Casino Gambling Web Representatives Headed to Washington! [Archive]

TheEngineer

06-29-2007, 05:45 PM

Article from PRN News Now, at 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.)

Representatives of Casino Gambling Web, A Gambling Information Website ( www.casinogamblingweb.com (http://www.casinogamblingweb.com) ), are going to Washington D.C. next month with the intention of garnering support to repeal the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA).

The representatives of the proactive site will be in contact with every Congressman and every Senator to inform and enlighten them about the millions of Americans that want the law, considered Prohibition II, overturned.

"There are many in Congress who are not aware of the far-reaching effects of the UIGEA and it is Casino Gambling Web's intention to empower them with knowledge," said Gordon Price, owner of Casino Gambling Web.

"We will arm each representative with a new found understanding of the safeguards currently utilized by other countries to prevent underage and problem gambling," said one of the Casino Gambling Web representatives going to Washington D.C. who wishes to remain anonymous.

"We will show each representative on paper all the testimony from the Financial Services Committee hearing held earlier in the month," the rep. from the website said, "we will show them the tax revenue that can be realized with proper regulation, and we will present each of them with the will of the people in the form of the Repeal the UIGEA petition that has been signed by almost 5,000 Americans."

The Repeal the Internet Gambling Ban petition, at www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/306149419 (http://www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/306149419) is still going strong and has recently been upgraded. Those still wishing to sign the petition can now leave a text message for their representative to read.

The Casino Gambling Web reps also said they "will enlighten each representative about the impending ramifications with regard to trade violations and pending sanctions the United States is now facing due to the UIGEA, and the extent that those violations may financially harm the U.S. economy and several U.S. industries."

"We will also explain to each elected official how the law that was passed to protect Americans, has actually done the opposite," one of the reps said.

As of now the United States Internet gambling ( www.casinogamblingweb.com/main/other-gambling-news/internet-gambling-bill-news.jsp (http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/main/other-gambling-news/internet-gambling-bill-news.jsp) ) market is only open to corrupt online gambling entities that can easily steal from the American people and launder money to criminals.

"Our hope is that these elected officials will take the time to listen to its citizens," the rep said, "to read the packet of materials we will present to them, and to come to the same conclusion that we have, that is, Internet gambling should be legalized and regulated for the benefit of the society."

In a statement, Gordon Price, owner of Casino Gambling Web, said

"We urge all Americans interested in regaining personal freedom in the United States to contact their Senators and Congressmen today and tomorrow and again next week and let their voices be heard. We encourage all those interested to encourage others to do the same. It is Casino Gambling Web's true belief that we can make a difference if we all come together on this issue."

TheEngineer

06-29-2007, 05:57 PM

Focus on the Family Warning, at their Action site, at www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/cog/A000004244.cfm (http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/cog/A000004244.cfm)

Desperate Foreign, Online Casino Lobby Travels to D.C.

This July, a Canadian-based organization called Casino Gambling Web plans to march on Washington, D.C. and flood Congressmen's desks with reasons to "regulate Internet gambling for the benefit of society," or at least for the benefit of their foreign online casino operations.1 They have collected nearly 5,000 American signatures on their Repeal the Internet Gambling Ban petition, a relatively small number of citizens when compared to an estimated 15 million or more people afflicted with a problem or pathological gambling addictions in the U.S. Nonetheless, this is America and we all have the freedom to speak out.

The loudest and most desperate voices, however, seem to be coming from abroad: the United Kingdom, Costa Rica and the Caribbean Islands, amidst continuing U.N. pressure from the European Union on the World Trade Organization. Signs of desperation are popping up in other places, as well.

During the past three consecutive days, Focus on the Family has received a "list fax" from Vega Promotions encouraging investors to sink money into their sharply declining online gambling market. See fax and hi-lighted areas (PDF).

Back in Washington, D.C., these foreign "voices" plan to "enlighten" U.S. Congressmen about the "impending ramifications" concerning trade violations by not allowing the European Union to dictate U.S. foreign policy. The voices "will arm each representative with a new found understanding" of the safeguards "to prevent" problem and underage gambling. Is this why online gambling addiction and underage Internet gambling grew so rapidly while these foreign gambling operators mocked U.S. laws and ran illegal casino sites within the United States for nearly a decade? What safeguards?

"We will show them the tax revenue that can be realized," say the voices. This "revenue" will come from the losses of millions of people by deceiving them and exploiting their weaknesses. Is Congress elected to protect special foreign interests or to represent and defend the people of America? Should foreign special interest groups, particularly predatory industries like online gambling, be dictating policy for the United States?

Congress passed legislation to protect American families from online gambling predators and to prevent potential threats to our national security. Congress intentionally chose not to legalize or "regulate" online gambling, but rather to enforce existing federal laws that prohibit online gambling. In spite of the mounting desperation and pressure from foreign gambling interests, Congress must be encouraged to stick to their guns. Encourage your members of Congress to uphold the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 for the safety of our children, families and our national security.

TheEngineer

06-29-2007, 06:00 PM

I can't vouch for the petition, but the site seems legit enough. Maybe we should all sign it, if we haven't already. FOF vouches for it.

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

TreyWilly

06-29-2007, 06:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
They have collected nearly 5,000 American signatures on their Repeal the Internet Gambling Ban petition, a relatively small number of citizens when compared to an estimated 15 million or more people afflicted with a problem or pathological gambling addictions in the U.S. Nonetheless, this is America and we all have the freedom to speak out.

[/ QUOTE ]

I /images/graemlins/heart.gif FOF

TheEngineer

06-29-2007, 06:29 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They have collected nearly 5,000 American signatures on their Repeal the Internet Gambling Ban petition, a relatively small number of citizens when compared to an estimated 15 million or more people afflicted with a problem or pathological gambling addictions in the U.S. Nonetheless, this is America and we all have the freedom to speak out.

[/ QUOTE ]

I /images/graemlins/heart.gif FOF

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. 15 million. 5% of the U.S. population!! I guess they don't mind lying to make a point.

BluffTHIS!

06-29-2007, 06:33 PM

It's too bad that we don't have a venue to debate this issue directly with the FOF people who write this stuff, as although they might keep tabs on this forum, they aren't likely to be getting an account and posting. Because as I said in the earlier FOF thread, these are the kinds of arguments we can easily rebut.

If we did have the author of that press release by FOF here, we could point out:

1) the language is misleading as it assumes/concludes that the primary issue is one of foreign concerns seeking access to the US market, *and* at the same time when a majority of americans oppose same.

2) the real issues are:

a) the right of americans to spend their money as they wish

b) the fact that the US gov't is reneging on prior trade agreements

3) the fact that FOF wants to impose their morality on others, even when it doesn't affect someone else, and which is essentially equivalent to the nanny-staters on the left end of the political spectrum who also believe people must be protected from themselves.

These are the types of arguments that the PPA should be making in one of their own press releases, every single time one of these dishonest rhetoric bombs is dropped by our opponents.

And note when I say dishonest, I mean that basically many/most of our opponents suck at logic and interpretation of facts, and not necessarily that they are being intentionally dishonest. Nonetheless we in turn must make it clear that the primary issue is one of imposing their own moral standards on others, and that the other types of facts and "conclusions" they add to that are false.

scscoach

06-29-2007, 08:47 PM

I signed...

oldbookguy

06-29-2007, 09:15 PM

OK 2&2 people.
It is TIME to REALLY be heard. Heard NOT just in Washington, but heard at FoF as well.

We ARE AMERICANS not some foreigners and we need to tell FoF / Citizen link just that!

http://family.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/famil...amp;p_lva=14190 (http://family.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/family.cfg/php/enduser/ask.php?p_sid=11O4Xemi&p_accessibility=0&p_lva=141 90)

My letter to them:

First and foremost, I am a Christian, I believe in God and my Country!

I am an AMERICAN, not some foreigner and I lobby my congress people all the time and I oppose now and opposed in the past the UIGEA.

Equally important I believe in a separation of churches and government and I believe in the reverse as well.

I am a republican though given the current state government under your influence I will continue working to, as I did in the recent mid term elections, prevent the freedoms of AMERICANS to be restricted and taken away based on a misguided and misrepresented religious philosophy!

I also believe in personal freedoms. We, the United States, are not now nor have we ever been a religious theocracy. If that is the type of government you wish, I can suggest several in the Middle East that will welcome you.

More importantly I believe it is very UN-godly to hijack religion to promote personal causes, causes that are not in anyway considered a sin in ANY Bible I have or have read.

Misusing religion and invoking God and Jesus in manners such as you are will only land you in places I do not think you want to be.

Then again, religion as you manage it is a VERY big business and surely it provides you with a very good income.

XXXXX

obg

oldbookguy

06-29-2007, 09:41 PM

There is also a positive way to look at this.
We have FoF's attention and they seem worried and quit upset.

Are we being more effective than we may know?

Just a random thought.

obg

TheEngineer

06-29-2007, 10:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
There is also a positive way to look at this.
We have FoF's attention and they seem worried and quit upset.

Are we being more effective than we may know?

Just a random thought.

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

We're definitely being heard....it's only the degree to which we're being heard that is at question.

As for writing to FoF...well, why not? Will it help? Probably not, but it can't hurt either. They need to know they've overreached in their recent attempts to put morals under government control. I imagine they won't want a backlash. I'll probably shoot them a quick email.

Hopefully no one here will write to them in lieu of writing to their congressman or someone else useful, of course.

blutarski

06-29-2007, 10:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]

More importantly I believe it is very UN-godly to hijack religion to promote personal causes, causes that are not in anyway considered a sin in ANY Bible I have or have read.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you proof read this letter? This paragraph doesn't make much sense.

I think we're better served writing letters that express our opinion, but don't antagonize. FOF will say "oh, look at the ungodly heathens we have to endure" when they read negative letters.

Plus, it's a chance to take the high road with a bunch of people whose anger and intolerance who can't help but be negative.

TheEngineer

06-29-2007, 11:17 PM

Another article, at http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/gamblin....g_46668.html (http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/gambling-news/gambling-law/gambling_site_sending_reps_to_washington_to_lobby_ for_internet_gambling_46668.html)

Gambling Site Sending Reps to Washington to Lobby for Internet Gambling

Casino Gambling Web is sending workers to Washington D.C. to lobby on behalf of the American people who wish to repeal the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act.

The representatives, who wish to remain anonymous, will be armed with a packet of papers that will include all the information a politician will need in order to create an informed opinion about the pesky Internet gambling issue. A packet will be hand delivered to every congressman and every senator office in Washington D.C.

The packet of papers will feature a personal note from American citizens, attached to a number of other papers which will include all the testimony of the Financial Services Committee hearing on the topic. Information on the WTO situation the US is in now will also be included.

The company has said they will not represent a biased view of the situation. "We will not leave out the anti-Internet gambling information from our packet of papers," Gordon Price, Casino Gambling Web's owner, said.

"It is important that the congressmen see the other point of view so they can see how silly it is," Mr. Price said.

Much of the anti-Internet gambling sentiment stems from the idea that banning online gaming will protect underage and problem gamblers, however, since the ban was put it into place it has been easier for underage and problem gamblers to play.

"The reality is that if we really want to protect the vulnerable potential gamblers in America, then regulating the industry is the answer," Price said.

He was alluding to the fact that if regulation was implemented than problem gamblers would be able to block themselves, or be blocked from, gambling online. As well underage gamblers could be easily prevented from participating in the activity. With no regulation the illegal companies that are still promoting to US citizens do not care if a gambler has a problem or is underage and there is basically nothing that can be done to stop corrupt companies from stealing money from Americans.

"Of course, the real issue here is that Americans expect to live free, and they are being prevented from doing so. That is why in our packet of papers we will be presenting the petition that proves Americans hate this new situation," Price said.

Also in the packet of papers will be information on the Poker Player Alliance and how they have currently over 500,000 voluntary members who wish to see the law repealed.

Richas

06-30-2007, 06:38 AM

[ QUOTE ]
LOL. 15 million. 5% of the U.S. population!! I guess they don't mind lying to make a point.

[/ QUOTE ]

They do provide a source:

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/ngisc/reports/4.pdf

The 15m at risk seems to be based on a telephone survey of 2417 supplemented by interviewing 530 people in gambling establishments to "increase the sample size of potential problem gamblers".

The "problem" level they have set is 2 from ten of the DSM-IV questions, the weakest three of which are "gambles to escape" which translates to me as gambles because you enjoy it. "Lies to family members re the extent" which translates as telling granny that you are fine and whether at any point in your lifetime you have increased the level of stake to achieve the "desired" excitement which to me means saving up for a big tournament.

If you applied these criteria to golf players or sports fans what result would you get? Yes Yes yes. Other surveys listed set the "problem" level of loss at $100 in a day.

To put it into some perspective the paper does include other lifetime problems:

Alcohol 23.5%, Drug dependence 11.9% and Gambing at 5.4%

PS this research is 1997 which makes it an odd choice for analysing online gambling.

TheEngineer

06-30-2007, 09:57 AM

It's an interesting study. I actually read through it last night, after my post. I intended to simply find 15 million number but, due to the "Reefer Madness" tone of the report, found myself reading the whole thing. While I concede there are certainly some problem gamblers, to say the overstatement of the problem due to the flawed methodology of the study would be an understatement.

Skallagrim

06-30-2007, 02:03 PM

Silver lining: we must be doing something good if FOF is that riled up.

Skallagrim

TheEngineer

07-01-2007, 02:46 PM

True. Seems we're the ones on the offensive now. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

eddytom

07-01-2007, 08:32 PM

Casino Gambling Web responded to Chad Hills' attack on the new lobbying being done by the site.

http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/gamblin...oups_46698.html (http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/gambling-news/gambling-law/an_internet_gambling_education_for_anti_online_gam bling_groups_46698.html)

And supposedly they have been fighting with the guy in the past.

http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/gamblin...ling_45983.html (http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/gambling-news/gambling-law/focus_on_the_family_should_educate_not_legislate_a bout_gambling_45983.html)

Those are two articles currently on the homepage of the Casino Gambling Web site.

meleader2

07-02-2007, 10:14 AM

Good luck getting Bachus to read that GOD he's dumb. Honestly, how does he run uncontested?

PBJaxx

07-02-2007, 11:07 AM

signed

TheEngineer

07-02-2007, 11:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Good luck getting Bachus to read that GOD he's dumb. Honestly, how does he run uncontested?

[/ QUOTE ]

Fortunately, he doesn't represent the majority of Americans. Our job is to let the OTHER congressmen know that we care and we vote.

We may have a long way to go, but we sure are making progress. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

meleader2

07-02-2007, 11:39 AM

[ QUOTE ]
signed

[/ QUOTE ]

TheEngineer

07-02-2007, 11:53 AM

[ QUOTE ]
signed

[/ QUOTE ]

I think FoF will help us double the signatures. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Kodfish

07-02-2007, 12:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]

First and foremost, I am a Christian, I believe in God and my Country!

I am an AMERICAN, not some foreigner and I lobby my congress people all the time and I oppose now and opposed in the past the UIGEA.

Equally important I believe in a separation of churches and government and I believe in the reverse as well.

I am a republican though given the current state government under your influence I will continue working to, as I did in the recent mid term elections, prevent the freedoms of AMERICANS to be restricted and taken away based on a misguided and misrepresented religious philosophy!

I also believe in personal freedoms. We, the United States, are not now nor have we ever been a religious theocracy. If that is the type of government you wish, I can suggest several in the Middle East that will welcome you.

More importantly I believe it is very UN-godly to hijack religion to promote personal causes, causes that are not in anyway considered a sin in ANY Bible I have or have read.

Misusing religion and invoking God and Jesus in manners such as you are will only land you in places I do not think you want to be.

Then again, religion as you manage it is a VERY big business and surely it provides you with a very good income.

XXXXX

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

OBG, this is very well written. Awesome stuff.

Jerry D

07-02-2007, 12:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]

OK 2&2 people.
It is TIME to REALLY be heard. Heard NOT just in Washington, but heard at FoF as well.

We ARE AMERICANS not some foreigners and we need to tell FoF / Citizen link just that!

http://family.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/famil...amp;p_lva=14190 (http://family.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/family.cfg/php/enduser/ask.php?p_sid=11O4Xemi&p_accessibility=0&p_lva=141 90)

My letter to them:

First and foremost, I am a Christian, I believe in God and my Country!

I am an AMERICAN, not some foreigner and I lobby my congress people all the time and I oppose now and opposed in the past the UIGEA.

Equally important I believe in a separation of churches and government and I believe in the reverse as well.

I am a republican though given the current state government under your influence I will continue working to, as I did in the recent mid term elections, prevent the freedoms of AMERICANS to be restricted and taken away based on a misguided and misrepresented religious philosophy!

I also believe in personal freedoms. We, the United States, are not now nor have we ever been a religious theocracy. If that is the type of government you wish, I can suggest several in the Middle East that will welcome you.

More importantly I believe it is very UN-godly to hijack religion to promote personal causes, causes that are not in anyway considered a sin in ANY Bible I have or have read.

Misusing religion and invoking God and Jesus in manners such as you are will only land you in places I do not think you want to be.

Then again, religion as you manage it is a VERY big business and surely it provides you with a very good income.

XXXXX

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

Very nice letter. This is one reason why large numbers of Republicans like myself have left the party. There is an excellent book called "Invasion of the Party Snatchers" (which was written by Victor Gold, a lifelong Republican and former speechwriter for George H.W. Bush and he was also a top aide of Barry Goldwater) that tells how the religious right has taken over and now controls the Republican party. The really scary thing - even if you leave out poker - is that these Republicans have stated that they DO NOT BELIEVE IN SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE. They don't only want to ban internet poker, they want to outlaw ALL land based casinos, they want to outlaw ALL erotic materials EVEN PLAYBOY, and want Hollywood to go back to the way it was in the 1930's or so when you couldn't use any 'curse' words, you couldn't show any nudity, and so forth. The Religious Republican right really wants the same society the Taliban does.

eddytom

07-02-2007, 01:58 PM

Here is the next response from Casino Gambling Web to Focus on the Family....

http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/gamblin...sons_46720.html (http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/gambling-news/gambling-law/internet_gambling_should_be_legalized_for_many_rea sons_46720.html)

twoblacknines

07-02-2007, 03:46 PM

Signed the petition....why are there not more signatures though. Not even 5,000 yet and there are way more people on 2+2 alone than that. Come on people it takes 2 seconds to sign and you don't even have to leave your computer.

TheEngineer

07-02-2007, 07:54 PM

Looks like the FoF Alert has helped out! They posted the alert on June 29th:

Signatures.........Date

183.............2-Jul-07, 7:53 pm ET
12....................1-Jul-07
15...................30-Jun-07
24...................29-Jun-07
20...................28-Jun-07
5.....................27-Jun-07
0.....................26-Jun-07
8.....................25-Jun-07
14...................24-Jun-07
30...................23-Jun-07
15...................22-Jun-07
30...................21-Jun-07

Thanks Chad! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

I guess next time we need something, we should "warn" FoF! Hehe.

This is what sucks about being on the defensive. When FoF publicizes their issues, it works against them. If they stay quiet, it works against them. This is where we were a couple of years ago. We're much better on offense.

oldbookguy

07-02-2007, 08:23 PM

I am glad everyone here found this petition, I signed a long time ago and just figured all here already had.

obg

TheEngineer

07-02-2007, 08:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I am glad everyone here found this petition, I signed a long time ago and just figured all here already had.

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

I think many of us shy away from these because we don't know who runs them or what they're using the data for. We know this one is legit, and they're actually using the results for something that will help us.

I see they're almost up to 5,000 now (4858). Hopefully it will spread by word of mouth.

TheEngineer

07-02-2007, 09:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Signed the petition....why are there not more signatures though. Not even 5,000 yet and there are way more people on 2+2 alone than that. Come on people it takes 2 seconds to sign and you don't even have to leave your computer.

[/ QUOTE ]

We just passed 5,000. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Uglyowl

07-02-2007, 09:21 PM

Signed, if you haven't it takes two seconds.

TheEngineer

07-02-2007, 10:22 PM

[ QUOTE ]
We just passed 5,100. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Good job everyone. Let's give the CGW folks plenty of ammo for the fight. Please spread the word.

TheEngineer

07-03-2007, 07:58 AM

Nice work everyone! Let's get them up a couple more thousand.

Total: 5306

Signatures.........Date
121..................3-Jul-07, 7:56 am ET
489.................2-Jul-07
12....................1-Jul-07
15...................30-Jun-07
24...................29-Jun-07
20...................28-Jun-07
5.....................27-Jun-07
0.....................26-Jun-07
8.....................25-Jun-07
14...................24-Jun-07
30...................23-Jun-07
15...................22-Jun-07
30...................21-Jun-07

eddytom

07-03-2007, 12:36 PM

The petition is now on the hot list on the petitionsite hot list page. The higher it goes on that list the more people sign it. Keep up the moementum!

TheEngineer

07-03-2007, 05:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The petition is now on the hot list on the petitionsite hot list page. The higher it goes on that list the more people sign it. Keep up the moementum!

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice!

Everyone, please sign. Then, have your spouse sign, then your sister, then your mom, then your friends. Hopefully we all get a few others to sign with us.

TheEngineer

07-03-2007, 05:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Nice work everyone! Let's get them up a couple more thousand.

Total: 5306

Signatures.........Date
398..................3-Jul-07, 5:47 pm ET
489.................2-Jul-07
12....................1-Jul-07
15...................30-Jun-07
24...................29-Jun-07
20...................28-Jun-07
5.....................27-Jun-07
0.....................26-Jun-07
8.....................25-Jun-07
14...................24-Jun-07
30...................23-Jun-07
15...................22-Jun-07
30...................21-Jun-07

[/ QUOTE ]

TheEngineer

07-03-2007, 05:58 PM

http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/gamblin...ures_46722.html (http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/gambling-news/online-poker/poker_players_power_gambling_petition_past_5_000_s ignatures_46722.html)

Poker Players Power Gambling Petition Past 5,000 Signatures
July 3, 2007

The Internet gambling petition, meant to show the public's desire to repeal the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, has seen a resurgence following a message from Focus on the Family gambling analyst, Chad Hills.

Hills sent a message to his religious followers following the announcement that Casino Gambling Web was going to be sending representatives to Washington D.C. to lobby on behalf of the American people. Hills noted in his article that the Internet gambling petition that CGW started had only a little over 4,000 signatures and laughed at the industry's efforts.

The article by Hills was then posted on the popular poker forum, 2+2, and mayhem has ensued.

"In trying to rally his own followers," said Gordon Price, gambling analyst and president of Casino Gambling Web, "he inadvertently fueled the fires of poker players who had their favorite past time taken away by the UIGEA."

The Internet gambling petition will be hand delivered to every congress person and senator in Washington D.C. in mid to late July, sometime before everyone goes on their summer break, by the representatives of Casino Gambling Web.

Since the 2+2 poker forums posted the Focus on the Family article the petition signatures have increased by 10% - in just one day.

Before Chad Hills' article the petition had a little over 4,500 signatures. Currently, there is more than 5,000.

The Repeal the UIGEA petition started on April 23, 2007 and will continue indefinitely.

"The goal is 10,000 signatures, but the more signatures added the more lawmakers will pay attention," Price said.

TheEngineer

07-04-2007, 09:39 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Total: 5731

Signatures.........Date
498..................3-Jul-07
489..................2-Jul-07
12....................1-Jul-07
15...................30-Jun-07
24...................29-Jun-07
20...................28-Jun-07
5.....................27-Jun-07
0.....................26-Jun-07
8.....................25-Jun-07
14...................24-Jun-07
30...................23-Jun-07
15...................22-Jun-07
30...................21-Jun-07

[/ QUOTE ]

1p0kerboy

07-04-2007, 03:06 PM

Signed.

Literally takes two seconds.

Everybody do it!

1p0kerboy

07-04-2007, 03:19 PM

Posted a link to the petition in the Full Ring forum monthly thread.

Already have one additional signature.

oldbookguy

07-04-2007, 03:48 PM

I received a reply in my mail from FoF.

Seems they are really busy and the mail box is a bit full.

Here is a copy / paste of it:

Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:22:58 -0600 (MDT)
From: "Focus on the Family" <family@custhelp.com> Add to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
Subject: UIGEA Repeal Opposistion [Incident:070629-000574]
To: oldbookguy@verizon.net

Suggested Answer
Recently you submitted a question or comment to Focus on the Family. Please know that we are currently experiencing higher than expected volumes of e-mail. Should your situation require a response, we ask that you please allow a few additional days for handling. We appreciate your patience.

OK everyone, lets keep them busy, better reading our thoughts and Focusing on Poker Playing Americans than on the so called 'Foreigners" they seemed to be 'Focusing' on.

obg

TankerLTC

07-04-2007, 03:51 PM

Signed, 5,792

TankerLTC

07-04-2007, 04:06 PM

Here is my brief note to FoF to help with their busy servers.

I believe the UIGEA should be repealed; it is a bad law and was passed under shady circumstances. My right to gamble online is a personal rights issue not a moral one. I do believe the sites should be regulated but prohibiting them is not the right answer. I am an American veteran that takes the rights we enjoy in this country very seriously. I do not believe I need any organization to save me from myself or to help me protect my family; that is my job.

Vanidor

07-04-2007, 05:57 PM

Just sent a quick note to FOF. I hope it crashes their servers.

oldbookguy

07-04-2007, 06:57 PM

Great letter!

Please, everone take 2 minutes and drop FoF a note if you will.

E-mail:

http://family.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/famil...amp;p_lva=14190

obg

TheEngineer

07-04-2007, 09:37 PM

Fixed the link.

[ QUOTE ]

Great letter!

Please, everone take 2 minutes and drop FoF a note if you will.

E-mail:

http://family.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/famil...amp;p_lva=14190 (http://family.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/family.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=14190)

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

oldbookguy

07-04-2007, 09:48 PM

thanks, lol, sorry, I copied something wrong.....

obg

ps - e-mail them Engineer, keep them occupied.....

TheEngineer

07-04-2007, 10:07 PM

I wrote them a quick note:

I’m writing to let you know many Americans find your organization’s outspoken (and often inaccurate to the point of being deceitful) advocacy of banning Internet poker offensive, particularly FoF’s assertion that the American people need the federal government to act as their nanny. Americans are capable of making their own decisions. We don’t need a bigger federal government to do that for us. Actually, we need a smaller one. After all, the power you give government today is the power they’ll use against us tomorrow.

For example, do you feel safe in saying the IRS could never revoke a church's tax exempt status for refusing to hire a gay pastor? Do you feel safe in saying the IRS could never revoke a church's tax exempt status for preaching that homosexuality is a sin? If you answered "yes, that cannot happen", are you certain that couldn't come to pass within ten years? And, why shouldn't it? YOU decided government should involve itself in issues of morality, and many Americans do think discrimination against gays is immoral. That's the power you're advocating giving government today!!! After all, YOU said the American people are incapable of making their own decisions. YOU said government should have a role. And, YOU condemned yourself to this outcome by chasing limited-government conservatives like me from the Republican Party, assuring the party of minority status.

I urge you to let this one go. Support limited government. Support regulation over prohibition. Fiscal conservatism plus government out of your life = true conservatism. Government control of one’s life = statism.

Sincerely,

oldbookguy

07-04-2007, 10:10 PM

Nice letter1

obg

TheEngineer

07-04-2007, 10:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think we're better served writing letters that express our opinion, but don't antagonize. FOF will say "oh, look at the ungodly heathens we have to endure" when they read negative letters.

[/ QUOTE ]

My personal opinion is that we should write "persuasive" letters to open-minded folks, as an antagonistic letter could do more harm than good. However, against a sworn enemy like FoF, we should probably show our resolve and conviction of our goals. At least that's the approach I took with my letter to them.

TheEngineer

07-04-2007, 10:14 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Nice letter1

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Legislurker

07-04-2007, 11:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think we're better served writing letters that express our opinion, but don't antagonize. FOF will say "oh, look at the ungodly heathens we have to endure" when they read negative letters.

[/ QUOTE ]

My personal opinion is that we should write "persuasive" letters to open-minded folks, as an antagonistic letter could do more harm than good. However, against a sworn enemy like FoF, we should probably show our resolve and conviction of our goals. At least that's the approach I took with my letter to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

At what point should we be confrontational? You get a shot at Congress only once every two years. Kyl still tells people we don't vote, sooner or later we have to disabuse that notion. Maybe Im just naturally militant, or the lessened income is wearing on me, but I really want to start striking back.

TheEngineer

07-04-2007, 11:12 PM

Legislurker

07-05-2007, 12:05 AM

Well, Kyl has a job for 5.5 years. FoF, well no one here was donating to them before, so what are they losing. I would think as soon as we have a 527 and a PAC up, we let our targets know we intend to come after them. I would think a monthly phone in/letter write on a coordinated day in every targeted district would put the fear of only being a lobbyist in some Reps hearts if the efforts were big enough. I honestly don't think we should even bother with finding candidtates. Our role model should be the NRA. Leave us alone, let us play poker, repeal UIGEA, and have the DOJ Nazis back off, or we vote you out. No Democrat in a national campaign mentions guns unless bent over a barrel.
The message should be leave us alone or we will vote out every incumbent we can. If 10 House Republicans have to take us seriously in 10 states, thats a potential of 20 Senators who have to listen to them. Make it clear the onus is on them to let us go back to being free to puruse our living/hobby/recreation, and we go away.

TheEngineer

07-05-2007, 12:09 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Total: 5842

Signatures.........Date
160..................4-Jul-07 (pretty good for a holiday)
498..................3-Jul-07
489..................2-Jul-07
12....................1-Jul-07
15...................30-Jun-07
24...................29-Jun-07
20...................28-Jun-07
5.....................27-Jun-07
0.....................26-Jun-07
8.....................25-Jun-07
14...................24-Jun-07
30...................23-Jun-07
15...................22-Jun-07
30...................21-Jun-07

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

TheEngineer

07-05-2007, 12:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I would think as soon as we have a 527 and a PAC up, we let our targets know we intend to come after them...

[/ QUOTE ]

We could do lots of stuff with an organization that we can't effectively do now. What we can do now is build the momentum to take that next step.

[ QUOTE ]
I honestly don't think we should even bother with finding candidtates. Our role model should be the NRA.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then how would be know who to help and who to target? The NRA recruits and recommends candidates all the time. Every congressman has an NRA grade.

[ QUOTE ]
The message should be leave us alone or we will vote out every incumbent we can.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're going to vote out Barney Frank and Robert Wexler?

[ QUOTE ]
If 10 House Republicans have to take us seriously in 10 states, thats a potential of 20 Senators who have to listen to them. Make it clear the onus is on them to let us go back to being free to puruse our living/hobby/recreation, and we go away.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe we should actually set up an organization first. You're very optimistic about the power we'll wield. I look forward to furthering our agenda.

TheEngineer

07-05-2007, 12:49 AM

[ QUOTE ]
At what point should we be confrontational? You get a shot at Congress only once every two years. Kyl still tells people we don't vote, sooner or later we have to disabuse that notion. Maybe Im just naturally militant, or the lessened income is wearing on me, but I really want to start striking back.

[/ QUOTE ]

We lost the HR 4411 vote 317-93 last year. They paid no attention to our point of view at all. If we wrote confrontational letters the day after the vote threatening to vote the 317 congressmen who voted against us out of office, we'd have been laughed at.

Getting Leach out got us some attention. Since then, we've been building credibility since then the only way possible....by getting some legislation introduced on our behalf while writing and calling a lot of congressman, primarily either most likely to help us or most likely to switch sides. The sad fact is that over 90% of incumbants who run for reelection get reelected. With such a lopsided HR 4411 vote, it makes a lot of sense for us to try to flip "aye" votes wherever possible.

Opportunities abound. I'd like to strike back at good targets wherever possible, so long as it doesn't distract from more productive efforts. Do you have anything in mind (prior to formation of a PAC)? Feel free to post any suggestions to my Action Item thread.

ProsperousOne

07-05-2007, 08:51 PM

Signed: 5900ish... Unfortunately, we've dropped to position 22 in the petition rank /images/graemlins/frown.gif

BTW, I called FOF and they left this message on my voice mail re: Annie Duke:

(sorry, the url auto link didn't work. Copy and past the URL into your browser and download the mp3... file)

http://yupislyr.com/drewmike/redirect.php?file=/3/notachristian.mp3

TheEngineer

07-05-2007, 09:57 PM

We're up to 5,952 signatures. Let's get to 6,000. Can everyone here try to this wherever possible, such as a Libertarian site?

I posted it on conservapedia, at http://www.conservapedia.com/Gambling . I disguised it as a warning from FoF /images/graemlins/grin.gif . Wikipedia saw through my attempt to post it there, though.

oldbookguy

07-05-2007, 10:08 PM

Received an answer of sorts today from my FoF e-mails as follows:

Thu, 05 Jul 2007 16:43:03 -0600
From: "FOF Email Response" <Emlresp@fotf.org> Add to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
Subject: Response to Your Contact
To: oldbookguy@verizon.net
Dear XXXXXXXX:

Thank you for your e-mail to Focus on the Family. It’s my privilege to get back to you on behalf of our staff.

We appreciate your taking a moment to share a few thoughts regarding the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA). From what you wrote, it’s obvious that both of us are approaching this subject from completely different perspectives. Nevertheless, if you’re interested in learning more about our views on Internet gambling, we invite you to look at the “Talking Points” about 3/4 of the way down the following online article: http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/A000004244.cfm. Furthermore, we believe the Bible has much to say about gambling in general. A summary of these thoughts can be found at http://www.troubledwith.com/AbuseandAddi...%3a%20gambling. (http://www.troubledwith.com/AbuseandAddiction/A000000799.cfm?topic=abuse%20and%20addiction%3a%20 gambling.)

Thanks again for getting in touch with us, Dave. God bless you.

Darrell Green
Focus on the Family

Legislurker

07-05-2007, 10:12 PM

Do we have anyone out there in the shadows with some Biblical scholarship in their background willing to look into this?

oldbookguy

07-05-2007, 10:27 PM

Just general.

My response to FoF. This is actually kinda fun.....

The link at 'Troubled with' is most interesting indeed.

1. "More than 15 million Americans already struggle with a gambling problem".
I can only assume you / they consider ALl who gamble "TROUBLED' as the 15 million figure is the estimated total number of Americans who gamble. The true estimate of 'troubled' gamblersis .04% (less than 1/2 of 1%) who are troubled. Based on those figures that equals 6000 people nationwide.

NOTE: There is a SIN against lying or bearing false witness!

2. It saddens me that you even consider the many churches and church groups as 'TROUBLED' as many of the 15 million are church members who frequent the myriad number of Church BINGOS and Raffles. Ah, so sad for them, do you REALLY think they consider themselves troubled?

3. Work Ethic - "Scripture is replete with exhortations toward industriousness and admonitions against slothfulness." So, working at a job that requires time, patience and skills is 'sloughful' even though it may provide for my family?

4. Greed - "In a recent national poll, two-thirds of respondents stated that the reason they gamble is to win money." Most interesting as I would also guess that 100% of those polled who go to work go to make money. Does that make them greedy? SEE NUMBER THREE ABOVE. They too must be sloughful.

That is enough for now, I doubt your plate (no, not the one passed around accepting donations from the poor) is full and you will have much to contemplate.

Looking forward to a response......

XXXXX XXXXXX

zimmer879

07-05-2007, 10:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
NOTE: There is a SIN against lying or bearing false witness!

[/ QUOTE ]

nice

TheEngineer

07-05-2007, 10:37 PM

Nice reply.

oldbookguy

07-05-2007, 10:43 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Nice reply.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks, these folks just may entertain me / us for a few days, lol.

obg

TheEngineer

07-05-2007, 10:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nice reply.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks, these folks just may entertain me / us for a few days, lol.

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

True. We can't change their mind, but I don't mind throwing their words back in their faces.

Actually, I'm looking forward to whatever chain-yanking plan Legislurker is dreaming up. I'd like to let an opponent or two know we're here and we're not going anywhere.

Legislurker

07-05-2007, 10:51 PM

It may be fun, but since when did FoF care about facts? They preach to a choir who votes. Ive had long hard arguments with friends/family who categorically think gambling is wrong/bad/sinful. Some even had education, and it wasnt always religion that promulgated their prejudice. We should start working on a convince a Christian gambling is not evil set of talking points. Perhaps even useful if someone has to testify before Congress and can discredit an out and out lie from an FoF Gestappo rep. We can't just ground a response on reason, we need some solid scripture behind us. And I think its there if we look hard enough.

oldbookguy

07-05-2007, 11:06 PM

That info is somewhere here in these threads, I will look later, getting late now.

If you want to look, I believe is is in the threads concerning the IGREA hearing, someone posted the biblical references to actual gamling (lotteries) that was done for various reasons in the bible.

obg

Legislurker

07-05-2007, 11:09 PM

I mean take FoF's points and deconstruct them. Im familiar with the land division of the promise land. I guess Im saying it would make my day if we saw these guys embarassed on national TV for lying about the Bible/fallaciously restating things for political gain.

TheEngineer

07-06-2007, 02:42 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I mean take FoF's points and deconstruct them. Im familiar with the land division of the promise land. I guess Im saying it would make my day if we saw these guys embarassed on national TV for lying about the Bible/fallaciously restating things for political gain.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems that would move the argument onto their turf. I think we should keep it on ours...freedom, free will, and rights as Americans. With regard to their arguments, I guess we could simply say:

"If banning gambling were important to God, why doesn't the Bible say, 'thou shalt not gamble'? Seems God would have put something in there if He were concerned about this. Perhaps you oppose this because YOU PERSONALLY don't like it." Then, watch them stammer.

Uglyowl

07-06-2007, 08:28 AM

OBG,

Awesome response!

TheEngineer

07-06-2007, 09:16 AM

meleader2

07-06-2007, 11:33 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I mean take FoF's points and deconstruct them. Im familiar with the land division of the promise land. I guess Im saying it would make my day if we saw these guys embarassed on national TV for lying about the Bible/fallaciously restating things for political gain.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems that would move the argument onto their turf. I think we should keep it on ours...freedom, free will, and rights as Americans. With regard to their arguments, I guess we could simply say:

"If banning gambling were important to God, why doesn't the Bible say, 'thou shalt not gamble'? Seems God would have put something in there if He were concerned about this. Perhaps you oppose this because YOU PERSONALLY don't like it." Then, watch them stammer.

[/ QUOTE ]

To expand further, I think OBG's reply is right on. I can't imagine wanting to debate the Bible with fundamentalist preachers when we can stick to issues of freedom and hypocrisy.

[/ QUOTE ]

...or...you could simply say "separation of church and state"

/debate.

TheEngineer

07-06-2007, 11:44 AM

[ QUOTE ]
...or...you could simply say "separation of church and state"

/debate.

[/ QUOTE ]

They don't believe in such a separation. Or, more accurately, they believe it's a one-way separation preventing government from regulating Christian churches.

They actually embrace the idea that church should be a large part of "state".

TheEngineer

07-06-2007, 01:12 PM

The petition just hit 6,000. Great job everyone. Hopefully this 20% increase in signatures will help CGW in their visit to Washington.

Ron Burgundy

07-06-2007, 10:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I mean take FoF's points and deconstruct them. Im familiar with the land division of the promise land. I guess Im saying it would make my day if we saw these guys embarassed on national TV for lying about the Bible/fallaciously restating things for political gain.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems that would move the argument onto their turf. I think we should keep it on ours...freedom, free will, and rights as Americans. With regard to their arguments, I guess we could simply say:

"If banning gambling were important to God, why doesn't the Bible say, 'thou shalt not gamble'? Seems God would have put something in there if He were concerned about this. Perhaps you oppose this because YOU PERSONALLY don't like it." Then, watch them stammer.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think that's an effective response. It's still moving the argument onto their turf. If I were from FOF and I heard that, I would just come up with some twisted interpretation of something in the Bible that would suggest God said gambling is wrong. Since gambling isn't as important of an issue as murder or cheating on your wife, gambling didn't need to be one of the ten commandments.

If one were to get involved in a public debate with someone from FOF, the best thing to say is that you believe it's wrong for them to impose their religious beliefs onto others, and leave it at that. You have to remember that the majority of people listening are not going to be religious fanatics who only want to know what the Bible says and act accordingly. Most people just want to know what's best for society and their personal liberty.

TheEngineer

07-11-2007, 07:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Received an answer of sorts today from my FoF e-mails as follows:.....

[/ QUOTE ]

I received a reply from them today:

Thank you, ******, for contacting Focus on the Family.

We appreciate the time you took to offer your personal insights on the controversial issue of gambling. In response, what some people don't realize is that the pragmatic downside to gambling, including poker, is serious. The hard facts indicate that legalized gambling is responsible for a host of social ills (a suggestion that can be validated by looking at virtually any area where gambling has been introduced on a widespread basis). Take Atlantic City, for example, where from 1976 to 1992 the community’s police budget tripled to $24 million while the local population decreased by 20 percent. And despite spending $59 million yearly to monitor casinos, during the first three years of casino operation Atlantic City jumped from 50th to 1st on the nation’s per capita crime chart! Even more disturbing is the astronomical price tag associated with the costs of “cleaning up the mess” left in gambling’s wake. John Kindt, Ph.D., professor of commerce and legal policy at the University of Illinois, asserts that for every one dollar of revenue generated by gambling, taxpayers must dish out at least three dollars in increased criminal justice costs, social-welfare expenses, high regulatory costs, and increased infrastructure expenditures.

In addition, gambling can quite literally have a devastating effect on individuals. Millions of Americans now have a compulsive gambling problem, which not only causes great personal financial hardship for the gambler, but also disrupts and, in some cases, destroys families. Countless studies show a direct link between legalized gambling and gambling addictions, as well as drug and alcohol abuse and suicide.

On another note, if it be contended that Dr. Dobson wants to “legislate morality,” or that we are attempting to force individuals to conform to our idea of what constitutes godly behavior, we respond that nothing could be further from the truth. But Dr. Dobson believes that a nation which recognizes no transcendent standard of accountability is headed for moral bankruptcy and social chaos. All laws place restraints upon human behavior by declaring one act socially acceptable and another unacceptable. To that extent laws are statements about morality. We can’t avoid “legislating morality,” then. The question is, whose morality will be legislated? To what standard do we appeal in seeking a rationale for our laws? As Chuck Colson writes in his book, _Kingdoms in Conflict_, “Without transcendent norms, laws are either established by the social elites or are merely bargains struck by competing forces in society ... laws rooted in moral absolutes do not vacillate with public taste or the whim of fashion.”

Again, thanks for writing. We hope this response has clarified our perspective. God bless you.

Amy Campbell
Focus on the Family

Customer 07/04/2007 08:05 PM

I’m writing to let you know many Americans find your organization’s outspoken (and often inaccurate to the point of being deceitful) advocacy of banning Internet poker offensive, particularly FoF’s assertion that the American people need the federal government to act as their nanny. Americans are capable of making their own decisions. We don’t need a bigger federal government to do that for us. Actually, we need a smaller one. After all, the power you give government today is the power they’ll use against us tomorrow.

For example, do you feel safe in saying the IRS could never revoke a church's tax exempt status for refusing to hire a gay pastor? Do you feel safe in saying the IRS could never revoke a church's tax exempt status for preaching that homosexuality is a sin? If you answered "yes, that cannot happen", are you certain that couldn't come to pass within ten years? And, why shouldn't it? YOU decided government should involve itself in issues of morality, and many Americans do think discrimination against gays is immoral. That's the power you're advocating giving government today!!! After all, YOU said the American people are incapable of making their own decisions. YOU said government should have a role. And, YOU condemned yourself to this outcome by chasing limited-government conservatives like me from the Republican Party, assuring the party of minority status.

I urge you to let this one go. Support limited government. Support regulation over prohibition. Fiscal conservatism plus government out of your life = true conservatism. Government control of one’s life = statism.

Sincerely,

WorkinGuy09

07-12-2007, 10:30 AM

Dear Focus On The Family,

Why do you feel you have the right to tell me what I can and can not do. Does it make you feel important or special. Religion is an internal belief not a political weapon. I love all your "studies", for God loving people you sure do lie a lot. Here is a study, Religion is ruining the world, all major wars have been fought over your pushiness. Sure Religion has murdered billions, but now you take a stand on playing a backgammon like game on the internet. You people need to concentrate on your own problems and leave me alone! Talk about preying on the weak, you all prey on the weak minded, I am sure you guys put all those "donations to good use". You sir/maddam are a thief, steal from the weak and shove your beliefs down my throaght. Who do you think you are, I will tell you;
You are an individual who can not cut it in the real world who must follow something which gives you a sense of superiority because frankly you are inferior or you would not have been caught up in the black magic. Thankyou for looking out for the 100,000 people with gambling problems becuase I am sure not being able to play poker on the internet will solve there addiction issues, get a clue!
Sincerely,
A Regular Citizen

Richas

07-18-2007, 07:26 AM

Who wants to let them know that God won it for Yang?

I suspect they will not be happy!

fleece_me

07-19-2007, 11:27 PM

"And despite spending $59 million yearly to monitor casinos, during the first three years of casino operation Atlantic City jumped from 50th to 1st on the nation’s per capita crime chart!"

Of course crime went up, there are more people there now to rob and burglar. If they built disneyworld or a mall there, the same thing would of happened.

The increased jobs and tax revenues are a boom to the local municipalities, including the police force.

None of their arguments work, I don't care what God you do or don't believe in.

TheEngineer

07-20-2007, 04:30 PM

My reply:

Dear Amy and Focus on the Family,

Thank you very much for your thoughtful reply to my inquiry on Focus on the Family’s stand concerning Internet poker. I read it with much interest and felt compelled to reply. I honestly don’t feel your advocacy of a total ban on Internet poker is in the best interests of your organization, and I’d like to share my thoughts with you on this.

Your organization thrives under freedom. The power you wish to give the federal government over our lives is the power the government will one day use against all Christians, including Focus. As I mentioned in my initial letter, you’ve essentially told the federal government that Americans cannot be trusted to make their own decisions, so I hope you won’t be surprised when preachers are prohibited from speaking against homosexuality and other issues (at risk of losing at least their tax exempt status). As you know, many feel discrimination is a moral issue as well. Many also feel the same way about gun possession, and I’m certainly not willing to initiate any process by which I end up surrendering my Second Amendment rights simply to keep people from choosing to play poker. Many of my fellow conservative Republicans feel this way, and we’ll vote for our freedoms. How will Focus fare under the Democratic majority you’re helping to create?

You mentioned that all laws are based on morality. I respectfully beg to differ. Theft may be immoral, but laws against it are based on property rights. Laws against murder are based on the right of the victim to life. Many pro-life people, me included, are pro-life not because of morality, but because we believe the unborn child has a right to life just as a “born” individual does. Even if you do believe freedom should be curtailed in the name of morality, you have not made the case that poker is immoral. Gambling is not prohibited anywhere in the Bible. In fact, your tortured “proof” that poker is a sin really only proves that your organization simply doesn’t like poker. Perhaps it doesn’t “seem” Christian to some. Sorry, but most of us believe God gave us His marching orders in the Bible and that we shouldn’t be in the business of inventing new sins. Does Focus feel the work God actually asked of us is done, such that you all feel compelled to figure out what’s next? If not, how much time and money is Focus taking from God’s work to work on curtailing freedom in America, and how much is too much? After all, you know my fellow poker players will be fighting hard for our freedom. Your ill conceived fight for big government will consume a lot of cash and political capital. Is it worth it?

Your citing of the experiences of Atlantic City, NJ was telling. First of all, it seems disingenuous that you chose the example with the most manipulable statistics to cite as average. The use of per capita stats appears disingenuous, as Atlantic City has many more tourists now than it had pre-gambling. As such, the city’s average daily population (which includes these many money-spending tourists) of Atlantic City is now much higher than the city’s resident population (which is used for per capita statistics). Were you trying to imply that crime rate increases were caused by former law-abiding citizens who were drawn to crime by gambling addictions? I hope not, as the reality is that crime went up simply as a result of increased economic activity, growth, and increased tourism; in fact, many believe any economic stimulus would have caused a similar outcome. And, the reality is that Atlantic City is far better off today than it was the day before gambling was legalized. Finally, this whole argument is better suited for “bricks and mortar” casinos and related zoning issues. As Internet poker does not cause any of the issues you attempted to show with the example of Atlantic City, it seems odd to cite this case as justification for an Internet poker ban.

Also, not all Internet gambling has been banned. Many Republicans schemed behind the scenes to allow Internet wagering on horseracing to continue. Why no Alert Warnings about this? Is Chad Hills okay with horse betting? Or, could it be that you all oppose all gambling…just some more than others? I imagine it’s hard to oppose your friends in Congress. It does seem hypocritical, though. After all, Internet horse betting is no less susceptible to the issues you cited than Internet poker. You can be sure the proponents of Internet poker will ask you why you support Internet horseracing wagering (at least implicitly by not opposing it with the same vigor as you do poker). What will you say? Will you stand for your friends, or will you stand for your principles?

Finally, I think your organization fails to understand the realities of poker. Poker is a game of skill that we play because we enjoy the challenges of the game. I think you feel everyone who plays is some kind of addicted gambler. I assure you nothing could be further from the truth. A recent Harvard study concluded that only 0.4% of gamblers develop addictions. Why deprive the other 99.6% of their liberties when you could be at the forefront of helping those who actually need it? After all, they’ll find a bet somewhere. HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, funds treatment for compulsive gamblers while regulating the industry for fairness, age verification, and other issues. Wouldn’t your organization be better suited to provide this treatment and to air public service announcements warning of your concerns, so that Americans can make their own choices? I think you would.

Thank you for your time and attention.

Kind regards,