FoF back at it again

[TheEngineer]

FoF has an updated action plan out. I guess these busybodies have nothing better to do than to worry about what WE do in OUR OWN HOMES! I guess this makes them feel morally superior.

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. Representative Barney Frank recently introduced dangerous legislation that would legalize Internet gambling. The fight is on and we need your help to defend the family!



Updated: 8-3-2007




Pro-Family Coalitions and Sports Associations Write Congress to Uphold Intergrity of UIGEA



Read letters faxed to Congress Members concerning recent bills that would legalize Internet gambling and reverse the Unlawful Internet Gamblnig Enforcement Act of 2006.



Sports Associations' letter to Congress (7-30-2007)
Coalition sign-on letter to House Members (8-1-2007)
Coalition sign-on letter to Senators (8-1-2007)
We encourage citizens to contact their Members of Congress by phone, fax or e-mail and share why the Unlawful Internet Gamblnig Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA) is so important for families and homeland security. Recent bills have been introduced that threaten to reverse UIGEA (bill mentioned specifically in above letters).



When Congressmen promote the interests and profits of foreign lobbyists at the expense of American families and our national security, we've got a problem on our hands. People must be the common denominator in any decision.







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.







NEWS FLASH: Barney Frank Bill Threatens Families, National Security



Representative Barney Frank, Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, sponsored a bill (H.R. 2046) that would legalize Internet gambling in the United States. His bill, if passed, will undo nearly a decade of Congressional efforts to protect children and families from gambling predators on the Internet. It also threatens homeland security in the midst of terrorist threats.

Before the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 was signed into law, children were being assaulted by Internet pop-ups and advertisements for more than 2,000 instant, online casinos. More than $6 billion left the U.S. economy and poured into questionable off-shore gambling operations. Barney Frank's bill must be defeated for the sake of children, families and homeland security.

On June 8, 2007, the House Financial Services Committee held a hearing on Rep. Barney Frank's legislation, H.R. 2046, the "Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007." H.R 2046 has 19 Co-Sponsors.

H.R. 2046 sets up a scheme for legalizing, licensing and regulating Internet gambling operations. Rep. Barney Frank's bill excuses Internet gambling operators from prosecution or enforcement action under any Federal or State law, if they simply obtain a license and follow the bill's requirements. Thus, H.R. 2046 effectively overrides all other gambling regulations or limitations under Federal or State law.

An Internet gambling news site exposed an interesting statistic, indicating that "probably more than 70%" of Internet gambling operators have a prior arrest record ["Barney Frank Will Have Few Online Gambling Luminaries at Friday's Hearing," Gambling911.com, 6 June 2007].

"The industry [foreign Internet gambling] in general is skeptical of Frank's proposed legislation since it restricts those with prior arrest records (including bookmaking) from operating an online casino, poker room or sportsbook. That's probably more than 70% of the industry. The sports betting side in particular was started off shore mostly by individuals who left the States because they tired of having law enforcement bust their doors down every couple of months."

Still want to place a bet online with your bank account number or credit card? Again, this emphasizes our concern about the potential for Internet gambling to fund money laundering operations and organized crime through predatory, unscrupulous operations.

Jack Abramoff and Barney Frank have something in common: they both want to expand gambling. One man's in jail, the other man's still in Congress. We know who was behind Abramoff, but we're curious to know who's behind Barney Frank's legislation? Frank says he doesn't gamble, so why is he suddenly online gambling's mascot?

Are you tired of being assaulted by thousands of online gambling pop-up ads? Are you worried about your children, a spouse or an extended family member becoming "hooked" on highly addictive Internet gambling? Barney Frank seems more concerned about a handful of disgruntled poker players and the special interests of foreign casino operators.

Oppose Barney Frank's bill (H.R. 2046) and support strong regulations for the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006. Take action now!



Take Action - Barney Frank Bill

Oppose Barney Frank's legislation (H.R. 2046), because it jeopardizes the safety of our families and our nation.

The House of Representatives, specifically those who serve on the Financial Services Committee, need to hear an outcry from families and pro-family groups by this Thursday (6-7-07).


Fax, call or e-mail your Representative. Urge your House Representative to oppose HR 2046. If your state has a Representative on the House Financial Services Committee, contact them as well (see Committee members). This Committee held a hearing on Barney Frank's bill June 8, 2007.
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).


Other Things You Can Do:

Submit testimony (your experience, your thoughts) about Internet gambling for the Congressional record (by 6-8-07).
Send out e-mails to friends to call their Representatives.
Mention this issue in your church, to radio programs or other pro-family organizations
Write to the local newspaper editor with your concerns.


Background on the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act

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 - Unlawful Internet Gambling

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 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/

[TheEngineer]

FoF's letter to the House (they sent the same one to the Senate as well):

http://www.citizenlink.org/pdfs/fosi/gam...AX_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)

August 1, 2007

Dear Member of Congress,

As a bipartisan coalition of family and faith-based organizations representing millions of
citizens nationwide, we thank you for your efforts to protect families from the dangers of
Internet gambling. Last year, Congress took the very valuable step of enacting the Unlawful
Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA) so that U.S. gambling laws could be
better enforced on the Internet. We are concerned, however, about ensuring the integrity of
UIGEA in upcoming months. We have three primary concerns:

• Congressional support for strong UIGEA regulations from the Treasury Department
o Add list of illegal Internet gambling to FinCEN and OFAC lists, block
transactions
o Create a system for reporting illegal sites to the DOJ (Internet, phone, mail)
o Enforce prosecution of illegal online gambling operations
• Your support of UIGEA's integrity and your opposition to contrary legislation
• Congressional support for U.S. withdrawal from WTO obligations that jeopardize
UIGEA

Internet gambling represents the most invasive and addictive form of gambling in history.
Speed, accessibility, availability and anonymity make Internet gambling the perfect storm for
gambling addiction. Internet gambling also creates fertile ground for criminal activity and
threatens homeland security by potentially funding terrorist activity.

More than 230 million Americans access the Internet, many of whom are children and
adolescents. Internet gambling extends beyond state borders, beyond democratically enacted
laws and is piped directly into millions of homes. Before Congress passed UIGEA, nearly
3,000 online casinos could be accessed instantly with the click of a mouse.
Since its passage, UGIEA has severely cut unlawful U.S. profits to foreign gambling interests.
Now these Internet casino operations are willing to spend millions of dollars influencing
Congress to gain legal access into U.S. homes. In fact, the UC Group (a leading paymentservice
provider in the U.K.) claims to be "leading the initiative" behind Rep. Barney Frank's
bill, H.R. 2046. The misinformation campaign is in full swing, and Congress is the target.
You should be aware of several bills that threaten the integrity of UIGEA:
• Rep. Frank's bill H.R. 2046 – far-reaching legalization of Internet gambling, providing
online casinos with exemptions from federal and state laws
• Rep. Wexler's bill H.R. 2610 - exempts poker and "games of skill" from UIGEA
• Rep. McDermott's bill H.R. 2607 - licenses and taxes Internet casinos
Foreign gambling interests are also pressuring the World Trade Organization (WTO) to force
the U.S. to legalize Internet gambling. They claim that the U.S. is obligated to legalize
gambling because it committed to free trade in “recreational services,” and a WTO panel
agreed. Now the U.S. is seeking to amend its trade commitments to make clear that Congress
never intended to turn over to the WTO its right to set gambling policy. Congress should
return the favor to the U.S. Trade Representative by supporting these negotiations.
Again, thank for your time and service in preserving families. We hope for your ongoing
support of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act in the upcoming months.

Sincerely,

Tom Minnery
Senior Vice President
Focus on the Family Action

Guy C. Clark, D.D.S.
Chairman
National Coalition Against Legalized
Gambling

Gary Bauer
President
American Values
Roberta Combs
President
Christian Coalition of America

Rev. Donald E. Wildmon
Executive Director and Founder
American Family Association

Phyllis Schlafly
President and Founder
Eagle Forum
Tom McClusky
Vice President for Government Affairs
Family Research Council

Dr. Keith Wiebe
President
American Association of Christian
Schools

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
We (FoF) have three primary concerns:

• Congressional support for strong UIGEA regulations from the Treasury Department

o Add list of illegal Internet gambling to FinCEN and OFAC lists, block transactions
o Create a system for reporting illegal sites to the DOJ (Internet, phone, mail)
o Enforce prosecution of illegal online gambling operations

• Your support of UIGEA's integrity and your opposition to contrary legislation
• Congressional support for U.S. withdrawal from WTO obligations that jeopardize UIGEA

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess we have three concerns as well -- the opposite of FoF's.

[Uglyowl]

I will have to find the article, but in the upcoming elections the message of a "separate of church and state" is getting on the radar of key ideas that is makes a favorable candidate. Although it wasn't the top "slogan" it was up there in well inside the top 10. Fortunately they have lost some strength but, are still pretty powerful force.

[tangled]

• Congressional support for U.S. withdrawal from WTO obligations that jeopardize UIGEA

This entry is fairly interesting. It has been discussed on this forum whether the administrations actions on the WTO situation would have to be approved by the Senate. This entry seems to be saying that it is likely that they will. The FoF feeling on this is probably reliable since I'm sure they have some pretty good lawyers,... and, of course, they have exclusive access to God himself, too.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I will have to find the article, but in the upcoming elections the message of a "separate of church and state" is getting on the radar of key ideas that is makes a favorable candidate. Although it wasn't the top "slogan" it was up there in well inside the top 10. Fortunately they have lost some strength but, are still pretty powerful force.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's almost humorous that they're sending this stuff to the current Congress. It does give us good opportunities to expose them for the big government nanny-staters that they are.

[TheEngineer]

The "bipartisan" coalition (LOL):

[ QUOTE ]
Tom Minnery
Senior Vice President
Focus on the Family Action

Guy C. Clark, D.D.S.
Chairman
National Coalition Against Legalized
Gambling

Gary Bauer
President
American Values
Roberta Combs
President
Christian Coalition of America

Rev. Donald E. Wildmon
Executive Director and Founder
American Family Association

Phyllis Schlafly
President and Founder
Eagle Forum
Tom McClusky
Vice President for Government Affairs
Family Research Council

Dr. Keith Wiebe
President
American Association of Christian
Schools

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd hate to see their partisan group!

[Uglyowl]

Is FOF going over the line; can an argument be made? It seems to me they are abusing their tax-exempt status.


"Churches which want to keep their 501(c)(3) tax exempt status, however, must refrain from overt political activity. Specifically, pastors or church representatives may not use their official capacity to endorse any one candidate, nor do too much to advocate for the adoption or rejection of specific legislation. Official church newsletters or other publications may not endorse specific candidates or legislation."

Source: http://www.khouse.org/enews_article/2006/1141/

------------------------------------------------
Focus on the Family is a 501(c)(3) organization; gifts to the organization are deductible as charitable contributions for Federal and Minnesota income tax purposes

[oldbookguy]

OK, we need this as an action alert, FILE COMPLAINS AGAINST THEM IN MASS TO THE IRS and DETAIL A GOOD CASE.

Doubtful it will matter but we need to. AND send them copies of the complaints as well perhaps, let them know we mean busuiness!!!!!

Engineer, ACTION ALERT?

obg

[oldbookguy]

Also, from what I can surmise it seems they are monitoring us as well as us them.

obg

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Engineer, ACTION ALERT?

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe. I guess we should see what the lawyers here think first.

CitizenLink was formed specifically to allow for lobbying under the tax code, according to their site. I didn't dig much deeper than that.

I hope they overstepped. It would be sweet if we could get them.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]

Also, from what I can surmise it seems they are monitoring us as well as us them.

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe so.

[blutarski]

"We don't have to study Internet gambling to know that risks are too great."

This is my favorite line. In other words "We don't need to check facts, we just know."

I used to have a running dialogue with a conservative Christian political cartoonist about the Iraq War. When we got past all the conservative/progressive talking points, he came out and said "Sure you may cite facts that things are going poorly, but I live in a world of faith. I don't need facts because I believe that the just will triumph." Direct quote.

How is it possible to fight the illogical?

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Engineer, ACTION ALERT?

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe. I guess we should see what the lawyers here think first.

CitizenLink was formed specifically to allow for lobbying under the tax code, according to their site. I didn't dig much deeper than that.

I hope they overstepped. It would be sweet if we could get them.

[/ QUOTE ]

The letter is signed on behalf of "Focus on the Family Action." It seems to be a lobbying arm of FoF, most likely set up to avoid problems with the IRS. As for the other organizations on the letter, I'm really not sure.

The best strategy to oppose FoF is to elect more Democrats. I'm quite serious about this. FoF virtually owns the Republican Party these days, and they have zero influence with the Democrats. A running joke during the last Congress was that Bill Frist was nothing more than James Dobson's puppet.

As the saying goes... focus on your own damn family!

[Legislurker]

Believe me they know the legal part of it, and if they violated it, who in the executive would charge them? Maybe even a Dem would steer clear of provoking their ire if elected.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Believe me they know the legal part of it, and if they violated it, who in the executive would charge them? Maybe even a Dem would steer clear of provoking their ire if elected.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure you're right about that. Just in my cursory reading of what they had set up for political advocacy, they seemed to be well aware of the limitations of what they could and could not do under tax law. Given that the ACLU watches their every move, I imagine they're on their toes. Still, I imagine we should check it out.

[CompatiblePoker]

I love this line.

Congress passed legislation to protect American families from online gambling predators and to prevent potential threats to our national security

Next on... dateline MSNBC...to catch an online gambling predator.

[eddytom]

Casino Gambling Web responded to their letter, too.

http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/gamblin...gain_46822.html (http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/gambling-news/gambling-law/internet_gambling_community_united_by_focus_on_the _family_again_46822.html)

[Legislurker]

I think we are almost to the point we need a UNIFIED gaming political website. Affiliates, players, sites, and software companies. The PPA is dropping the ball. This is the most coherent lobbying place online, but I don't think it has the traffic a website just dedicated to political action would. It doesnt have to be a PAC or 527 or anything, just a place to go for news and support grassroots letter writing, phone calling, and general activity. Who would pay for it, I don't know. A place we can spam links to at poker tables and on blogs, maybe hand out cards in bars, or my old trick, stick them in poker books in Barnes&Nobles. Beg FT and Stars for email lists. AND NOT REVENUE GENERATING. Unless its non gaming. Legality and appearances should matter.

[oldbookguy]

Take a look at one I am working on a little, I will be moving it soon to a new host with several good features.

www.wvgeneralstore.com (http://www.wvgeneralstore.com)

obg

[CountingMyOuts]

[ QUOTE ]
I think we are almost to the point we need a UNIFIED gaming political website. Affiliates, players, sites, and software companies. The PPA is dropping the ball. This is the most coherent lobbying place online, but I don't think it has the traffic a website just dedicated to political action would. It doesnt have to be a PAC or 527 or anything, just a place to go for news and support grassroots letter writing, phone calling, and general activity. Who would pay for it, I don't know. A place we can spam links to at poker tables and on blogs, maybe hand out cards in bars, or my old trick, stick them in poker books in Barnes&Nobles. Beg FT and Stars for email lists. AND NOT REVENUE GENERATING. Unless its non gaming. Legality and appearances should matter.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is an excellent idea.

Until the PPA becomes a bit more transparent as to what they are doing, it makes sense to try to fight our own battles and not rely on the PPA.

[The Bandit Fish]

[ QUOTE ]
I think we are almost to the point we need a UNIFIED gaming political website. Affiliates, players, sites, and software companies. The PPA is dropping the ball. This is the most coherent lobbying place online, but I don't think it has the traffic a website just dedicated to political action would. It doesnt have to be a PAC or 527 or anything, just a place to go for news and support grassroots letter writing, phone calling, and general activity. Who would pay for it, I don't know. A place we can spam links to at poker tables and on blogs, maybe hand out cards in bars, or my old trick, stick them in poker books in Barnes&Nobles. Beg FT and Stars for email lists. AND NOT REVENUE GENERATING. Unless its non gaming. Legality and appearances should matter.

[/ QUOTE ]

PM me and we may be able to work some stuff out. I can setup something like Mambo (http://www.mamboserver.com/) and a forum. If we can get the more vocal folks like The Engineer on board we can all discuss what we want there.

[eddytom]

http://family.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/family.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=1238

The above link is on the focus on the family website, after the more... there is a link to focus on the family's position statement on gambling. this link takes you to citizenlink.com
http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/abp/A000001159.cfm

Could this be the link that is needed to prove they are using their 501(c) nonprofit to lobby through their PAC ??

[Uglyowl]

There is "some" lobbying allowed.. What "some" is and what it should be I don't know.

[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think we are almost to the point we need a UNIFIED gaming political website. Affiliates, players, sites, and software companies. The PPA is dropping the ball. This is the most coherent lobbying place online, but I don't think it has the traffic a website just dedicated to political action would. It doesnt have to be a PAC or 527 or anything, just a place to go for news and support grassroots letter writing, phone calling, and general activity. Who would pay for it, I don't know. A place we can spam links to at poker tables and on blogs, maybe hand out cards in bars, or my old trick, stick them in poker books in Barnes&Nobles. Beg FT and Stars for email lists. AND NOT REVENUE GENERATING. Unless its non gaming. Legality and appearances should matter.

[/ QUOTE ]

PM me and we may be able to work some stuff out. I can setup something like Mambo (http://www.mamboserver.com/) and a forum. If we can get the more vocal folks like The Engineer on board we can all discuss what we want there.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think we would need to find some support from somewhere outside first, we need a new intact base to reach, say Full Tilt's mailing list. Its a bitch to drum up a base from nothing, sure it woudl be nice to have people manning phones, trolling tables, and blogs, etc, but we would need cooperation from a place with names, emails, or something, maybe a spammed link to tables like tourney notifiers.

[oldbookguy]

reading the IRS rules a c (3) is allowed no lobbying for legislation ect, a c (4) is.

I think they are a (3) though as Dobson left being the head of FoF so he can lobby for legislation.

We need to know for certain which they are.

obg

[oldbookguy]

Two important things.

1. Tax avoidance schemes as feared by the IRS and poker.
Is not this from FoF website a tax avoidance scheme:
[ QUOTE ]
The Johnsons are pleased to learn that although they can claim the same charitable deduction whether giving cash or securities, they can save an additional $1,350 in capital gains tax avoidance by giving their ACME Stock.

[/ QUOTE ]
http://www.focusonthefamily.com/stewardship/A000000448.cfm

2. I have been looking at IRS Publication
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf
specifically pages 8-10 though this relates directly to candidates, I think perhaps we can cite this and requerst FoF give US equal time as well, I.E. they should send out a letter, drafted by us to members they sent theirs to and publish ours as well.

Any thoughs after reading the publication?

obg

[The Bandit Fish]

[ QUOTE ]
I think we would need to find some support from somewhere outside first, we need a new intact base to reach, say Full Tilt's mailing list. Its a bitch to drum up a base from nothing, sure it woudl be nice to have people manning phones, trolling tables, and blogs, etc, but we would need cooperation from a place with names, emails, or something, maybe a spammed link to tables like tourney notifiers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, but you also need something to exist for people to go to. Regardless, the offer stands, but I won't do it alone. If people are willing to help with content; I will gladly provide a home for it.

[ChrisAJ]

I can't stand these guys. And I'm a conservative. I just wish they'd quit focusing on my family.

[Skallagrim]

One can only hope that the PPA, having hired lobbyists, is actually doing something behind the closed doors in Washington. Seems the only thing they ever ask of us is writing letters and paying dues.

The work OldBookGuy and the Engineer have done here and at other forums is worth a full time paid position easily IMHO.

And there are others here (I like to think including myself) who will contribute as much as their day jobs (and poker evenings /images/graemlins/wink.gif ) allow.

And how much could a web site cost? And maybe it could be paid for by having a few advertisements?

If the PPA wont be more public, there is no reason we should not fill the void, if we can.

Skallagrim

[TheEngineer]

The good news here is that we're obviously being heard! Also, did you all notice FoF has moved to new arguments? It seems we did a good enough job of rebutting their prior ones that they felt it better to move forward with new ones. Well, we're on offense and they're on defense. I like that! It's good for us. Also, their new point are easily refutable.

I'll write a rebuttal letter over the weekend. Hopefully we'll all do so. We need to show Congress we don't need the government's help to live our lives or to spend our money.

[oldbookguy]

I do not have poker in the name but I will donate use of my old business website that I post some poker stuff on now.

Take a look:

www.wvgeneralstore.com (http://www.wvgeneralstore.com)

I can add a blog with users, polls and such.

obg

[DerekJCEX]

[ QUOTE ]
One can only hope that the PPA, having hired lobbyists, is actually doing something behind the closed doors in Washington. Seems the only thing they ever ask of us is writing letters and paying dues.

The work OldBookGuy and the Engineer have done here and at other forums is worth a full time paid position easily IMHO.

And there are others here (I like to think including myself) who will contribute as much as their day jobs (and poker evenings /images/graemlins/wink.gif ) allow.

And how much could a web site cost? And maybe it could be paid for by having a few advertisements?

If the PPA wont be more public, there is no reason we should not fill the void, if we can.

Skallagrim

[/ QUOTE ]

if there were a website run by the major contributers of the legislation forum, i would definitely make a good donation to help get it running.

i could also get a friend who is a professional website designer to create the site.

[oldbookguy]

Much agreed Engineer we are on the offense and I will write a letter and post this weekend as well.

One thing, congress goes on vacation for a month after this weekend.

The presidential candidates will be hitting the road and I will post a complete contact list for them all. Maybe we can split them up and see where they will be appearing and send letters to local media....

obg

[Johnny McEldoo]

If such a site was created an idea could be to advertise the website through an avatar on sites like Stars. I assume the sites would permit it since i see things like "Cash Man Brain". It would be neat to sit at a table and see others with the same avatar. It could create a little trend and peak interest...

Just a thought...

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
One can only hope that the PPA, having hired lobbyists, is actually doing something behind the closed doors in Washington. Seems the only thing they ever ask of us is writing letters and paying dues.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've talked to them to see what more we can do. They were willing to add some info to their website and to their forums (I x-post stuff there on occasion just to keep it alive), but weren't willing to increase communications to members.

I hope everyone will check their site out and post there on occasion. After all, if we want stuff from them, we may have to ask.

Again, keep in mind that I'm nothing more than a regular member at PPA, so I couldn't do anything more than ask. They do recognize me from my work on this issue, so they do reply to my inquiries, at least.

Basically, they are very hesitant to ask their members to do anything. I drafted some emails for them to send to their members and they wouldn't do it. I hope we can continue to show through our example that we don't mind working to secure our rights. That's how the NRA does it. They do have stuff going on behind the scenes, though.

[ QUOTE ]
The work OldBookGuy and the Engineer have done here and at other forums is worth a full time paid position easily IMHO.

And there are others here (I like to think including myself) who will contribute as much as their day jobs (and poker evenings /images/graemlins/wink.gif ) allow.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks! /images/graemlins/grin.gif I try, relative to work and poker as well. You do a lot as well.

[ QUOTE ]
And how much could a web site cost? And maybe it could be paid for by having a few advertisements?

If the PPA wont be more public, there is no reason we should not fill the void, if we can.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe we can use the PPA site for what we have in mind. It has a recognizable name and enough funding to keep it running. Check out http://webringamerica.com/4/pokerplayersalliance/viewforum.php?f=2 and http://pokerplayersalliance.org/ .

[mrhobbeys]

Shouldn't every one just go to the PPA and use their auto letter feature? Seems easy, but dose it work?

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Shouldn't every one just go to the PPA and use their auto letter feature? Seems easy, but dose it work?

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone who hasn't already should definitely use the PPA auto letter (we should use it once per month or so, I guess). Also, we should print it out, sign it, and mail it.

However, for this I think we can gain a lot in rebutting their points. After all, they didn't do a very good job on this letter. It should be a slam-dunk for us. For my letter, I'll send it to my congressman and both senators, the president, Atty. Gen. Gonzales, Treas. Sec. Paulson, Steve Laughton (the UIGEA regs point man at Treasury), Ben S. Bernanke, the USTR, Ron Paul, Barney Frank, the House Financial Services Committee, the DNC, Sen. Harry Reid, and the RNC. That's a lot of coverage for one letter.

FoF often says gaming exists in the shadows, and withers when light is shined on it. I think we should be proud of what we do, and I think we are. Rebuttal letters demonstrate this well.

[TheEngineer]

Repost of my FoF dialog (as a reminder):

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

Dear Amy and Focus on the Family,

Thank you very much for your thoughtful reply to my inquiry on your 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 providing this treatment and to airing public service announcements warning of your concerns, so that Americans could make their own choices? I think you would.

Thank you for your time and attention.

Kind regards,

xxxxxxxxx



----- Original Message ----
From: Focus on the Family <family>
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 8:35:11 AM
Subject: Gambling [Incident: 070704-000293]

Recently you requested personal assistance from our on-line support center. Below is a summary of your request and our response.

Thank you for allowing us to be of service to you.


Subject
Gambling

Discussion Thread
Response (Amy Campbell) 07/11/2007 09:35 AM
Thank you, xxxx, 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.

xxxxxxxxxxxx
Focus on the Family
Auto-Response 07/08/2007 08:07 PM
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.


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,

xxxxxxxxxx
Auto-Response 07/04/2007 08:05 PM
Focus on the Family

[The Bandit Fish]

[ QUOTE ]
And how much could a web site cost? And maybe it could be paid for by having a few advertisements?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well unless traffic was insane, the server I host my personal websites on is more than enough and it's on a pretty big net connection (it's a friends machine that is in a colo).

I would be fine with hosting it there. I can easily setup a web portal (like Mambo as I already mentioned) and a forum for us. If you folks would rather pay for something right off the bat; there are many reasonably priced web hosting services out there that offer exactly what I'm offering.

We could also incorporate some ads if everyone involved agreed upon it. I'll be glad to set the backend up, but when it comes to design I can do it, but I'm sure others could do better.

[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And how much could a web site cost? And maybe it could be paid for by having a few advertisements?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well unless traffic was insane, the server I host my personal websites on is more than enough and it's on a pretty big net connection (it's a friends machine that is in a colo).

I would be fine with hosting it there. I can easily setup a web portal (like Mambo as I already mentioned) and a forum for us. If you folks would rather pay for something right off the bat; there are many reasonably priced web hosting services out there that offer exactly what I'm offering.

We could also incorporate some ads if everyone involved agreed upon it. I'll be glad to set the backend up, but when it comes to design I can do it, but I'm sure others could do better.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ads are fine, just not gaming ads. We don't want to give them a chance to put the FBI or some other goon org on us.

[ktulu22]

How much better off would the world be without people that think like this? It's truly sickening. Mind your own damn business

[The Bandit Fish]

[ QUOTE ]
Ads are fine, just not gaming ads. We don't want to give them a chance to put the FBI or some other goon org on us.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. I'll work on getting Mambo and a forum setup this week.

[kidpokeher]

Just popping in to say this letter is brilliant. I hope they respond.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Just popping in to say this letter is brilliant. I hope they respond.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

They did reply. They told me they would not engage in an ongoing debate and we'd have to agree to disagree. I did send copies to my senators and my congressman.

[TheEngineer]

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

Dear Senator McConnell:

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

Some in our party wish to increase the size and scope of the federal government over the private lives of Americans. For example, Focus on the Family has an ongoing campaign to create a second prohibition – this one on Internet poker and other games (i.e., Prohibition 2.0). UIGEA started this process, but Focus wants even more. They advocate government censorship of the Internet, government spying on Americans’ Internet usage, and government spying on Americans’ banking transactions. Millions of Americans, including me, vehemently oppose Prohibition 2.0 and the anti-freedom, draconian big government required to enforce it. It is dangerous for America and potentially disastrous for the Republican Party.

I attached my communications with Focus on the Family for your review.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,


[name and address]

-----------------------------------
July 20, 2007

Dear Amy and Focus on the Family,

Thank you very much for your thoughtful reply ......

[Tuff_Fish]

I do admire your energy and dedication to this cause. I know it take a LOT of time and effort to keep this up at the pace you have shown.

Tuff

[TheEngineer]

Thanks. I appreciate the compliment.

[Lostit]

I second that Engineer. You're doing a fantastic job on here with everything, and your drive & persistence is incredible. There are a lot of us out here who are sending letters (and usually stealing yours, but you did say it was ok), and calling, because you've given us good information on how to do so.

Keep up the great work, we appreciate you (and the others like OBG)

[govman6767]

Do you ppl actually expect anything different from FoF.

If this was a sane country congress would look at the fact that this guy thinks harry potter is destroying the world and just lol in his face.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you ppl actually expect anything different from FoF.

If this was a sane country congress would look at the fact that this guy thinks harry potter is destroying the world and just lol in his face.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. We expected exactly this.

[GPrice]

Co-sponsors for Barney Frank's Bill to legalize and regulate the industry has reached 35, another congressman signed on Friday.

We at Casino Gambling Web believe the support of this forum and the strong letter writing and phone calling campaigns you guys are persistently doing is helping out tremendously. Please do not let up!

We would also like to let everyone here know that we have postponed our Washington D.C. trip until September as advised by aids to Congressman Frank in the Financial Services Committee. The FoF letter sent out to all congressman and senators was a chess move by FoF meant to counteract and follow up the lobbying that we had done, however, they did not know that we had not done our lobbying yet, so this move backfired on them.

Just to let everyone here know, the petition that we sponsored that includes signatures, along with everyone's comments, will be hand delivered to all congressmen and senators when we go and it is expected to be the strongest document to get their attention. Just an fyi, we have received many questions about the 'anonymous' feature on the petition. Rest assured that when the petition is delivered no names will be anonymous, only to the common web viewer does it show that way.

Again, a sincere thanks must go out to Engineer and the rest at this forum who are great advocates for the cause, if there is anything we at Casino Gambling Web can do, do not hesitate to let us know. we only have a small staff so it is hard to monitor all the forums across the web so please drop us an email at an address listed on our site if there is anything more we can do to help.

[The Bandit Fish]

Ok, I've got Mambo and phpbb2 setup. It's just the default config right now, so don't expect anything fancy.

For the moment I'd prefer to keep it semi-private (right now it's using one of my domain names which will have to change before it goes public). If you're interested in helping out or just being a part of it, PM me and I'll send you the URL.

Edit: Speaking of domain names, godaddy has .info's for 2.99 per year right now, so if we're serious we should discuss a domain name and which TLD we're interested in. We can go with that standard .com, .net, .org or even .info, .us, etc.

[The Bandit Fish]

Well hopefully to drum up some more interest from people willing to help and those who just want to participate in discussion, here's the URL. The domain _will_ change at some point if this takes off. Also, as I said before it's very generic right now, so don't expect much until we get some people on board who are willing to help.

Main site (http://theangryamerican.org/)
Forum (http://theangryamerican.org/forum/)

[TheEngineer]

Cool! I'll contribute content to anyone and everyone who starts a site.

[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
Cool! I'll contribute content to anyone and everyone who starts a site.

[/ QUOTE ]

I signed up already, I guess we should put up a few posts, but this needs to be or become a master site. The reason I want it ad free as well, is I don't want to see a squabble come up over who owns it, who contributes, and who is owed what. That is an issue we can try to settle first, but we need one place to go from, 2p2 is nice and huge, but we arent front page here. We should strive to set up what g911 and the PPA should be. A one stop shop for jobs to do help poker, what everyone else is doing this week/day/month/year, and who the friends and enemies of poker are.

[TheEngineer]

Good reply to the FoF letter:

What We're Up Against (Gene Bromberg, 08/06/07) (http://genebromberg.com/?p=741)

[The Bandit Fish]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Cool! I'll contribute content to anyone and everyone who starts a site.

[/ QUOTE ]

I signed up already, I guess we should put up a few posts, but this needs to be or become a master site. The reason I want it ad free as well, is I don't want to see a squabble come up over who owns it, who contributes, and who is owed what. That is an issue we can try to settle first, but we need one place to go from, 2p2 is nice and huge, but we arent front page here. We should strive to set up what g911 and the PPA should be. A one stop shop for jobs to do help poker, what everyone else is doing this week/day/month/year, and who the friends and enemies of poker are.

[/ QUOTE ]

I verified your account on the forums. If you go ahead and create an account on the main site I'll give you access to publish stuff.

TheEngineer, if you're interested please sign up and I'll do the same for you.

The way that Mambo is setup is so that anyone can register and submit things for review to be published, so if anyone is interested in contributing please sign up on the main site and the forum and have at it!