist in either sport. It seems quite hypocritical, at least to me, that one is expressly permitted while the other is not. The horseracing proponents did not even feel the horses a study – the same one they refuse to give us.

In the name of equitability will you consider introducing legislation to repeal the Interstate Horse Racing Act of 1978? After all, it seems the horses should be subject to the same laws the rest of us are. We should be on equal footing, as you said in the June 8 House Financial Services Committee hearing on the subject of Internet gaming. I also think it would be very effective to put the opponents of Internet poker in the spotlight of having to vote for Internet horseracing.

You can be assured the millions of Internet gaming enthusiasts will be with you and will be grateful. After all, we think we should be treated at least as well as horses.

Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[TheEngineer]

The Center for Regulatory Effectiveness sent a letter to several government officials concerning UIGEA regulatory burdens. It's at http://www.thecre.com/pdf/McInerney_Letter.pdf . The points brought up in the analysis may be good for us to use in our letters and in our comments on the proposed regulations (once they are released, starting the comment period.

Some points:

There is strong evidence that a substantial number of credit card issuers are small businesses.

Census Bureau data strongly suggests that a substantial number small companies are in engaged in financial transaction processing services.

Small, innovative American technology companies will be directly and/or indirectly impacted by the rule.

The rule will place significant direct and indirect burdens on a substantial number of small entities, potentially altering the competitive situation in financial transactions industries and leading to further consolidations in already highly concentrated industries.

The letter also contains a number of people to whom we may consider writing, including:

Ms. Roberta K. McInerney
Assistant General Counsel for Banking and Finance
Room 2304
Department of the Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.
Washington, DC 20220

The Honorable Robert J. Portman, Director, The Office of Management and Budget

The Honorable Thomas M. Sullivan, Chief Counsel for Advocacy, U.S. Small Business Administration

Mr. Scott G. Alvarez, General Counsel, The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

Mr. Peter A. Bieger, Deputy Assistant General Counsel, Banking and Finance

Dennis W. Carlton, Ph.D., Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Economic Analysis

[Legislurker]

If anyone else was watching, the WSOP just ended, and Jerry is donating 10%(825k) to charities, and thanking God, rather sincerely for his victory. From all I can see, and read, he is a family guy, a refugee from Thailand made good in the US, and just won poker's biggest prize. Definitely a good face for poker to counter the frauds at FoF. Id love to see Yang stand up to someone like Bauchus on a panel in Congress witha life of real hardship and true faith, combined with respect for poker as a job and legitimate pastime. Im going to sleep now, but when I wake up Im going to start letters to the editor about him.

On the other hand, the commentary, especially Phil and Howard, disappointed me. Helmuth totally dissed online poker's contributions to the WSOP. No mention of politics, none. These guys were rich before this, but they are literally raking it in now. And if not for online poker, the WSOP would still be a small cult phenomenon. Literally almost popped a blood vessel listening to Phil before he left for the airport.

[TheEngineer]

What do you all think we should do next week to advocate for our rights?

[TheEngineer]

I vote for expanding the current actions a bit by adding more recipients to the "UIGEA regs letters" item, plus writing to our governors and state reps. When the UIGEA regs are released and opened for comments, I'll recommend we make as many comments as possible.

[oldbookguy]

I think in our letters this week we need to make a list of the not so obvious 'legal' interstate wagering going on all over the U S, even if in some cases is a bit of a reach.

1. Deal / No Deal Text .99 Fees
2. Sprint / Nextel NASCAR win a Million (no entry fee, just normal text messaging fees apply to enter)
3. Obama's 'donation' lottery to have dinner with him.
4. any other examples we can find as a group.

Doing this we can try and Main Stream wagering in the U S and show it is very common and the UIGEA regulations will affect many businesses / activities other than poker, the 'unintended consequences of a poorly conceived law.

obg

[oldbookguy]

OK, they have a video at Capitol Hill Broadcasting:
http://www.chbn.com/clip.aspx?key=124BDA9AA5668035

Right next to it is a GOOD Ron Paul Video.

I joined just so I could leave a comment and am making the follow-up call in the morning:
202-456-1111
Though NOT what FRC / FoF wants me to say of course.

I suggest you / we take a minute, join Capitol Hill and denounce this video!

obg

[Emperor]

[ QUOTE ]
What do you all think we should do next week to advocate for our rights?

[/ QUOTE ]

Throw all of their proverbial tea in the harbor!

[oldbookguy]

CNBC did a piece Monday on the WSOP and the drop in online qualifiers this year with Gambling911.
the video is here:
http://www.costiganmedia.com/cnbc-poker.html

CNBC nerver really got into any details other than a generic mention of the UIGEA.

We need to e-mail CNBC with comments and try and get a real story about the WTO case involving this.

Link to CNBC:
https://register.cnbc.com/email/EmailSupport.jsp

My letter to CNBC:
I found Darren Rovell’s piece on the WSOP interesting.
More of interest was the law passed by congress to block funds transfers for playing online poker and the effect it had on the WSOP and by implication on the American public as a whole.
Considering there has been little to no news concerning this I was, to say the least, surprised. Surprised especially in light of the recent arrest of Neteller executives and the settlement to return 94 Million Dollars of American Online players funds frozen by the DoJ / USAO in the Southern District Federal Court.
With the cooperation agreement signed by this company to defer prosecution and agreement to help the USAO office in further investigations, how far may this reach and what U.S. banks may be implicated and what affect will that have on the banking industry and stock valuations and the affect it has on limiting Americans freedom of association.

There has been no coverage of the WTO ruling and mounting BILLIONS of dollars in trade claims filed against the U.S. for passing the UIGEA by Antigua-Barbuda, Japan, Canada, Costa Rica, India and the entire European Communities along with Macao / China.

This most important piece of information related to the drop in online WSOP entrants is of utmost concern to all, especially U.S. companies doing business abroad.

[TheEngineer]

Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 7/23

<font color="brown"><u>Summary of actions:</u>
1. Write to Treasury and DOJ officials AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK to request the minimum possible UIGEA regulations.
2. Write to your governor and to your state representatives.
3. Regularly write to Congress.
4. Write to newspapers and post to blogs.</font>

--------------------------------------------------------

Based on our group discussions, let's do the following:

1. Write to Treasury and DOJ officials AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK to request the minimum possible UIGEA regulations. We should contact Steven D. Laughton (the UIGEA Treasury Dept. focal point), Roberta McInerney (Assistant General Counsel for Banking and Finance), Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Treasury Secretary Paulson, and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke. The regs were supposed to be out by now...the fact they they are not is probably good for us. I think a big push here on our part could really pay off.

Let's ask them not to exceed the specific mandates of UIGEA when drafting legislation. Let's ask them to exclude all ACH transactions (too burdensome for banks to filter). Also, remind them that online poker is not illegal under any federal law. We should ask them to require unambiguous state laws, so banks aren't in the position of trying to interpret state laws that may or may not apply to Internet gaming. Finally, there should be no "site blacklists".

Contact info:

Steven D. Laughton
Office of the Assistant General Counsel (Banking and Finance)
Room 2027B,1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.
Washington,DC 20220
Phone: (202) 622-8413
Email: steven.laughton@do.treas.gov

Ms. Roberta K. McInerney
Assistant General Counsel for Banking and Finance
Room 2304
Department of the Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.
Washington, DC 20220

The Honorable Alberto Gonzales
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov

The Honorable Henry Paulson
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220

The Honorable Ben S. Bernanke
Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Washington, D. C. 20551
http://www.federalreserve.gov/feedback.cfm

Others:

Pres. Bush: comments@whitehouse.gov
Your senators: www.senate.gov (http://www.senate.gov)
Your representative: www.house.gov (http://www.house.gov)
Republican National Committee: Chairman@gop.com
Democratic National Committee: www.democrats.org/contact.html (http://www.democrats.org/contact.html)
Speaker Nancy Pelosi: AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: http://reid.senate.gov/contact/email_form.cfm

2. Contact your governor and state representative. Congress won't pass anything that forces states to legalize gambling, so we ought to get the ball rolling at that level.

3. Continue to contact your senators and representative. <u>Let’s call and send snail mail at least once every four to six weeks</u>. Let’s email at least once per week or biweekly. Some of these may be carbon copies of letters to others (like the USTR, Frank, FoF, etc).

We have many issues, so we can focus on one item for each letter while rotating. It does not matter to our movement which items you choose; any communication against attempts to ban online gambling at the federal level work in our favor. After all, if IGREA fails due to lack of public support, it’s not like the media will report that people disagreed with giving power to the FinCEN or to issues relating to shutting out foreign operators. They’ll report, “Frank’s Attempt to End Online Gambling Ban (as if there is such a thing, but the media don’t care) Fails to Draw Public Support”. Our opponents will say, "see, Americans are happy we’re 'protecting the public'". If Wexler’s bill fails, the media won’t report that some felt it legitimized UIGEA. They’ll report that Americans didn’t even wish to legalize poker. This year, we’re all about generating support for our general position, which is that online gaming should not be prohibited. Let’s focus there. So, here are some issues we can rotate:

- Antigua’s WTO case
- IGREA
- Hypocrisy of existing legal online gaming (games of skill, horseracing, etc)
- Wexler’s bill: H.R. 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act
- Praise for the 6/8 hearing. www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml (http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml); webcast archived at http://financialserv.edgeboss.net/wmedia/financialserv/hearing060807.wvx
- Shelley Berkley's study bill

4. Now that we have bills progressing, we should try to work on advocating for the legislation. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. Since we proved our position in the 6/8 House hearing, let's post the link to the hearing webcast wherever we can.

Letters to the editor, Washington Post: letters@washpost.com
Letters to the editor, New York Times: letters@nytimes.com

Thanks everyone!

[TheEngineer]

July 22, 2007

The Honorable Barack Obama
United States Senate
713 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Obama:

I would like to congratulate you on your performance to date in your presidential run. I wish you well in the race. As you know, a lot of your support comes from young, Internet-savvy Americans. While we are a diverse group, we do share one common interest; we want individual freedom and liberty. One important area for many of us is Internet poker.

As you are likely aware, HR 2046, The Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007, provides for safe, secure, regulated online poker. The bill provides for stringent licensing to ensure that poker operators are legitimate. Via a regulatory framework, the bill addresses underage gambling as well as compulsive gambling. The bill also provides a provision by which states can choose to opt-out, thus preserving the rights of the states in this important area. Sports leagues can also opt-out, thereby allowing the leagues the ability to prohibit all Internet gambling on that sport anywhere in the U.S. What is your position on HR 2046 and on allowing Americans to choose to play Internet poker?

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[kidpokeher]

I'd like to suggest a sticky or thread consisting of the better letters written so we have a framework to work with (or copy outright for the truly lazy.)

[unlucky4me]

I got that same form letter reply you did. The boob republicans must have had it drawn up.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd like to suggest a sticky or thread consisting of the better letters written so we have a framework to work with (or copy outright for the truly lazy.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like a good idea. Go for it.

[TheEngineer]

Also, please remember that PPA has the automailer at http://activate.pokerplayersalliance.org/ . It's no substitute for a real snail mail paper letter, but it's good between letters or to send your rep a reminder.

[oldbookguy]

My this week letter to Congresswoman Capito, (R., WV).

Congresswoman Capito,

I am following up on our recent exchange of letters and the follow-up phone call from your office concerning the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) that was passed by the 109th congress.

I am again asking for your support of H.R. 2046 Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007 introduced by Congressman Barney Frank and H.R. 2610 introduced by congressman Robert Wexler To amend subchapter IV of chapter 53 of title 31, United States Code, and section 1084 of title 18 of such Code to clarify the applicability of such provisions to games of skill, and establish certain requirements with respect to such games, and for other purposes.

In the letter and phone conversation from your office it is apparent you were led to believe the UIGEA banned ALL forms of Internet Wagering.

Fortunately or unfortunately (depending on one position) this is far from the case.

In the recent annual ‘Report To Congress’ from the Federal Reserve Board who is charged with drafting the UIGEA regulations I quote from page 147:

The act generally defines “unlawful Internet gambling” as transmitting a bet by any means that involves the use, at least in part, of the Internet and where such bet or wager is unlawful under any applicable federal or state law in the state or tribal lands in which the bet or wager is initiated, received, or otherwise made.

As we can read, the act does not make any wagering illegal; it only makes funding existing unlawful wagering illegal.

To bolster this, I quote from a recent Sen. Jon Kyl press release:

The bill did not, as some have alleged, make online gambling illegal. Online gambling is already illegal under existing federal and state laws. The UIGEA simply provides the legal mechanisms necessary for authorities to enforce those laws.

Though Sen. Kyl erroneously states online gambling is already illegal, the point is well made; it only effects what is illegal already.

Recent court ruling in the 5th circuit have ruled that existing Federal Law (1961 Wire Act) does not cover Casino Games, only sports betting.

Additionally, state laws in only 11 states specifically ban Internet Wagering of any kind, leaving 39 states, the District of Columbia and the U.S Territories with no specific legislation addressing wagering other than Sports Betting. The Department of Justice is left to rely on state laws that ban games of chance for enforcement of the UIGEA but many states (WV included) use the predominate test to determine skill versus chance.

The latter is extremely important since the UIGEA specifically targets ‘Games of Chance’ not games relying predominantly on an individuals skill. Currently these skill games are available online via such sites as AOL, MSN and YAHOO! Games marketed right next to games children can play.

It is for this reason I again ask you to support congressman Frank’s Internet Gambling Regulation Act and congressman Robert Wexler’s skill Gaming Act.

These two pieces of legislation will correct the shortfalls of the UIGEA.
By supporting Frank’s bill regulating ALL Internet wagering this provide a safe and secure environment for everyone (children included).
By supporting Wexler’s Skill Gaming’ Act the Federal Codes can be brought into conformity with Federal Court Rulings.

Thank You In Advance,
XXXXXXX

obg

[kidpokeher]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd like to suggest a sticky or thread consisting of the better letters written so we have a framework to work with (or copy outright for the truly lazy.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like a good idea. Go for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm too lazy! J/K. Actually I don't mind going through and compiling a bunch of other letters but I don't know if I'm violating some forum rule or ethics by doing so without asking. Asking everyone one by one for permission to copy their letters could get annoying.

Plus, I'd only want to do it if I could get it stickied otherwise the thread will drop into the muck in a week.

[Bilgefisher]

[ QUOTE ]

I'm too lazy! J/K. Actually I don't mind going through and compiling a bunch of other letters but I don't know if I'm violating some forum rule or ethics by doing so without asking. Asking everyone one by one for permission to copy their letters could get annoying.

Plus, I'd only want to do it if I could get it stickied otherwise the thread will drop into the muck in a week.

[/ QUOTE ]

If they posted their letters on here then they have basically opened it to being repeated.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm too lazy! J/K. Actually I don't mind going through and compiling a bunch of other letters but I don't know if I'm violating some forum rule or ethics by doing so without asking. Asking everyone one by one for permission to copy their letters could get annoying.

Plus, I'd only want to do it if I could get it stickied otherwise the thread will drop into the muck in a week.

[/ QUOTE ]

If a mod started a sticky, we could all post our own letters to it.

[TheEngineer]

July 25, 2007

The Honorable Barack Obama
United States Senate
713 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Obama:

I am writing regarding my pleasant conversation with your Senate office today. I was informed that you may release a statement regarding your stand on pending Internet poker legislation “within the next couple of days”. This is encouraging to many of us in the poker community, as the attempts to ban this all-American game of skill have been serious affronts to our freedom and liberty.

As you know, a lot of your support comes from young, Internet-savvy Americans. I think if you were to publicly support our right to play poker on the Internet, you would significantly increase your support among this important group. I believe you would also significantly increase your support among the millions of Americans who believe the federal government has no business telling Americans what to do inside their own homes.

Politicians across America are lining up in support of the right to choose to play Internet poker. In fact, as of right now almost 50% of Democratic congressmen, and 61% of Congressional Black Caucus House members, have either voted against HR 4411 (the bill that because the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act when it was rammed through the Senate as part of the SAFE Ports Act), cosponsored HR 2046 (Rep. Frank’s Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007), or cosponsored HR 2140 (Rep. Berkley’s Internet Gambling Study Act), and more join the side of freedom every day. It seems the party and its members want freedom. It also seems Americans regardless of party affiliation want freedom.

I encourage you to take a stand against the Internet poker prohibitionists and for liberty. America will thank you!

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[oldbookguy]

WOW Engineer, that is a very informative post!

May I use some of that on my Obama blog, WVPokerMan?

obg

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]

WOW Engineer, that is a very informative post!

May I use some of that on my Obama blog, WVPokerMan?

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

Certainly. Hopefully we'll have a statement from him soon.

[oldbookguy]

thanks, posted. you may view @

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/blog/wvpokerman

[Legislurker]

How cross-posted(on other forums) do you think this thread IS or SHOULD be? We're expanding who we write/call/pester, but are we expanding the base of who is? Perhaps we could take some time each week to maybe hit up another forum or two with what we are doing, stop by a PLAY MONEY table and link it, or drop by the skill games sites?

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
How cross-posted(on other forums) do you think this thread IS or SHOULD be? We're expanding who we write/call/pester, but are we expanding the base of who is? Perhaps we could take some time each week to maybe hit up another forum or two with what we are doing, stop by a PLAY MONEY table and link it, or drop by the skill games sites?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's x-posted to most playing forums, with the blessing of the mods. I tried yesterday to x-post to Health and Fitness and got the following from the mod, who subsequently locked it:

[ QUOTE ]

kyleb
Reged: 09/24/04
Posts: 8122

Please don't spam our forum, or any others, for that matter.

[/ QUOTE ]

[TheEngineer]

It's also x-posted to bj21.com, the PPA board at http://webringamerica.com/4/pokerplayersalliance/viewforum.php?f=2 , and www.thebeargrowls.com (http://www.thebeargrowls.com) .

[fnurt]

I got a form email yesterday (I assume I'm not the only one) over the name of Greg Raymer, urging me to call my Congresswoman and ask her to cosponsor H.R. 2046. In terms of a call for action, by the way, this email was very well done, including both her name and phone number since many people won't take the trouble to look up who their Congressman is.

I called the office of my Rep (Carolyn Maloney, NY-14) and asked her to cosponsor the bill. The intern said that she didn't believe the Congresswoman had stated a position on the bill yet but that she had been getting "a lot of calls" on that particular bill, so let's hear it for the good guys!

A big chunk of the New York delegation has already cosponsored the bill (even Republicans!) so I imagine that with a few more calls from constituents, she's likely to join in as well.

[oldbookguy]

Back on june 08, Street signs, CNBC did a story on online gaming and Franks Bill, a good story and the video is here:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/19115704/from/ET/

It is time to follow-up with them on this as the WTO 'pending' case was only mentioned in passing, now it has grown important.

Lets send them SEVERAL letters asking for a follow-up story.

E-Mail - streetsigns@cnbc.com

My letter:
I just had the pleasure of watching a copy of the Internet Gaming report done by Erin Burnett on June 08, 2007.

In that interview it was mentioned that the gambling ban was possibly going to be an issue at the WTO.

Well, it has in a very big way.

Antigua-Barbuda has filed claim against the United States (we lost the case for the 3rd time) for 3.4 billion dollars in trade sanctions seeking to be allowed to legally pirate software as repayment for lost revenue and jobs.

Additionally the entire European Community is seeking compensation along with Canada, Japan, China, Costa Rica and a few other countries potentially costing billions in U S trade and untold costs and burdens on American companies.

Quoting USTR “we find the Antigua claim excessive and unnecessary to have been filed since we are negotiating with ALL WTO members to settle claims”.

This potential multi-billion dollar concession agreement deserves a follow-up looking at the affect it WILL have on American companies and consumers alike.

Thank You In Advance,

XXXXX XXXXX

[TheEngineer]

Ron Paul has replied to everything I've sent him (and no crappy form letters either):

Dear xxxxxxxx:

Thank you for taking the time to contact my office with your kind and supportive words and with a copy of your letter to Rep. Spencer Bachus. It is reassuring and encouraging to hear from those, such as yourself, who understand the issues and the positive impact of a pro-freedom philosophy.

Such active citizen participation, as the founders well understood, is absolutely vital to our form of government and to the preservation of the liberty they entrusted to us.

As I serve in the 110th Congress, rest assured that I shall continue to take very seriously my oath to uphold the Constitution of limited federal powers and work to make ours the freest, and hence most prosperous and tranquil society in the history of mankind.

Once again, thank you for taking the time to communicate your thoughts. I always appreciate hearing from those to whom power is vested by our Constitution, "the People of the United States."

Sincerely,

Ron Paul

[TheEngineer]

Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 7/30

<font color="brown"><u>Actions:</u>
- Call Sen. Barack Obama on Monday, 7/30, and on Thursday, 8/2 to ask for his support. Post notice of this call effort wherever possible.

Ongoing advocacy:
1. Write to Treasury and DOJ officials AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK to request the minimum possible UIGEA regulations.
2. Regularly contact Congress.
3. Contact your governor and to your state representatives.
4. Write to newspapers and post to blogs.</font>

--------------------------------------------------------

Based on our group discussions, let's all call Sen. Barack Obama on Monday, 7/30, and on Thursday, 8/2 to ask for his support. By calling on the same days, we'll make a stronger impression.

We need a senator to support some pro-Internet poker legislation. We also need a top-tier presidential candidate with us. Perhaps we can get a two-for-one in Barack Obama.

As 61% of House Congressional Black Caucus members are with us ("A" or "B", meaning they've at least consponsored the study bill), and as 49% of House Democrats are "A" or "B" rated in my rating post, it makes sense to look at the top-tier presidential candidates who are Democratic senators and members of the Congressional Black Caucus. Obviously there's only one....Sen. Barack Obama. So, I phoned his office on Thursday to ask him to support us. I was very surprised to hear that they were familiar with the legislation and that they "may" release some statement in a couple of days.

Also, Sen. Obama is reputed to be a good poker player: www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=0130165f-82d7-4c5a-85bc-64d52aaf8318&amp;k=36044&amp;p=1 (http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=0130165f-82d7-4c5a-85bc-64d52aaf8318&amp;k=36044&amp;p=1)

This is something everyone should wish to do. Even if you don't support Sen. Obaba's candidacy, you should call, as all we're doing is asking him to support our position.


Contact info:

Washington D.C. Office
713 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
(202) 224-2854
(202) 228-4260 fax
(202) 228-1404 TDD
Email our office: http://obama.senate.gov/contact/

Chicago Office
John C. Kluczynski Federal Office Building
230 South Dearborn St.
Suite 3900 (39th floor)
Chicago, Illinois 60604
(312) 886-3506
(312) 886-3514 fax
Toll free: (866) 445-2520
(for IL residents only)

Springfield Office
607 East Adams Street
Springfield, Illinois 62701
(217) 492-5089
(217) 492-5099 fax

Marion Office
701 North Court Street
Marion, Illinois 62959
(618) 997-2402
(618) 997-2850 fax

Moline Office
1911 52nd Avenue
Moline, Illinois 61265
(309)736-1217
(309)736-1233 fax

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ongoing efforts:

1. Write to Treasury and DOJ officials AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK to request the minimum possible UIGEA regulations. We should contact Steven D. Laughton (the UIGEA Treasury Dept. focal point), Roberta McInerney (Assistant General Counsel for Banking and Finance), Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Treasury Secretary Paulson, and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke. The regs were supposed to be out by now...the fact they they are not is probably good for us. I think a big push here on our part could really pay off.

Let's ask them not to exceed the specific mandates of UIGEA when drafting legislation. Let's ask them to exclude all ACH transactions (too burdensome for banks to filter). Also, remind them that online poker is not illegal under any federal law. We should ask them to require unambiguous state laws, so banks aren't in the position of trying to interpret state laws that may or may not apply to Internet gaming. Finally, there should be no "site blacklists".

Contact info:

Steven D. Laughton
Office of the Assistant General Counsel (Banking and Finance)
Room 2027B,1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.
Washington,DC 20220
Phone: (202) 622-8413
Email: steven.laughton@do.treas.gov

Ms. Roberta K. McInerney
Assistant General Counsel for Banking and Finance
Room 2304
Department of the Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.
Washington, DC 20220

The Honorable Alberto Gonzales
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov

The Honorable Henry Paulson
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220

The Honorable Ben S. Bernanke
Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Washington, D. C. 20551
http://www.federalreserve.gov/feedback.cfm

Others:

Pres. Bush: comments@whitehouse.gov
Your senators: www.senate.gov (http://www.senate.gov)
Your representative: www.house.gov (http://www.house.gov)
Republican National Committee: Chairman@gop.com
Democratic National Committee: www.democrats.org/contact.html (http://www.democrats.org/contact.html)
Speaker Nancy Pelosi: AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: http://reid.senate.gov/contact/email_form.cfm

2. Continue to contact your senators and representative. <u>Let’s call and send snail mail at least once every four to six weeks</u>. Let’s email at least once per week or biweekly. Some of these may be carbon copies of letters to others (like the USTR, Frank, FoF, etc).

We have many issues, so we can focus on one item for each letter while rotating. It does not matter to our movement which items you choose; any communication against attempts to ban online gambling at the federal level work in our favor. After all, if IGREA fails due to lack of public support, it’s not like the media will report that people disagreed with giving power to the FinCEN or to issues relating to shutting out foreign operators. They’ll report, “Frank’s Attempt to End Online Gambling Ban (as if there is such a thing, but the media don’t care) Fails to Draw Public Support”. Our opponents will say, "see, Americans are happy we’re 'protecting the public'". If Wexler’s bill fails, the media won’t report that some felt it legitimized UIGEA. They’ll report that Americans didn’t even wish to legalize poker. This year, we’re all about generating support for our general position, which is that online gaming should not be prohibited. Let’s focus there. So, here are some issues we can rotate:

- Antigua’s WTO case
- IGREA
- Hypocrisy of existing legal online gaming (games of skill, horseracing, etc)
- Wexler’s bill: H.R. 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act
- Praise for the 6/8 hearing. www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml (http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml); webcast archived at http://financialserv.edgeboss.net/wmedia/financialserv/hearing060807.wvx
- Shelley Berkley's study bill

3. Contact your governor and state representative. Congress won't pass anything that forces states to legalize gambling, so we ought to get the ball rolling at that level.


4. Now that we have bills progressing, we should try to work on advocating for the legislation. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. Since we proved our position in the 6/8 House hearing, let's post the link to the hearing webcast wherever we can.

Letters to the editor, Washington Post: letters@washpost.com
Letters to the editor, New York Times: letters@nytimes.com

Thanks everyone!

[oldbookguy]

Thanks Engineer, I posted this at 2 other sites I am at and will add to my Obama blog as well.

May add to my GOP blog too, though it will likely peeve them off.

obg

[oldbookguy]

A quick note to all, today is day 2 of calling / writing Obama's office asking for support and a public statement for Internet Poker.

obg

[Uglyowl]

[ QUOTE ]
A quick note to all, today is day 2 of calling / writing Obama's office asking for support and a public statement for Internet Poker.

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

E-mail sent on website, I will try to call during lunch today.

[TheEngineer]

What do you all want to do? I can think of two things. One is to write rebuttals to the FoF letter to Congress and send them to Congress plus everyone involved in the UIGEA regs. We could get a lot of "bang for the buck", as one letter could go to ten people. The other item is to write to your representative, enclosing a copy of our voter guide, asking for comments and commitments. I personally like the first option, but what do you all think?

www.citizenlink.org/pdfs/fosi/gambling/08-02-07_Internet_Gamb_GroupSign_Letter_8-1-07_Final_FAX_to_HOUSE.pdf (http://www.citizenlink.org/pdfs/fosi/gambling/08-02-07_Internet_Gamb_GroupSign_Letter_8-1-07_Final_FAX_to_HOUSE.pdf)

[oldbookguy]

At the least we need to respond in kind with letters to both houses of congress.

Looking at the FoF:

We should begin....ROUGH DRAFT IN A BIT OF RAGE, suggestions?

Has not been ran through MS Word for corrects.

Dear XXXXXXX,
First and foremost, this letter is from a VOTING American in your district and state, I am NOT a foreigner from overseas lobbying you.

As an American Citizen who in no way portends to represent million of others, although there are many millions like myself, I am compelled to voice my indignity that any group would stoop to a level hyperbole by stressing that 230 million people access the Internet and many are children as reasoning to encourage continued invasion into MY HOME.

I am outraged that a CHRISTIAN group would even suggest that our great country negotiate out of a commitment we made sullying our word to the WTO and the world.

Why would ANY Christian encourage any one or any nation to simply say, I will pay you money for allowing me to lie to you?

Why would any Christian that portends to care about his fellow man and country encourage its government to negotiate trade sanctions that potentially can cost many American jobs by allowing unfair trade.

Why would any Christian that portends to care about his fellow man and country encourage its government to negotiate trade sanctions that will certainly cost American companies to suffer reduced profits or his fellow man to pay higher prices?

Why would ANY ONE wish to enter my home via Federal Legislation and dictate to me how I may or may not morally spend my recreational time?

I consider myself a Christian, and having read the letter authored by Focus On The Family and others you received, more so than they.

I respect their views however, I have no respect for anyone or group who disparages others or seeks dominion over others on earth in the name of God or religion.

I live in America.

In closing I beseech you to not make the words sung by Joan Baez ring true, FREEDOM IS JUST ANOTHER WORD FOR NOTHING LEFT TO LOSE........


obg

[TheRedRocket]

[ QUOTE ]
Why would ANY ONE wish to enter my home via Federal Legislation and dictate to me how I may or may not morally spend my recreational time?

[/ QUOTE ]

instead of this how about language that instead says that the FOFs should be concerning itself with educating its members about the dangers of irresponsible gambling, and looking for ways to see that sites continue to install responsible gaming mechanisms instead of taking away your freedom to engage in the enjoyment of responsible poker playing from your home.

I just dont think the privacy of my own home stuff gets anywhere with lawmakers, as its basically what they do

[TheEngineer]

Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 8/6 &amp; 8/13

<font color="brown"><u>Actions:</u>
- Write to Congress (your senators and your rep) with a rebuttal to one of the 8/1 FoF letters.
- Write to Congress (your senators and your rep) to ask for their support and to ask where they stand on Internet gaming. Reference the Congressmen For and Against Online Gambling (http://www.eog.com/news/industry.aspx?id=28374) article in the letter.

Ongoing advocacy:
1. Write to Treasury and DOJ officials AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK to request the minimum possible UIGEA regulations.
2. Regularly contact Congress.
3. Contact your governor and to your state representatives.
4. Write to newspapers and post to blogs. </font>

--------------------------------------------------------

- Let’s all write to Congress (senators and rep) with a rebuttal to one of the 8/1 FoF letters, at FoF Letter (http://www.citizenlink.org/pdfs/fosi/gambling/08-02-07_Internet_Gamb_GroupSign_Letter_8-1-07_Final_FAX_to_HOUSE.pdf) and Sports Coalition Letter (http://www.citizenlink.org/pdfs/fosi/gambling/08-02-07_Sports_Assn_Letter%20Congress7-30-07.pdf). Let’s be careful to not give these letters credit with our response. Rather, let’s take the tone of “you believe this joke of a letter?”, so to speak. We don’t want to inadvertently elevate or promote either FoF letter, but we don't want it to unchallenged, eihter.

- Let’s all write and call Congress (senators and rep) to ask for their support and for their stand on Internet gaming. Reference the Congressmen For and Against Online Gambling (http://www.eog.com/news/industry.aspx?id=28374) article in the letter. Consider stating that you’ll vote based on the letter and inform them that you hope their rating improves by Election Day. This will help the congressmen see tangible evidence of our work, and it will show the senators what to expect. For many representatives, Googling “[their name] gambling” returns this article at #1, so that may be worth mentioning. Once done, please let me know if you receive a response, so I can update the report accordingly. I hope we can get rid of most of the question marks.


---------------------------------------------------------

Ongoing efforts:

1. Write to Treasury and DOJ officials AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK to request the minimum possible UIGEA regulations. We should contact Steven D. Laughton (the UIGEA Treasury Dept. focal point), Roberta McInerney (Assistant General Counsel for Banking and Finance), Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Treasury Secretary Paulson, and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke. The regs were supposed to be out by now...the fact they they are not is probably good for us. I think a big push here on our part could really pay off.

Let's ask them not to exceed the specific mandates of UIGEA when drafting legislation. Let's ask them to exclude all ACH transactions (too burdensome for banks to filter). Also, remind them that online poker is not illegal under any federal law. We should ask them to require unambiguous state laws, so banks aren't in the position of trying to interpret state laws that may or may not apply to Internet gaming. Finally, there should be no "site blacklists".

Contact info:

Steven D. Laughton
Office of the Assistant General Counsel (Banking and Finance)
Room 2027B,1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.
Washington,DC 20220
Phone: (202) 622-8413
Email: steven.laughton@do.treas.gov

Ms. Roberta K. McInerney
Assistant General Counsel for Banking and Finance
Room 2304
Department of the Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.
Washington, DC 20220

The Honorable Alberto Gonzales
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov

The Honorable Henry Paulson
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220

The Honorable Ben S. Bernanke
Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Washington, D. C. 20551
http://www.federalreserve.gov/feedback.cfm

Others:

Pres. Bush: comments@whitehouse.gov
Your senators: www.senate.gov (http://www.senate.gov)
Your representative: www.house.gov (http://www.house.gov)
Republican National Committee: Chairman@gop.com
Democratic National Committee: www.democrats.org/contact.html (http://www.democrats.org/contact.html)
Speaker Nancy Pelosi: AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: http://reid.senate.gov/contact/email_form.cfm

2. Continue to contact your senators and representative. <u>Let’s call and send snail mail at least once every four to six weeks</u>. Let’s email at least once per week or biweekly. Some of these may be carbon copies of letters to others (like the USTR, Frank, FoF, etc).

We have many issues, so we can focus on one item for each letter while rotating. It does not matter to our movement which items you choose; any communication against attempts to ban online gambling at the federal level work in our favor. After all, if IGREA fails due to lack of public support, it’s not like the media will report that people disagreed with giving power to the FinCEN or to issues relating to shutting out foreign operators. They’ll report, “Frank’s Attempt to End Online Gambling Ban (as if there is such a thing, but the media don’t care) Fails to Draw Public Support”. Our opponents will say, "see, Americans are happy we’re 'protecting the public'". If Wexler’s bill fails, the media won’t report that some felt it legitimized UIGEA. They’ll report that Americans didn’t even wish to legalize poker. This year, we’re all about generating support for our general position, which is that online gaming should not be prohibited. Let’s focus there. So, here are some issues we can rotate:

- Antigua’s WTO case
- IGREA
- Hypocrisy of existing legal online gaming (games of skill, horseracing, etc)
- Wexler’s bill: H.R. 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act
- Praise for the 6/8 hearing. www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml (http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml); webcast archived at http://financialserv.edgeboss.net/wmedia/financialserv/hearing060807.wvx
- Shelley Berkley's study bill

3. Contact your governor and state representative. Congress won't pass anything that forces states to legalize gambling, so we ought to get the ball rolling at that level.


4. Now that we have bills progressing, we should try to work on advocating for the legislation. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. Since we proved our position in the 6/8 House hearing, let's post the link to the hearing webcast wherever we can.

Letters to the editor, Washington Post: letters@washpost.com
Letters to the editor, New York Times: letters@nytimes.com

Thanks everyone!

[TheEngineer]

August 3, 2007

The Honorable Geoff Davis
United States House of Representatives
1108 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-1704

Dear Congressman Davis:

I am writing to ask you to restore the right of Americans to play Internet poker and other games in the privacy of their own homes. The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) is big government nanny-statism at its worst. Why should the federal government care how I spend my own money in my own home? I fail to see how this could possibly be of any concern to Congress and, quite frankly, I am angry that Congress thinks it is their concern.

Out of love for freedom, and out of anger, immediately after UIGEA passed I started advocating for its repeal on various web sites. Posting as “TheEngineer”, many of my fellow Internet poker enthusiasts and I have made some progress toward our ultimate goal. One step I took was to develop and post a voting guide for poker players and others who value freedom. Besides assigning a grade to every congressman, it identifies twelve L-rated congressmen (most vulnerable opponents…i.e., most likely to be “Leached”, as in Jim Leach) for special focus. I posted the guide at several sites that are frequented by thousands of poker players, including www.eog.com/news/industry.aspx?id=28374 (http://www.eog.com/news/industry.aspx?id=28374) , http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...=1#Post11456661 (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=11456661&amp;page=0&amp;vc=1#Pos t11456661) and http://webringamerica.com/4/pokerplayersalliance/viewtopic.php?t=1618 . It seems to be popular. In fact, Googling “Geoff Davis gambling” returns my guide at positions #1, #5, #9, and #10.

I plan to expand this as much as possible over the next year. As the Poker Players Alliance, a grassroots poker rights organization chaired by Sen. Al D’Amato, now has over 600,000 members, I foresee a lot of attention being paid to this issue in the next election. I know my friends, family, and I will vote along these lines.

I am updating my guide monthly. Will you provide me with some information? I would simply like to know if you support HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007. As you know, IGREA provides for regulated, taxed, and legal Internet poker. It provides for age verification and other issues, as you heard at the June 8 House Financial Services Committee hearing on the subject.

This is not about supporting or not supporting poker; rather, it is about supporting the right of adults to make their own decisions and to live in freedom. Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
I got a form email yesterday (I assume I'm not the only one) over the name of Greg Raymer, urging me to call my Congresswoman and ask her to cosponsor H.R. 2046. In terms of a call for action, by the way, this email was very well done, including both her name and phone number since many people won't take the trouble to look up who their Congressman is.

I called the office of my Rep (Carolyn Maloney, NY-14) and asked her to cosponsor the bill. The intern said that she didn't believe the Congresswoman had stated a position on the bill yet but that she had been getting "a lot of calls" on that particular bill, so let's hear it for the good guys!

A big chunk of the New York delegation has already cosponsored the bill (even Republicans!) so I imagine that with a few more calls from constituents, she's likely to join in as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I called Rep. Maloney today as a follow-up. They said she still hadn't taken a position, so I repeated my arguments and mentioned that the supporters of this issue are publishing voter guides and that she'll get a lot of support if she decides to co-sponsor the bill. Gotta keep the pressure on!

[TheEngineer]

Word is that FoF is pressing hard with their letters and other advocacy of Congress. Let's all get a quick letter out. It doesn't have to be the perfect rebuttal. I simple "it's none of their business, or yours, what I do in my own home with my own money" will do, but it's more important to get the short note out now than to wait to write the "perfect" rebuttal. Thanks.

[TheEngineer]

August 10, 2007

The Honorable Geoff Davis
United States House of Representatives
1108 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-1704

Dear Congressman Davis:

As a constituent and voter in your district, I am writing in response to the August 1st Focus on the Family letter to Congress concerning Internet gaming. I urge you to disregard their recommendations concerning Internet gaming, as these nanny-statish ideas are bad for America and potentially disastrous for the Republican Party.

The idea that Americans need the federal government to protect us from ourselves is laughable. What I do in my own home is not the business of Focus on the Family. I could not help but note that FoF and other freedom-restrictors fail to mention that every wager ever made online was made voluntarily. Internet poker sites are not predatory…people play poker because they enjoy it. We’re not degenerates as Focus would have you believe; rather, we enjoy matching wits in contests of skill.

HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007, addresses EVERY concern mentioned by Focus on the Family. It seems FoF should praise HR 2046 for having systems in place to address Focus’ list of so-called “problems” [age verification, regulated sites, self-exclusion lists, funding for treatment for the 0.6% (according to a recent Harvard study) of players who develop issues, and state and sports league opt-outs], especially as the testimony at the June 8 House Financial Services Committee hearing on this conclusively proved that Internet gaming can be regulated effectively. I write “so-called” because it is obvious that Focus would oppose Internet gaming even if there were no negatives, as Focus is simply opposed to all gambling…even games of skill like poker. They are entitled to their opinion, but they should just say that, instead of pretending that their concerns are rooted in the “problems” listed in their letter.

Regarding their specific recommendations, I ask that you help ensure that the UIGEA regulations do not exceed the specific requirements of the Act. As you know, UIGEA did not make Internet gaming illegal. Rather, it merely provides a means for enforcement of federal and state Internet gaming laws that were already in effect when UIGEA passed. Prohibitionists are fond of saying this. However, they neglect to mention that very few types of online gambling are illegal under federal law. Specifically, federal law covers only some sports betting. As for state laws, very few states have outlawed Internet gaming. Regarding other states, prohibitionists are trying to use ambiguous, arcane gambling laws to claim that some types of Internet gaming MIGHT be illegal in their states. To keep from placing an unfair burden on our banks and citizens, I ask that the upcoming UIGEA regulations apply only where laws are unambiguous in their application to the Internet and to specific forms of gambling. After all, if states actually wished to ban Internet gaming, they would have done so in an unambiguous fashion, especially if they wished to have the federal government take the unprecedented step of enforcing it. I also ask that you not support the U.S. withdrawal from the gaming sectors of the WTO. Kentucky needs an effective WTO, not one that will be stripped of effectiveness, even after penalizing us billions of dollars for stopping Americans from choosing to spend their own money while in their own homes.

Finally, the 2008 elections are shaping up to be a real bloodbath for our party, especially as it looks like Steve Beshear will end 2007 by trouncing Gov. Fletcher – while running on a pro-gaming platform. This, plus the overall mood of the nation, will make running for reelection on a nanny-state platform political suicide. You may win in 2008, but it is hard to see our party controlling anything any day soon.

Thank you for your consideration of my request.

Sincerely,

[my name]

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
August 10, 2007

The Honorable .....

[/ QUOTE ]

Tweaked and sent to both senators.

[fightingcoward]

Got a reply from Frank Wolf (Rep-VA).

"Dear Mr. XXX"
Thank you for your recent email sharing your support for a "skilled game" exemption to Internet gambling laws. I appreciate your comments.

Internet gambling was addressed in the 109th Congress through the UIGEA of 2006 (H.R. 4411). Introduced by Rep. James Leach, the measure passed the House with my support by a bipartisan vote of 317-93 on July 11, 2006.

The Senate failed to take action on H.R. 4411 but the measure was added to the Safe Port Act (H.R. 4954) which became public law 109-347. There has been no additional legislation regulating internet gambling during the 110th congress.

While I regret that we disagree on this issue, please be assured that I value your opinion and appreciate your taking the time to contact me.

Best wishes.

Sincerely,


[censored] Wolf

[oldbookguy]

posted the folowing on my GOP BUZZ Central with a link to your TownHall Blog entry Engineer.

obg



I am becoming more and more concerned this single issue, playing poker on the Internet, and our adamant stance opposing this is going to cause more harm to the GOP than any support the Rev. Dobson and Focus on the Family can deliver.
Witness this by reading this single blog entry, by a fellow republican. There are literally thousands of these posts and the legions are growing.

It may be time for a repositioning of our stance adopting the idea that we can best “protect” the American family by regulating this activity rather than banning it.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Got a reply from Frank Wolf (Rep-VA).

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the heads-up. It's great to have written documentation of where these guys stand. I did have Wolf F-rated already, as he cosponsored HR 4777 and voted for HR 4411. So, with the note for sure we know where he stands.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
The Center for Regulatory Effectiveness sent a letter to several government officials concerning UIGEA regulatory burdens. It's at http://www.thecre.com/pdf/McInerney_Letter.pdf . The points brought up in the analysis may be good for us to use in our letters and in our comments on the proposed regulations (once they are released, starting the comment period.

Some points:

There is strong evidence that a substantial number of credit card issuers are small businesses.

Census Bureau data strongly suggests that a substantial number small companies are in engaged in financial transaction processing services.

Small, innovative American technology companies will be directly and/or indirectly impacted by the rule.

The rule will place significant direct and indirect burdens on a substantial number of small entities, potentially altering the competitive situation in financial transactions industries and leading to further consolidations in already highly concentrated industries.

The letter also contains a number of people to whom we may consider writing, including:

Ms. Roberta K. McInerney
Assistant General Counsel for Banking and Finance
Room 2304
Department of the Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.
Washington, DC 20220

The Honorable Robert J. Portman, Director, The Office of Management and Budget

The Honorable Thomas M. Sullivan, Chief Counsel for Advocacy, U.S. Small Business Administration

Mr. Scott G. Alvarez, General Counsel, The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

Mr. Peter A. Bieger, Deputy Assistant General Counsel, Banking and Finance

Dennis W. Carlton, Ph.D., Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Economic Analysis

[/ QUOTE ]

As for the UIGEA regs, please don't forget about the Regulatory Flexibility Act issue I shared with you all last month. Hopefully we'll include this in our letters. The longer we can delay the regs, the better off we'll be. Too bad we can't get this delay beyond Jan. 20, 2009 (but we can try, right?).

[TheEngineer]

Here's the "Sports Coalition's" letter against Internet gaming (the other FoF letter that I mentioned). It's at www.citizenlink.org/pdfs/fosi/gambling/08-02-07_Sports_Assn_Letter%20Congress7-30-07.pdf (http://www.citizenlink.org/pdfs/fosi/gambling/08-02-07_Sports_Assn_Letter%20Congress7-30-07.pdf) . I'm going to write to Congress (my rep and both senators) to express my displeasure. Will everyone join me?

---------------------------------------------

July 30, 2007

Dear Member of Congress:

Sports betting is incompatible with preserving the integrity of American athletics. For many decades, we have actively enforced strong policies against sports betting. And the law on this point is consistent. Federal statutes bar sports betting, especially the 1961 Wire Act and the 1992 Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act. Enforcement of these laws against sports betting was also a significant motive for enacting the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA).

Accordingly, we urge you to reject current proposals to legalize Internet gambling, such as H.R.2046 sponsored by Rep. Barney Frank. This legislation reverses federal policy on sports betting and would for the first time give such gambling Congressional consent. The bill sends exactly the wrong message to the public about sports gambling and threatens to undermine the integrity of American sports.

On a related point, we believe the Congress should not consider any liberalization of Internet gambling until the U.S. Trade Representative successfully resolves our trade disputes in this area. A rush to judgment on this subject could result in irreversible damage to U.S. sovereignty in the area of gambling regulation, including the capacity to prohibit sports bets.

Though Internet gambling on sports has never been legal, easy access to offshore Internet gambling websites has created the opposite impression among the general public, particularly before Congress enacted UIGEA last fall. UIGEA emerged from more than a decade of Congressional consideration, in which stand-alone legislation aimed at restricting Internet gambling passed either the Senate or the House in each of five successive Congresses, each time by overwhelming bi-partisan votes. UIGEA also enjoyed a broad array of supporters, including 49 state Attorneys General and other law enforcement associations, several major financial institutions and technology companies, dozens of religious and family organizations, and of course our sports organizations.

Enactment of UIGEA was grounded on concerns about addictive, compulsive, and underage Internet gambling, unlawful sports betting, potential criminal activity, and the wholesale evasion of federal and state laws. When it passed the House a year ago, the vote was 317-93, including majorities of both caucuses and with the affirmative votes of both party leaders.

The final product was a law that did not change the legality of any gambling activity – it simply gave law enforcement new, effective tools for enforcing existing state and federal gambling laws. UIGEA and its predecessor bills could attract such consensus because they adhered to this principle: whether you think gambling liberalization is a bad idea or a good one, the policy judgments of State legislatures and Congress must be respected, not de facto repealed by deliberate evasion of the law by offshore entities via the Internet.

By contrast, H.R. 2046 would put the Treasury Department in charge of issuing licenses to Internet gambling operators, who would then be immunized from prosecution or liability under any Federal or State law that prohibits what the Frank bill permits. The bill would tear apart the fabric of American gambling regulation. By overriding in one stroke dozens of Federal and State gambling laws, this would amount to the greatest expansion of legalized gambling ever enacted.

This legislation contains an “opt-out” that appears to permit individual leagues to prohibit gambling on their sports. But regardless of the “opt-out,” the bill breaks terrible new ground, because Congress would for the first time sanction sports betting. That is reason enough to oppose it. In addition, 2 the bill’s safeguard opt-out for sports leagues as well as the one for states may well prove illusory and ineffectual. They will be subject to legal challenge before U.S. courts and the World Trade Organization.

In addition, this legislation would dramatically complicate current trade negotiations concerning gambling. In 1994, the United States signed the General Agreement on Trade in Services, which included a commitment to free trade in “other recreational services.” In subsequent WTO proceedings, the United States has claimed this commitment never included gambling services. The United States has noted that any such “commitment” would contradict a host of federal and state laws that regulate and restrict gambling. The WTO has not accepted this argument.

Accordingly, the U.S. Trade Representative has initiated negotiations to withdraw gambling from U.S. GATS commitments. Before withdrawal can be finalized, agreement must be reached on trade concessions with interested trading partners. Few concessions should be required because there was never a legal market in Internet gambling in the U.S. If Congress creates a legal market before withdrawal is complete, the withdrawal will become much more complicated and costly. Therefore, we oppose any legislation that would imperil the withdrawal process.

Finally, we have heard the argument that Internet gambling can actually protect the integrity of sports because of the alleged capacity to monitor gambling patterns more closely in a legalized environment. This argument is generally asserted by those who would profit from legalized gambling and the same point was raised in 1992 when PASPA was enacted. Congress dismissed it then and should dismiss it now. The harms caused by government endorsement of sports betting far exceed the alleged benefits.

H.R. 2046 sets aside decades of federal precedent to legalize sports betting and exposes American gambling laws to continuing jeopardy in the WTO. We strongly urge that you oppose it. Thank you for considering our views on this matter.

Sincerely,

Rick Buchanan, Executive VP and General Counsel
National Basketball Association

Elsa Kircher Cole, General Counsel
National Collegiate Athletic Association

William Daly, Deputy Commissioner
National Hockey League

Tom Ostertag, Senior VP and General Counsel
Major League Baseball

Jeffrey Pash, Executive VP and General Counsel
National Football League

[TheEngineer]

August 13, 2007

Roger Goodell
Commissioner
National Football League
280 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10017

Gene Upshaw
Executive Director
NFL Players Association
1133 20th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036

Dear Commissioner Goodell and Mr. Upshaw:

I am writing to express my anger and disappointment at the National Football League’s very vocal advocacy of a ban on all Internet gaming (even non-sports betting). I fail to understand why your concerns over the honesty of your million-dollar players constitutes an “integrity issue” severe enough to necessitate restricting MY freedoms. Don’t forget, it’s the fans who make the league possible.

As a result of your work against my liberty, I’ll definitely watch less NFL football from now on. I’ll also be less likely to patronize your sponsors, especially Anheuser-Busch, to whom I wrote as well.

I urge you to reconsider your advocacy of what many of us are calling “Prohibition 2.0". It’s a loser for America and a loser for freedom.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[oldbookguy]

http://www.nfl.com/help/emailtech

Commissioner Roger Goodell
National Football League
280 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10017

Sir,

I must say I am quit disappointed in your alliance with Focus on the Family and your opposition to the Barney Frank’s proposed Internet Gambling Legislation.

I can and do appreciate your position concerning Football and your right to oppose sports betting.
I appreciate your right to forbid NFL players from betting or engaging in betting.

I do NOT appreciate this position however when you openly support fantasy football, allowing we fans to draft our own team to ‘GAMBLE’ on to win prizes.

I do NOT appreciate your opposition to my being allowed to play cards on the Internet. It is not your nor anyone else’s place to determine what I do in my spare time.

Let me make a simple analogy for you between a football season and a poker tournament.

Your players and teams play the regular season hoping for the brass ring of the playoffs where they earn ‘extra’ money above and beyond the enormous salaries they are paid with the hope in the end to be crowned champion and get the gold ring.

A poker tournament is much the same; our ‘season’ is played to reach the money by beating out others to make the playoffs. Our ‘playoffs’ begin when enough players are eliminated and the bonus money level is reached. Each level of the ‘money / playoffs’ we advance to we earn more. In the end a champion is crowned and rather than the ‘brass’ ring we get the gold, we are champion in much the same way as a ‘Super Bowl’ champion is crowned.

In closing as a fan I would appreciate you making a distinction between your anti-sports betting stance and my playing cards.

A WV Fan,

XXXXXXXX

[TheEngineer]

August 13, 2007

Mr. August A. Busch IV
President and Chief Executive Officer
Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc.
One Busch Place
St. Louis, MO 63118

Dear Mr. Busch:

I am writing to express my anger and disappointment at the National Football League’s very vocal advocacy of a ban on all Internet gaming (even non-sports betting such as poker). I fail to understand why their concerns over the honesty of their million-dollar players constitutes an “integrity issue” severe enough to necessitate restricting MY freedoms. Seems they should have enough resources to maintain their integrity without infringing on my liberty. It seems they forget that it’s the fans who make the league possible.

As a result of their work against my liberty, I’ll definitely watch less NFL football from now on. I’ll also be less likely to patronize sponsors who remain silent in the face of this affront to liberty. Will Anheuser-Busch support freedom, or will you support Prohibition 2.0?

Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[TheEngineer]

Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 8/20 &amp; 8/27

<font color="brown"><u>Summary of Actions:</u>
- Write to the NFL, their sponsors, and Congress (senators and rep) to complain about the NFL’s advocacy of a ban for all Internet gaming (which goes beyond sports betting and beyond even UIGEA).
- Nationalize the 2007 KY gubernatorial election. It’s being waged and a fight between the right to gamble and prohibition based on family values (which makes it our fight).</font>

Ongoing advocacy:
1. Regularly contact Congress.
1a. Send Congress your opinion of the 8/1 FoF letter at FoF Letter (http://www.citizenlink.org/pdfs/fosi/gambling/08-02-07_Internet_Gamb_GroupSign_Letter_8-1-07_Final_FAX_to_HOUSE.pdf).
1b. Write to Congress (your senators and your rep) to ask for their support and to ask where they stand on Internet gaming. Reference the Congressmen For and Against Online Gambling (http://www.eog.com/news/industry.aspx?id=28374) article in the letter.
2. Write to Treasury and DOJ officials AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK to request the minimum possible UIGEA regulations.
3. Contact your governor and to your state representatives.
4. Write to newspapers and post to blogs.

--------------------------------------------------------

- Let’s all write to the NFL, their sponsors, and Congress (senators and rep) to complain about the NFL’s advocacy of a ban for all Internet gaming (beyond sports betting, and beyond even UIGEA). Their letter to Congress is at Sports Coalition Letter (http://www.citizenlink.org/pdfs/fosi/gambling/08-02-07_Sports_Assn_Letter%20Congress7-30-07.pdf). It seems they’ve actually partnered with Focus on the Family to work to take OUR rights from us, rather than figuring out how to develop internal policies and procedures to deal with sports betting. After all, they have the financial resources to control their own integrity. It’s time they enter the 21st century, rather than trying to take the nation back to the prohibition mentality of the early 20th century.

Some contacts:

Commissioner Roger Goodell
National Football League
280 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10017

Gene Upshaw
Executive Director
NFL Players Association
1133 20th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036

Mr. August A. Busch IV
President and Chief Executive Officer
Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc.
One Busch Place
St. Louis, MO 63118

PepsiCo, Inc.
700 Anderson Hill Road
Purchase, NY 10577
(914) 253-2000

Mr. G. Richard Wagoner Jr.
Chairman of the Board of Directors
General Motors Corporation
300 Renaissance Center
Detroit, Michigan 48265


- Nationalize the 2007 KY gubernatorial election. It’s being waged and a fight between the right to gamble and prohibition based on family values (which makes it our fight). The pro-gaming candidate is the heavy favorite. Additionally, the fact that it’s off year adds to the visibility of the election (and to the effort we and others can devote to it). And, we can leverage the results against Sen. McConnell [R-KY], who’s running in 2008. This election will set the tone for the national elections of 2008, so let’s do our part.

Gov. Ernie Fletcher [R], the incumbent, has been under the cloud of scandal for the past eighteen months. He was indicted for rewarding political supporters with state jobs. Fletcher made a deal with the prosecutor’s office to get the charges dropped, then pardoned his entire administration. As a result, while he did win the primary, he’s way down in the polls.

Steve Beshear [D], the challenger, wants to pay for education reforms with casino profits. Many neighboring states, including Indiana, Illinois, and West Virginia, have casinos at which KY residents frequently play. Despite this, Fletcher has taken a hard line against casinos, saying they cause crime, divorce, and bankruptcy. “I don’t subscribe to Steve Beshear’s math and science program that teaches children only to count to 21,” Mr. Fletcher said. Basically, Fletcher has decided to run as a pure social conservative.

So, I think we have an awesome opportunity to demonstrate what we can do. It seems we can write letters of support to Beshear and can contribute, even if only token amounts, to his campaign. Then, we can send photocopies of the donations to Sen. Mitch McConnell with an explanation of our beliefs in our freedoms. Then, once Beshear wins, we can lobby McConnell, claiming that the people of Kentucky have spoken in favor of allowing people to choose to play cards.

Latest poll:

Ernie Fletcher (R) - 36.7%
Steve Beshear (D) - 57.3%

Contact Info:

Steve Beshear / Daniel Mongiardo
PO BOX 4227
Frankfort, KY 40604
Email: info@stevebeshear.com
Tel: 502-607-8600
Fax: 502-607-8611

Governor Ernie Fletcher
700 Capital Avenue
Suite 100
Frankfort, KY 40601

Senator Mitch McConnell
United States Senate
361-A Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

---------------------------------------------------------

Ongoing efforts:

1a. Let’s all write and call Congress (senators and rep) to ask for their support and for their stand on Internet gaming. Reference the Congressmen For and Against Online Gambling (http://www.eog.com/news/industry.aspx?id=28374) article in the letter. [/b]Consider stating that you’ll vote based on the letter and inform them that you hope their rating improves by Election Day. This will help the congressmen see tangible evidence of our work, and it will show the senators what to expect. For many representatives, Googling “[their name] gambling” returns this article at #1, so that may be worth mentioning. Once done, please let me know if you receive a response, so I can update the report accordingly. I hope we can get rid of most of the question marks.


1b. Continue to contact your senators and representative. <u>Let’s call and send snail mail at least once every four to six weeks</u>. Let’s email at least once per week or biweekly. Some of these may be carbon copies of letters to others (like the USTR, Frank, FoF, etc).

We have many issues, so we can focus on one item for each letter while rotating. It does not matter to our movement which items you choose; any communication against attempts to ban online gambling at the federal level work in our favor. After all, if IGREA fails due to lack of public support, it’s not like the media will report that people disagreed with giving power to the FinCEN or to issues relating to shutting out foreign operators. They’ll report, “Frank’s Attempt to End Online Gambling Ban (as if there is such a thing, but the media don’t care) Fails to Draw Public Support”. Our opponents will say, "see, Americans are happy we’re 'protecting the public'". If Wexler’s bill fails, the media won’t report that some felt it legitimized UIGEA. They’ll report that Americans didn’t even wish to legalize poker. This year, we’re all about generating support for our general position, which is that online gaming should not be prohibited. Let’s focus there. So, here are some issues we can rotate:

- Antigua’s WTO case
- IGREA
- Hypocrisy of existing legal online gaming (games of skill, horseracing, etc)
- Wexler’s bill: H.R. 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act
- Praise for the 6/8 hearing. www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml (http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml); webcast archived at http://financialserv.edgeboss.net/wmedia/financialserv/hearing060807.wvx
- Shelley Berkley's study bill


2. Write to Treasury and DOJ officials AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK to request the minimum possible UIGEA regulations. We should contact Steven D. Laughton (the UIGEA Treasury Dept. focal point), Roberta McInerney (Assistant General Counsel for Banking and Finance), Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Treasury Secretary Paulson, and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke. The regs were supposed to be out by now...the fact they they are not is probably good for us. I think a big push here on our part could really pay off.

Let's ask them not to exceed the specific mandates of UIGEA when drafting legislation. Let's ask them to exclude all ACH transactions (too burdensome for banks to filter). Also, remind them that online poker is not illegal under any federal law. We should ask them to require unambiguous state laws, so banks aren't in the position of trying to interpret state laws that may or may not apply to Internet gaming. Finally, there should be no "site blacklists".

Contact info:

Steven D. Laughton
Office of the Assistant General Counsel (Banking and Finance)
Room 2027B,1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.
Washington,DC 20220
Phone: (202) 622-8413
Email: steven.laughton@do.treas.gov

Ms. Roberta K. McInerney
Assistant General Counsel for Banking and Finance
Room 2304
Department of the Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.
Washington, DC 20220

The Honorable Alberto Gonzales
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov

The Honorable Henry Paulson
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220

The Honorable Ben S. Bernanke
Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Washington, D. C. 20551
http://www.federalreserve.gov/feedback.cfm

Others:

Pres. Bush: comments@whitehouse.gov
Your senators: www.senate.gov (http://www.senate.gov)
Your representative: www.house.gov (http://www.house.gov)
Republican National Committee: Chairman@gop.com
Democratic National Committee: www.democrats.org/contact.html (http://www.democrats.org/contact.html)
Speaker Nancy Pelosi: AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: http://reid.senate.gov/contact/email_form.cfm


3. Contact your governor and state representative. Congress won't pass anything that forces states to legalize gambling, so we ought to get the ball rolling at that level.


4. Now that we have bills progressing, we should try to work on advocating for the legislation. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. Since we proved our position in the 6/8 House hearing, let's post the link to the hearing webcast wherever we can.

Letters to the editor, Washington Post: letters@washpost.com
Letters to the editor, New York Times: letters@nytimes.com

Thanks everyone! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[oldbookguy]

Engineer, you of course get the posting credit as writer, but I have something worked out with the J. Todd at APCW.org.

I am copying the weekly action thread and it will be included in the APCW.org weekly updates and promoted on RoundersRadio.com

Would like you to join each and we can work this new source together.

obg

[oldbookguy]

Additionally this week we need to be letting the PPA choice for president we are NOT pleased with the alliance being forged with FoF and Sen. Frist's minion.

Write the campaign (from my Thompson Thread post)

Contact:
http://www.imwithfred.com/Contact/Contact.aspx

My Letter To Thompson:

Sen. Fred Thompson

Sen.,
It was my hope your potential candidacy would be the saving grace of the Republican Party and the United States.

Sadly, having read closely your positions and becoming aware of your choices to head your campaign, it is obvious I was mistaken. Why? Simple. You are seeking to align yourself with closely with the Focus on the Family movement by hiring Bill Wichterman, former Sen. Frist Chief of Staff and ally of Focus on the Family.

Though I am a Christian as well, I am able to differentiate between my belief structure and the American Constitutional Structure. The two are wholly incompatible, the FoF beliefs that religious beliefs and morals should be codified into law.

Not all Christians adhere to the same strict tenants promulgated by FoF. So, simply by aligning yourself with this organization and promoting Laws based upon the FoF Evangelical beliefs you are seeking to establish a sectarian religious philosophy not endorsed nor followed by ALL Christians.

You and many of the GOP presidential hopefuls continue the mantra of the latest catch phrase, Federalism; I am a Federalist.

Your positions and staff however reveal this is but a ‘Catch Phrase’ and nothing more.

It is becoming more and more apparent that this ‘Federalism’ mantra is little or no different than the last manta, ‘Compassionate Conservative’.

I simply want a President that CAN and WILL understand; you are applying for a job not to represent a select few, but to represent ALL Americans. And remember, the job is only temporary at best.

XXXX

obg

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Additionally this week we need to be letting the PPA choice for president we are NOT pleased with the alliance being forged with FoF and Sen. Frist's minion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thompson actually wasn't endorsed by PPA. He was endorsed by D'Amato, who apparently did so as a private citizen.

I don't yet have an opinion on Thompson's selection. He could simply be a fellow Tennessean with organizational experience. Then again, I didn't see Thompson as a champion for poker in the first place. I guess time will tell. He should know pretty soon how tight he'll be with FoF.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]

Engineer, you of course get the posting credit as writer, but I have something worked out with the J. Todd at APCW.org.

I am copying the weekly action thread and it will be included in the APCW.org weekly updates and promoted on RoundersRadio.com

Would like you to join each and we can work this new source together.

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

Good work. Thanks. I'll participate.

[oldbookguy]

Knoxnews.com did a story on Thompson to the rescue:
http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2007/aug/18/fred-thompson-to-the-rescue/#comments

I joined the commentary with the following:
I agree whole-heartedly the president cannot and should not be our mother. Adding to that, Father MUST is included as well.
Though I was a huge Sen. Thompson fan, even without an announcement, sadly I am waning and it is likely not to return.

It was my hope your potential candidacy would be the saving grace of the Republican Party and the United States.

Sadly, having read closely Sen. Thompson’s positions and becoming aware of his choices to head his campaign, it is obvious I was mistaken. He is seeking to align himself closely with the Focus on the Family movement by hiring Bill Wichterman, former Sen. Frist Chief of Staff and ally of Focus on the Family.

Though I am a Christian as well, I am able to differentiate between my belief structure and the American Constitutional Structure. The two are wholly incompatible, the FoF beliefs that religious beliefs and morals should be codified into law.

Not all Christians adhere to the same strict tenants promulgated by FoF. So, simply by aligning yourself with this organization and promoting Laws based upon the FoF Evangelical beliefs you are seeking to establish a sectarian religious philosophy not endorsed nor followed by ALL Christians.

You, Sen. Thompson and many of the GOP presidential hopefuls continue the mantra of the latest catch phrase, Federalism; I am a Federalist.

Your positions and staff however reveal this is but a ‘Catch Phrase’ and nothing more.

It is becoming more and more apparent that this ‘Federalism’ mantra is little or no different than the last manta, ‘Compassionate Conservative’.

I simply want a President that CAN and WILL understand; you are applying for a job not to represent a select few, but to represent ALL Americans. And remember, the job is only temporary at best.

obg

[2461Badugi]

[ QUOTE ]

- Write to the NFL, their sponsors, and Congress (senators and rep) to complain about the NFL’s advocacy of a ban for all Internet gaming (which goes beyond sports betting and beyond even UIGEA).

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't forget the other leagues that signed on too. NFL's the 600-pound gorilla, but partly that means they can withstand a letter-writing campaign against them and their sponsors if they want to. The other leagues are more vulnerable, especially the NHL.

[oldbookguy]

more Good news.

WASHINGTON - Three-term Rep. Rick Renzi, an Arizona Republican facing a federal inquiry into his family's insurance business, said Thursday he will not seek re-election next year. Renzi becomes the fifth GOP House member in recent weeks to announce retirement plans, giving Democrats hopes of possibly picking up seats next year that otherwise would not be in play.

Full story:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070824/ap_on_go_co/renzi_retirement

obg

[TheEngineer]

There is one more thing I think we need can do. The 2004 Republican Party platform called for banning of Internet gaming.

[ QUOTE ]
Millions of Americans suffer from problem or pathological gambling that can
destroy families. We support legislation prohibiting gambling over the Internet...

[/ QUOTE ]

I think we should all write to the RNC now to express our strong displeasure with this in terms of dislike of big government and stuff like that (things Republicans care about). Then, after the KY gubernatorial election, we should all follow up with more letters to the RNC reminding them that anti-gaming FoF nanny-state big government position couldn't even carry a red state, and that FoF would force the party into irrelevancy. Also remind them of the growing popularity of gaming and of poker.

The party is in such disarray right now that a few letters could be enough to at least make them stop and think. In 2004 they probably received zero letters on this, so let's not repeat that mistake.

Contact Info:
Michael Duncan (from Kentucky, of all states)
Chairman, Republican National Committee
email: Chairman@gop.com

Republican National Committee
310 First Street, SE
Washington, D.C. 20003

I'll x-post on the KY governor's race thread.

[Uglyowl]

To: Chairman@gop.com, comments@whitehouse.gov

Subject: Why I left the Republican Party:

Dear Mr. Duncan,

Today on Labor Day, a day created as an a day off for the "working man", I am enjoying a $10 poker tournament from my living room as my 3 year old takes a nap on a rare day off. If alot of members of the Republican Party (my former party for 12 years) had their way, I would not be allowed to do so.

Internet poker allows millions of Americans to play the game they love from the comfort of their own home without the hassle of hours of travel, high cost entry fees, and sitting in a smoky card room. My introduction to online poker came at a time when I was physically unable to travel and sit in a casino or cardroom and today it upsets me that the government is trying to limit what Americans can do.

I never thought I would say this, but in 2008 will be the 2nd national election cycle I will vote for primarily Democrats. Not only will I be voting for Democrats, but will be making contributions to the Democratic Party and candidates who are in tough races who support the rights of Americans to play online poker from their homes (or are running against vocal anti-gambling Congressmen).

Thank you for your time and I hope one day to be able to return to my "roots".

Sincerely,

XXXXXX XXXXX
Telephone: (XXX) XXX-XXXX

[TheEngineer]

Fight for Online Poker!!
Updated 9/3/07

<font color="brown"><u>Summary of Actions:</u>
- Let’s nationalize the 2007 KY gubernatorial election. It’s being waged as a fight between gaming (including poker) and prohibition based on family values. In addition to the actual election, let’s write to the Republican National Committee about this race both before and after. We voted 58-0 to do this, so let’s do it right. I have no doubt we will! /images/graemlins/grin.gif
- Write to five U.S. companies to explain the upcoming WTO trade concessions. Let them know they’re expected to finance online horse racing and fantasy football.
- Continue to write to the NFL, their sponsors, and Congress (senators and rep) to complain about the NFL’s advocacy of a ban for all Internet gaming (which goes beyond sports betting and beyond even UIGEA).
</font>

Ongoing advocacy:
1. Write to Congress (your senators AND your rep) to ask for their support and to ask where they stand on Internet gaming. Reference the Politicians For and Against Online Poker article, at https://pokerplayersalliance.org/news/newsandarticles_article.php?DID=237, in the letter.
2. Write to Treasury and DOJ officials AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK to request the minimum possible UIGEA regulations.
3. Contact your governor and your state representatives.
4. Write to newspapers and post to blogs.

--------------------------------------------------------

- Nationalize the 2007 KY gubernatorial election. It’s being waged and a fight between the right to choose to play poker and other games and prohibition based on family values. The pro-gaming candidate is the heavy favorite. Additionally, the fact that it’s off year adds to the visibility of the election (and to the effort we and others can devote to it). And, we can leverage the results to influence Sen. McConnell [R-KY], who’s running for reelection in 2008, and his longtime supporter and fundraiser, Republican National Committee Chairman Mike Duncan. We should all ask Chairman Duncan to not add any Internet gaming prohibition language to the 2008 party platform. This election will set the tone for the national elections of 2008, so let’s do our part.

Gov. Ernie Fletcher [R], the incumbent, has been under the cloud of scandal for the past eighteen months. He was indicted for rewarding political supporters with state jobs. Fletcher made a deal with the prosecutor’s office to get the charges dropped, then pardoned his entire administration. As a result, while he did win the primary, he’s way down in the polls.

Steve Beshear [D], the challenger, wants to pay for education reforms with casino profits. Many neighboring states, including Indiana, Illinois, and West Virginia, have casinos at which KY residents frequently play. Despite this, Fletcher has taken a hard line against casinos, saying they cause crime, divorce, and bankruptcy. “I don’t subscribe to Steve Beshear’s math and science program that teaches children only to count to 21,” Mr. Fletcher said.

Latest poll:

Ernie Fletcher (R) - 36.7%
Steve Beshear (D) - 57.3%

Contact Info:

Steve Beshear / Daniel Mongiardo
PO BOX 4227
Frankfort, KY 40604
Email: info@stevebeshear.com
Tel: 502-607-8600
Fax: 502-607-8611

Governor Ernie Fletcher
700 Capital Avenue
Suite 100
Frankfort, KY 40601

Senator Mitch McConnell
United States Senate
361-A Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Michael Duncan (from Kentucky)
Chairman, Republican National Committee
Republican National Committee
310 First Street, SE
Washington, D.C. 20003
email: Chairman@gop.com

- Let’s each write to at least five U.S. companies and let them know they're expected to give up BILLIONS OF DOLLARS in trade concessions to permit the U.S. to allow Internet horse racing and online fantasy football while restricting or banning other Internet gaming. The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal have recently written articles on the upcoming WTO Internet gaming restriction concessions, including ongoing settlement negotiations between the U.S. Trade Representative and the EU. These articles are at www.nytimes.com/2007/08/23/business/worldbusiness/23gamble.html?ref=business (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/23/business/worldbusiness/23gamble.html?ref=business) and at http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB118783338870406171.html. Please send your congressman and both senators copies of the letters.

- Let’s all write to the NFL, their sponsors, and Congress (senators and rep) to complain about the NFL’s advocacy of a ban for all Internet gaming (beyond sports betting, and beyond even UIGEA). Their letter to Congress is at http://www.citizenlink.org/pdfs/fosi/gambling/08-02-07_Sports_Assn_Letter%20Congress7-30-07.pdf. It seems they’ve actually partnered with Focus on the Family to work to take OUR rights from us, rather than figuring out how to develop internal policies and procedures to deal with sports betting. After all, they have the financial resources to control their own integrity. It’s time they enter the 21st century, rather than trying to take the nation back to the prohibition mentality of the early 20th century.

Some contacts:

Commissioner Roger Goodell
National Football League
280 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10017
Email: goodellr@nfl.com

Gene Upshaw
Executive Director
NFL Players Association
1133 20th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036

Mr. August A. Busch IV
President and Chief Executive Officer
Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc.
One Busch Place
St. Louis, MO 63118

PepsiCo, Inc.
700 Anderson Hill Road
Purchase, NY 10577
(914) 253-2000

Mr. G. Richard Wagoner Jr.
Chairman of the Board of Directors
General Motors Corporation
300 Renaissance Center
Detroit, Michigan 48265


---------------------------------------------------------

Ongoing efforts:

1. Let’s all write and call Congress (senators and rep) to ask for their support and for their stand on Internet gaming. Reference the Politicians For and Against Online Poker article, at https://pokerplayersalliance.org/news/newsandarticles_article.php?DID=237, in the letter. Consider stating that you’ll vote based on the letter and inform them that you hope his or her rating improves by Election Day. This will help the congressmen see tangible evidence of our work, and it will show the senators what to expect. For many representatives, Googling “[their name] gambling” returns this article at #1, so that may be worth mentioning. Once done, please let me know if you receive a response, so I can update the report accordingly. I hope we can get rid of most of the question marks.

Continue to contact your senators and representative. <u>Let’s call and send snail mail at least once every four to six weeks</u>. Let’s email at least once per week or biweekly. Some of these may be carbon copies of letters to others (like the USTR, Frank, FoF, etc).

We have many issues, so we can focus on one item for each letter while rotating. It does not matter to our movement which items you choose; any communication against attempts to ban online gambling at the federal level work in our favor. Here are some issues we can rotate:

- IGREA
- Hypocrisy of existing legal online gaming (games of skill, horseracing, etc)
- Wexler’s bill: H.R. 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act
- Praise for the 6/8 hearing. http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml ; webcast archived at http://financialserv.edgeboss.net/wmedia/financialserv/hearing060807.wvx.
- Shelley Berkley's study bill


2. Write to Treasury and DOJ officials AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK to request the minimum possible UIGEA regulations. We should contact Steven D. Laughton (the UIGEA Treasury Dept. focal point), Roberta McInerney (Assistant General Counsel for Banking and Finance), the acting Attorney General, Treasury Secretary Paulson, and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke. The regs were supposed to be out by now...the fact they they are not is probably good for us. I think a big push here on our part could really pay off.

Let's ask them not to exceed the specific mandates of UIGEA when drafting legislation. Let's ask them to exclude all ACH transactions (too burdensome for banks to filter). Also, remind them that online poker is not illegal under any federal law. We should ask them to require unambiguous state laws, so banks aren't in the position of trying to interpret state laws that may or may not apply to Internet gaming. Finally, there should be no "site blacklists".

Contact info:

Steven D. Laughton
Office of the Assistant General Counsel (Banking and Finance)
Room 2027B,1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.
Washington,DC 20220
Phone: (202) 622-8413
Email: steven.laughton@do.treas.gov

Ms. Roberta K. McInerney
Assistant General Counsel for Banking and Finance
Room 2304
Department of the Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.
Washington, DC 20220

The Office of the Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov

The Honorable Henry Paulson
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220

The Honorable Ben S. Bernanke
Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Washington, D. C. 20551
http://www.federalreserve.gov/feedback.cfm

Others:

Pres. Bush: comments@whitehouse.gov
Your senators: [www.senate.gov
Your representative: www.house.gov (http://www.house.gov)
Republican National Committee: Chairman@gop.com
Democratic National Committee: http://www.democrats.org/contact.html
Speaker Nancy Pelosi: AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: http://reid.senate.gov/contact/email_form.cfm

3. Contact your governor and state representative. Congress won't pass anything that forces states to legalize gaming, so we ought to get the ball rolling at that level.


4. Now that we have bills progressing, we should try to work on advocating for the legislation. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. Since we proved our position in the 6/8 House hearing, let's post the link to the hearing webcast wherever we can.

Letters to the editor, Washington Post: letters@washpost.com
Letters to the editor, New York Times: letters@nytimes.com

Thanks everyone! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[TheEngineer]

Standard reply from Pfizer....at least they have it.


----- Original Message -----
From: Corporate Governance
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 11:01 AM
Subject: Re: Other Governance Issues

Dear xxxxxxxxx,

This note will acknowledge receipt of your e-mail sent to Pfizer’s Lead Independent Director. Thank you for taking the time to write to us and share your views. Your comments have been noted and will be shared with the Board.

Sincerely,

Margaret M. Foran

Senior Vice President – Corporate Governance,
Associate General Counsel &amp; Corporate Secretary
Pfizer Inc.

-------------------------------------------

From: Pfizer
Sent: Friday, 24 August, 2007 12:37:23 AM
To: leaddirector
Subject: Other Governance Issues

Activity Subject:Other Governance Issues

Activity Body:As a Pfizer stockholder, I read with great concern articles in both the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal concerning upcoming WTO sanctions on U.S. businesses to compensate for the government’s blocking of access to our Internet gaming market. [The articles are available online at www.nytimes.com/2007/08/23/business/worldbusiness/23gamble.html?ref=business (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/23/business/worldbusiness/23gamble.html?ref=business) and at http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB118783338870406171.html.] The articles are very troubling, as it appears the U.S. is already preparing to give billions of dollars in trade sanctions to the EU and other nations in order to keep its Internet gaming restrictions. Also, the U.S. is willing to weaken the WTO by backing out of a previously agreed-upon sector of GATS. While it is bad enough that the U.S. government would choose to not allow people the freedom to choose to play poker in their own homes with their own money, expecting our most successful industries and our largest employers to finance this decision to the tune of billions of dollars per year in trade concessions is egregious. What makes this even worse is that, had Congress truly felt Internet gaming was wrong, they could have avoided this trade issue by simply banning all Internet gaming. However, this was not the case. Congress specifically allowed interstate horse race betting and fantasy football to be wagered over the Internet (apparently these are more moral than poker to someone in Congress). So, in essence, Pfizer is being asked to subsidize these two activities, which I’ve nicknamed the Mitch McConnell Horse Racing Subsidy and the NFL Fantasy Football Tax. Negotiations with the European Union over this issue are scheduled for next month. I urge you to speak up before the United States Trade Representative places these taxes on the shoulders of Pfizer. Sincerely, xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[DeadMoneyDad]

Hey TE!

Clear up your mail box! It's so full it can't take any more!

D$D

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey TE!

Clear up your mail box! It's so full it can't take any more!

D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

I cleared it. Thanks.

[TheEngineer]

IGREA gains one more cosponsor (36 total):

Rep Scott, Robert C. "Bobby" [D-VA] - 9/7/2007

Rep. Scott moves from A- to A. He voted against HR 4411.

[suppasonic]

So my congresswoman, Lois Capps [D-CA], is A- under the list. So I should write a letter asking her to cosponsor the bill?

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
So my congresswoman, Lois Capps [D-CA], is A- under the list. So I should write a letter asking her to cosponsor the bill? [/quote

Yes, definitely. You should write to Congress regardless of rating. However, as Rep. Capps voted against HR 4411, you have a real chance here. Please write as soon as you can. Thanks.

[suppasonic]

Is UIGEA = HR 4411?

[Uglyowl]

[ QUOTE ]
IGREA gains one more cosponsor (36 total):

Rep Scott, Robert C. "Bobby" [D-VA] - 9/7/2007

Rep. Scott moves from A- to A. He voted against HR 4411.

[/ QUOTE ]

Awesome, it has stood at 35 forever it seems.

[suppasonic]

Ok, does this look good? Im not exactly sure what each individual act and bill is, so hopefully i didn't confuse them in this letter.

Dear Congresswoman ***,
I'm writing to request that you vote for and cosponsor HR 2046, Rep. Barney Frank’s online gambling licensing bill. The Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act troubles me. It makes concessions for horse racing and online fantasy sports, but not for online poker, which is a game of skill as much as if not more than horse racing and fantasy sports. Many people are able to consistently win in poker and many are able to use casino poker games as primary income. Poker is in no way the game of chance that roulette, slots, and other gambling games are.
In addition, the federal government has no right to regulate internet gambling, which California allows. You have already voted against HR 4411, so you already agree the federal government is out of line in regulating online gambling. What I do in the privacy of my own home for a little bit of enjoyment here and there to no one else’s detriment should not be outlawed;
The Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement act (HR 2046) would help to correct this mistake by allowing internet gambling and, by extension, poker to go aboveboard in the US. With the licensing under this bill, it would making online gambling an clean operation, just like any other corporation in the US.
The upcoming elections will be my first I am eligible to vote for. Cosponsoring this bill would make me an enthusiastic supporter of you next time you go up for re-election and for all future elections.

Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,
suppasonic

[Uglyowl]

Looks good, how about tax revenue? That seems to be the big thing that would grab their attention. Anyhow here are the big three that are in the works:

HR 2046: Barney Frank sponsored: License and regulate online gambling in US

HR 2610: Robert Wexler sponsored: Amend and allow games of skill

HR 2140: Shelley Berkley sponsored: To study online gambling for potential regulation in US