jthegreat
02-19-2006, 10:38 AM
I'm sending this letter to all GA representatives who are co-sponsors of the prohibition bill. I hope the rest of you do something similar. Honestly I don't expect them to listen, knowing how people tend to be, but it's better than doing nothing. We should also consider newspaper letters to the editor.
The list of cosponsors can be found here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/R?d109:FLD010:+@eq+20060216
Scroll down to HR 4777 and click on the cosponsors link.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representatives Gingrey and Kingston,
I am writing to you today to voice my opposition to your support of the proposed Internet
Gambling bill. While I certainly understand that gambling has historically been linked with
crime and other problems, there are several reasons why it is inappropriate for internet
gambling to be outlawed by the US government. I hope you take the time to read this and
consider your support carefully.
First, there are different forms of gambling with very different odds of winning for the
player. For example, traditional "house" or casino games, where the player plays against
the "house", are entirely different from poker, where players play against each other and
pay the house a fee, or "rake". In house games, the odds of winning are set before the game
even begins, and a player has no chance to be a long-term winner. However, in poker, the
long-term chances of winning depend on the player's skill relative to the skill of his
opponents. It is possible to be a long-term winner in poker, unlike house games.
Second, from a philosophical perspective, an outlaw on gambling runs against the spirit of
freedom that this country was founded upon. America is not the "Land of the Free" when its
government begins telling you that you can't wager your own money on games of chance if you
choose to. As long as a person's money is not being used to hurt another person, they
should be allowed to spend it as they choose.
Some would argue that gambling addicts hurt their children, which is true. However, there
are already laws against child neglect and systems in place to deal with it. Additional
laws against gambling only hurt those who gamble responsibly, since those persons with
addiction problems will simply find a new avenue for their addiction. This bill would do
nothing to protect children.
Third, there are already obstacles in place that make it, if not difficult, then certainly
not easy, to gamble online. The vast majority of US banks and credit card companies already
refuse to fund accounts on gambling sites. Most poker players use an online bank, NETeller,
to fund their poker accounts because it's one of the only ways to do it. Irresponsible
gambling is most likely to hurt the poor, but the poor are the least likely to have the bank
account funds and internet access necessary to fund a gambling account. The argument that
internet gambling is a threat to the poor simply has no merit.
Lastly, it is somewhat hypocritical for a Georgia representative to support prohibiting
internet gambling while Georgia has an official state lottery. The Georgia state lottery is
a much bigger threat to the poor in Georgia than internet gambling could ever be. First, it
is easy to buy lottery tickets, since they can be purchased at any gas station and many
other retailers. It is much more difficult to fund an internet gambling account. Second,
the odds of winning in a lottery are millions-to-one, which are *astronomically* higher than
in any casino game or poker. Gambling $1 at a time, a lottery player would almost never win
anything, while a casino gambler or poker player would win at least several times in 100
bets, meaning that it would take much longer for the player to lose that $100. If Georgia
representatives oppose internet gambling for the stated reasons, they should be even more
opposed to their own state lottery.
For a little over a year, I have played poker online, along with hundreds of thousands, if
not millions, of Americans. I made a profit and this April I will pay every penny I owe in
taxes to the state of Georgia and the US federal government. I encourage other poker
players I know to do the same. The answer to solving gambling problems in the US is not to
simply outlaw gambling. The answer is to make it completely legal, which would then make it
possible for the government to oversee and regulate its activity. Casino and poker sites
could report players' winnings to the government directly, making tax reporting much easier.
It would also be easier for sites to prevent abuse, which most of them already do, by
establishing deposit limits.
In closing, I hope you will consider the arguments I have presented and realize that this
issue is being misrepresented and that this bill will not accomplish its stated goals. I am
glad to be a Georgia resident and hope that I can continue to be. Thank you very much for
your time.
Sincerely,
The list of cosponsors can be found here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/R?d109:FLD010:+@eq+20060216
Scroll down to HR 4777 and click on the cosponsors link.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representatives Gingrey and Kingston,
I am writing to you today to voice my opposition to your support of the proposed Internet
Gambling bill. While I certainly understand that gambling has historically been linked with
crime and other problems, there are several reasons why it is inappropriate for internet
gambling to be outlawed by the US government. I hope you take the time to read this and
consider your support carefully.
First, there are different forms of gambling with very different odds of winning for the
player. For example, traditional "house" or casino games, where the player plays against
the "house", are entirely different from poker, where players play against each other and
pay the house a fee, or "rake". In house games, the odds of winning are set before the game
even begins, and a player has no chance to be a long-term winner. However, in poker, the
long-term chances of winning depend on the player's skill relative to the skill of his
opponents. It is possible to be a long-term winner in poker, unlike house games.
Second, from a philosophical perspective, an outlaw on gambling runs against the spirit of
freedom that this country was founded upon. America is not the "Land of the Free" when its
government begins telling you that you can't wager your own money on games of chance if you
choose to. As long as a person's money is not being used to hurt another person, they
should be allowed to spend it as they choose.
Some would argue that gambling addicts hurt their children, which is true. However, there
are already laws against child neglect and systems in place to deal with it. Additional
laws against gambling only hurt those who gamble responsibly, since those persons with
addiction problems will simply find a new avenue for their addiction. This bill would do
nothing to protect children.
Third, there are already obstacles in place that make it, if not difficult, then certainly
not easy, to gamble online. The vast majority of US banks and credit card companies already
refuse to fund accounts on gambling sites. Most poker players use an online bank, NETeller,
to fund their poker accounts because it's one of the only ways to do it. Irresponsible
gambling is most likely to hurt the poor, but the poor are the least likely to have the bank
account funds and internet access necessary to fund a gambling account. The argument that
internet gambling is a threat to the poor simply has no merit.
Lastly, it is somewhat hypocritical for a Georgia representative to support prohibiting
internet gambling while Georgia has an official state lottery. The Georgia state lottery is
a much bigger threat to the poor in Georgia than internet gambling could ever be. First, it
is easy to buy lottery tickets, since they can be purchased at any gas station and many
other retailers. It is much more difficult to fund an internet gambling account. Second,
the odds of winning in a lottery are millions-to-one, which are *astronomically* higher than
in any casino game or poker. Gambling $1 at a time, a lottery player would almost never win
anything, while a casino gambler or poker player would win at least several times in 100
bets, meaning that it would take much longer for the player to lose that $100. If Georgia
representatives oppose internet gambling for the stated reasons, they should be even more
opposed to their own state lottery.
For a little over a year, I have played poker online, along with hundreds of thousands, if
not millions, of Americans. I made a profit and this April I will pay every penny I owe in
taxes to the state of Georgia and the US federal government. I encourage other poker
players I know to do the same. The answer to solving gambling problems in the US is not to
simply outlaw gambling. The answer is to make it completely legal, which would then make it
possible for the government to oversee and regulate its activity. Casino and poker sites
could report players' winnings to the government directly, making tax reporting much easier.
It would also be easier for sites to prevent abuse, which most of them already do, by
establishing deposit limits.
In closing, I hope you will consider the arguments I have presented and realize that this
issue is being misrepresented and that this bill will not accomplish its stated goals. I am
glad to be a Georgia resident and hope that I can continue to be. Thank you very much for
your time.
Sincerely,