Mr. Raymer goes to Congress

[mshalen]

Raymer, Ferguson and Lederer lobby Congress. Link to article in Star-Ledger.

http://www.nj.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news-6/114421776064010.xml?starledger?ntop&coll=1

[jj_frap]

Congress has no business going against the majority's will (74% in this case.) unless the majority supports the suppression of civil liberties.

[Berge20]

[ QUOTE ]
Congress has no business going against the majority's will (74% in this case.) unless the majority supports the suppression of civil liberties.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd love to see the actual poll

[LearnedfromTV]

Whoever picked the trio did a great job, I can't imagine three better representatives of poker for this purpose. All three are smart, well-spoken, and capable of presenting the poker-player's position in a way that will be received well.

[Ryan2009]

Wall Street Journal - discussion board poll-credible? (http://discussions.wsj.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=wsjvoices&nav=messages&msg=3828 )

I think poster is talking about this one (http://statfox.com/statfoxnews/news~articleid~1258.htm)

[Berge20]

No, no...the actual polling wording, questions and data itself /images/graemlins/wink.gif

Zogby prolly won't give me free access though.

I would point out that depending on if the wording was as broad as "online recreational activity" - Picking up that kind of number isn't surprising and it shows how our side of the debate must frame online poker playing...as a recreational activity.

It also wouldnt surprise me if the poll asked specifically about online gambling or online poker, the results would be substantially different. Maybe not, but that's my gut.

[Mr.K]

[ QUOTE ]
No, no...the actual polling wording, questions and data itself /images/graemlins/wink.gif

Zogby prolly won't give me free access though.

I would point out that depending on if the wording was as broad as "online recreational activity" - Picking up that kind of number isn't surprising and it shows how our side of the debate must frame online poker playing...as a recreational activity.

It also wouldnt surprise me if the poll asked specifically about online gambling or online poker, the results would be substantially different. Maybe not, but that's my gut.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stu Rothenberg would be proud of your analysis. Yes, I too doubt that poll and would want to know several things before claiming it to be accurate. Was the poll test an "informed" test? In other words, did respondents answer questions about poker or receive other information prior to the question cited? Informed tests are notoriously inaccurate/misleading.

[Berge20]

[ QUOTE ]

Stu Rothenberg would be proud of your analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]

Expect nothing less /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Aytumious]

[ QUOTE ]
No, no...the actual polling wording, questions and data itself /images/graemlins/wink.gif

Zogby prolly won't give me free access though.

I would point out that depending on if the wording was as broad as "online recreational activity" - Picking up that kind of number isn't surprising and it shows how our side of the debate must frame online poker playing...as a recreational activity.

It also wouldnt surprise me if the poll asked specifically about online gambling or online poker, the results would be substantially different. Maybe not, but that's my gut.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can at least find some of the info you are looking for here:

http://www.onlinegamblingmythsandfacts.com/polls.htm

[Berge20]

Thx, missed it when I scanned the site the first time.

In addition, I had the opportunity to run into Greg, Howard, the PPA President and their lobbyist in the hall today. The two pro's looked a bit tired, hopefully not too turned off by their experience, but they were in good spirits.

The PPA President and their lobbyist were up beat and I am much more confident in their understanding and abilities now than I have been in the past. I remain hopeful that our community can rally behind opposition to harmful legislation and become more active in the future.

[jjb108]

[ QUOTE ]
The PPA President and their lobbyist were up beat and I am much more confident in their understanding and abilities now than I have been in the past. I remain hopeful that our community can rally behind opposition to harmful legislation and become more active in the future.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm glad to hear this. Thanks as always for the updates.

[2easy]

i dont remember where exactly i saw it, but when the poll first came out, i saw the exact questions/phraseology.

it was very "un-zogby-esque."

was presented in leading ways, almost like a blatant push-poll, unfortunately.


edit: i hadnt see aytumious' link when i posted this, but that is the poll that i saw and was referring to.

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, I too doubt that poll and would want to know several things before claiming it to be accurate. Was the poll test an "informed" test?

[/ QUOTE ]

The poll is absolutely 100% irrelevant in this debate. Nowhere in our constitution does popular opinion hold any water when it comes to consiidering legislation. While our representatives feel the need to protect their jobs, there is no reasoning that says under our system of government they should yield to the whims of the majority.

[Berge20]

While you are right in the fact that our legislators do not have to do anything the public wants, it is very important in helping us frame the debate in such a way that it strikes a cord with the population.

If you don't think legislators listen to their consituents, you are wrong and people do have an impact on their decisions. The difficult job is striking a cord with the public in such a way they get fired up and relay their opposition to their legislators.

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
If you don't think legislators listen to their consituents, you are wrong and people do have an impact on their decisions. The difficult job is striking a cord with the public in such a way they get fired up and relay their opposition to their legislators.

[/ QUOTE ]

I could produce a scientific poll showing 75+% of Americans oppose paying income taxes, but after almost 100 years of increasing bureaucracy, penalties, invasions of privacy, and blatant abuses of power, there has never been a mass movement for aboloshing the income tax.

That being said, I have doubts that something as insignificant in most people's minds as gamblers' rights will ever get the public fired up either.

[BluffTHIS!]

That's why all the offshore sites need to spend $$$ on lobbyists like some of them are doing to grease the wheels.

[Berge20]

I agree that just because someone thinks xyz about an issue, does not mean they will have the energy to actively voice their opinion on it.

However, with proper advocacy and grassroots work it is possible to get enough people involved to enhance awareness of the opposition.

[bds]

I think that each and every one of us who cares about this issue need to do two things. First, contact the legislative aide that deals with gambling issues and make a coherent rational argument for excluding poker since it is a game of skill, not a game of luck. Second, via email, etc encourage all the other folks we know who care to do the same. We may or may not make an impact in this way, but at least we have done all we can do at this point. The problem is that most folks wait for others to take action. We all need to be involved to the extent that we can.