|
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 5/14 & 5/21
[ QUOTE ]
1. If you haven't yet, please contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail. Ask them to support and cosponsor IGREA and HR 2140. Additionally, let's ask our representatives and senators to honor our commitments to the WTO in this matter. The PPA has an automailer at http://activate.pokerplayersalliance...t.php?rindex=1 . <font color="brown">As you've probably already done this, please tell your friends. Barney Frank asked us each to get six others to write to their congressmen in support of IGREA. </font> Perhaps post the PPA automailer web address in blogs (where it pertains to the topic, of course), or spam your friends and family. This isn't about IGREA as much as it is demonstrating political support for freedom to choose to gamble online. [/ QUOTE ] Just a reminder. Please try to get six friends or family members to write. Thanks! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 5/14 & 5/21
A Bob Novak article about Gonzalez at townhall.com (a conservative site)
One more blog post. I know these seem to be of small consequence, but it's free media and it gets the message out. Also, I'll reuse this a few times. Something to consider. ------------------------------ Another good article It seems we conservatives have been too busy drinking our own bathwater (reading only conservative pubs, listening primarily to conservative radio, etc.) to see what's going on with our party. We were elected on the promise of LIMITED GOVERNMENT, especially at the federal level. Instead of that, we decided to spend and spend and spend some more. Then, we decided big government was fine, so long as it promoted a socially conservative agenda (one that Goldwater would not have even recognized, by the way). We don't like online poker? Fine...pass federal legislation mandating banks to comb through our financial transactions and mandating our ISPs nose in on our Internet sites (and also mandating that ISPs block access to certain sites, like in China or Iran). After all, we can't trust Americans to make wise choices, right? We don't like Democrat corruption? Fine, we have lots of hearings (as we should). Republican corruption? We'd better hide that and criticize reporters who mention it, then act surprised when we lose elections (and blame the liberals for our own transgressions). It's time to take our party back. Limited government is just that. There's nothing conservative about big government, regardless of how much you love the laws it passes. |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 5/14 & 5/21
I wrote this in the sticky in HSNL, but I'll write it here again. A really easy way to get the message out is through Facebook. You can create a flier that will send people to the auto-messager for $5 a day. That $5 will send the ad out to 10,000 people in your network. So for $35 you can send out 70,000 ads. I really think that's worth the investment, especially from people who just want to donate money. Well, this is how to do it.
|
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Weekly action thread
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] There are also people with cigerrette, alchohol, shopping/credit card and eating problems. Are we going to ban cigerrettes, alchohol, shopping/credit cards, refined sugar, trans fats, etc. because some people can't control themselves? [/ QUOTE ] Just because people have problem with something doesn't mean that the State gets to ban it. The Nanny State doesn't preserve our freedom or our liberty, something millions have died to protect. If you are going to ban something because it is not good for people then the next step will be to force people to do things that are good for them. And who gets to decide? This is a very dangerous line of thinking that seems to be pervading politics these days: people in power think they know what is best for others and then run their lives accordingly. The problem with that is, no one really knows what is best for someone. And don't we have the liberty to find out for ourselves? Moreover, if you really truly believe that gambling can be bad and therefore needs to be banned then you MUST ban the stock market, lotteries, dog racing, horse racing and business and real estate investments. Let's not pretend that living does not involve taking a lot of risks with our time and money. We all take risks every day. But if you are going to be against one kind of gambling then you must be against them all. Many more fortunes have been lost in the stock market than all the poker games ever played combined. So let's stop the hypocrisy please. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with this entirely, but it's not the best way to broach the issue with politicians, who need to convince their electorate. I would suggest to eloquently present the preceding points (which are critical ones), but also make the suggestion that the bill include some measure of support for problem gamblers. These can include an agency to regulate the industry, perhaps compelling sites to provide concrete services for problem gamblers, or implement a gambling tax whose proceeds can be used to implement support systems and whatnot. There are many constructive ways to address maladaptive behaviour (such as gambling addiction, or alcohol or drug addiction for that matter), apart from prohibiting them entirely. The latter approach did not work for alcohol, is not working for drugs, and will not work for gambling. What it will do, if history is any indication, is drive gambling underground and cause a whole new set of problems, take problem gambling to an entirely new level, and ultimately run up the bill for taxpayers without really addressing the problem.. Regulate and tax. What's the problem? |
Action plan for week of 5/28
Well, it's action item time. I'd like to post it Sunday at noon. What would you all like to do? Here are some suggestions to start with:
<font color="brown"> 1. If you haven't yet, please contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail. IGREA has just picked up eight more cosponsors, so work it being done behind the scenes. Please do your part and ask them to support and cosponsor IGREA and HR 2140. Additionally, let's ask our representatives and senators to honor our commitments to the WTO in this matter. The PPA has an automailer at http://activate.pokerplayersalliance...t.php?rindex=1 . As you've probably already done this, please tell your friends. Barney Frank asked us each to get six others to write to their congressmen in support of IGREA. Perhaps post the PPA automailer web address in blogs (where it pertains to the topic, of course), or spam your friends and family. This isn't about IGREA as much as it is demonstrating political support for freedom to choose to gamble online. 2. Write to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Treasury Secretary Paulson (and anyone else responsible for implementing UIGEA). Sen. Kyl writes to them, so it seems we should be as well. 3. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online gaming. 4. We've been focusing on the federal government to date, but there's a state component to this as well. Please write to your state representatives this week and ask him/her to sponsor a bill legalizing Internet gambling within your state. </font> |
Re: Action plan for week of 5/28
Could you explain what #2 would do? I highly doubt internet gambling regulations are what AG is spending much time on right now. Do they even care what people say?
|
Re: Action plan for week of 5/28
[ QUOTE ]
Could you explain what #2 would do? I highly doubt internet gambling regulations are what AG is spending much time on right now. Do they even care what people say? [/ QUOTE ] Kyl is taking the time to badger Gonzales about these requirements via letters to Bush and by actually asking during Gonzales' last Senate hearings. It's easy to write to our friends. Our opponents should hear from us as well, I think. Anyway, something to discuss. I sent mine earlier. Here they are: ---------------------------------- May 15, 2007 The Honorable Alberto Gonzalez U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530-0001 Dear General Gonzales: On behalf of millions of law-abiding Americans, I am writing to ask you use care when drafting the regulations to implement the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, so as not to exceed the specific requirements of the Act. Many Americans oppose the UIGEA in its current form. It “passed” the Senate not by a majority vote on its merits, but by being sneaked into the Safe Ports Act, where it was safe from debate and discussion. As a result, reform measures like HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, have already been introduced, and others are sure to follow. However, the UIGEA is law, and your department is tasked with enforcing it as written. As such, I humbly ask that you to just that – write regulations that address the legislation as written. I understand that some who advocate restricting the rights of Americans to choose to play poker online have been lobbying your department for regulations that are well beyond the scope and authority of UIGEA. For example, although recent court decisions have defined the scope of the Wire Act of 1961 as covering wagering on only sporting events and races, in your last Senate appearance Sen. Jon Kyl specifically asked you for regulations affecting all Internet gambling, even Internet poker. It seems that if Congress wanted to outlaw Internet poker, they would have passed an act that did so. They did not. I urge you to resist the efforts of individual politicians who would use your department as a “back-door” means of creating laws that they were unable to create legislatively. Internet poker is not illegal under any federal law. I ask you to keep this in mind as you draft the UIGEA regulations. Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely, TheEngineer ---------------------------------- May 15, 2007 The Honorable Henry Paulson 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20220 Dear Secretary Paulson: On behalf of millions of law-abiding Americans, I am writing to ask you use care when drafting the regulations to implement the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, so as not to exceed the specific requirements of the Act. Many Americans oppose the UIGEA in its current form. It “passed” the Senate not by a majority vote on its merits, but by being sneaked into the Safe Ports Act, where it was safe from debate and discussion. As a result, reform measures like HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, have already been introduced, and others are sure to follow. However, the UIGEA is law, and your department is tasked with enforcing it as written. As such, I humbly ask that you to just that – write regulations that address the legislation as written. I understand that some who advocate restricting the rights of Americans to choose to play poker online have been lobbying your department for regulations that are well beyond the scope and authority of UIGEA. For example, although recent court decisions have defined the scope of the Wire Act of 1961 as covering wagering on only sporting events and races, in Attorney General Gonzales’ last Senate appearance Sen. Jon Kyl specifically asked him for regulations affecting all Internet gambling, even Internet poker. It seems that if Congress wanted to outlaw Internet poker, they would have passed an act that did so. They did not. I urge you to resist the efforts of individual politicians who would use your department as a “back-door” means of creating laws that they were unable to create legislatively. Internet poker is not illegal under any federal law. I ask you to keep this in mind as you draft the UIGEA regulations. Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely, TheEngineer |
Re: Action plan for week of 5/28
[ QUOTE ]
Could you explain what #2 would do? I highly doubt internet gambling regulations are what AG is spending much time on right now. Do they even care what people say? [/ QUOTE ] I just found out Focus on the Family has been writing to Bush and Paulson for tough UIGEA regs and against IGREA. The letter is at http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gamb...A000004244.cfm . The letter isn't on Focus on the Family's website, but they have a link to it, along with encouragement to participate. Here it is: ------------------------------------------------------ Internet Gambling Take Action 3-29-2007 by Chad Hills In 2005, U.S. citizens illegally exported $6 billion dollars to unknown, unaccountable foreign online casinos. Congress passed legislation to stop Internet gambling in the U.S., but the Department of Treasury needs to hear your voice to keep this legislation strong. Background The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) was attached to the SAFE Port Act (H.R. 4954) and passed in 2006. This legislation delegated authority to the U.S. Department of the Treasury to determine the details and regulations pertaining to the Internet gambling portion of this legislation (Title VIII). Needless to say, the foreign online gambling industry hired a number of lobbyists to influence this legislation and ultimately weaken the UIGEA. Foreign Internet casino operators lost an estimated $6 billion when Congress passed this legislation in 2006. They are intent on lobbying to reclaim their lost business by advocating porous Internet legislation and regulation. The U.S. Department of Treasury is expected to release their regulations very soon, so voice your concerns today (see talking points listed below). Read the letter written by professional and amateur sports organizations that encourages strong regulations against Internet gambling. Take Action Send a message to President Bush: Comments: 202-456-1111 Switchboard: 202-456-1414 FAX: 202-456-2461 (most effective) E-mail: comments@whitehouse.gov Emphasize these points: The Department of the Treasury is tasked with drafting strong and thorough regulations. Word from legislators working closely with this bill is that the regulations are too weak, and the law will may be undermined by the rules and regulations. A handful of federal agents could create and maintain a list of unlawful Internet gambling operations to existing Pro-family organizations and citizens must contact the White House and urge President Bush to direct the Treasury to create strong regulations to uphold this legislation. A second concern is Rep. Barney Frank's (D-MA) bill, HR 2046. His bill would effectively repeal the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, reversing nearly a decade of Congressional efforts to keep families safe from the predatory online gambling industry. Citizens need to voice their opposition to the dangerous bill that would open the gates wide for all Internet casinos. Citizens should also be aware that Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-NV) sponsored a bill that seeks to "study" the option of Internet gambling in the United States and ultimately justify its legalization. Oppose HR 2140, because more than 230 million Americans access the Internet, including children. We do not want thousands of virtual casinos tempting adults and children to gamble, nor can we verify whether these sites are funding criminals or terrorists. We don't have to study Internet gambling to know that risks are too great. You can also contact Secretary Paulson, of the Department of Treasury. Express your concern for the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act regulations to remain strong. The Honorable Henry M. Paulson Secretary of the Department of the Treasury 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20220 Phone - 202-622-1100 Phone - Department of the Treasury Main Switchboard - 202-622-1100 Fax - 202-622-6415 Web site: http://www.ustreas.gov/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Talking Points: (Choose three or four) Internet gambling sites took approximately $6 billion out of the U.S. economy in 2005 and may have funded foreign terrorist groups or criminal organizations. More than 2,500 foreign online virtual casinos were soliciting more than 230 million U.S. Internet users, without effective age verification, validation of payment sources and no financial accountability. Internet gambling holds catastrophic potential for organized crime, funding terrorists and laundering money. Read more … Betting on sports is illegal in the United States, with the exception of Nevada and Oregon (Montana and Delaware chose not to wager on sports). Online sports-betting sites were – and still are - making a mockery of U.S. legislation by violating federal Internet gambling laws daily. The integrity of amateur and professional sports is compromised by the growing number of online sports-gambling sites (i.e. point shaving, player payoffs, corrupting coaches, etc). Read more ... The American Psychological Association found high school and college-aged populations to be at an increased risk for Internet gambling addiction. [APA Advisory on Internet Gambling, March 17, 2002] See Advisory ... Machines cannot verify your age, and children are at extreme risk for exploitation and addiction. Already, gambling addiction with adolescents and on college campuses is at epidemic proportions. The National Gambling Impact Study Commission (NGISC) calculated that approximately 7.9 million adolescents have a problem or pathological gambling addiction. Imagine filling 113 NFL football stadiums to capacity; that's how many under-aged teens and children have gambling problems. Read more of the NGISC Report … Four out of five students under the age of 18 say that going online is a vital part of their schoolwork. One in five adults says their children spend too much time on the Internet. This age group is extremely vulnerable to online solicitation and subsequent gambling addictions. [USC Annenberg School, 2005] Read more ... Availability and accessibility are key components in creating addiction to gambling. The Internet is available and accessible 24/7 with no accountability. Addicted gamblers can remain anonymous and feed their addiction in secret. Pathological gambling addiction doubles within 10 to 50 miles of a casino – one can only imagine the addiction rates for 2,500 or more casinos within the reach of a mouse click. Read more … Video gambling is the most addictive form of gambling in history. Research finds that addiction can occur in about one year, compared with gambling addictions to traditional slots and card games occurring in three to four years. Read more … Taxpayers and the federal government should not be burdened with monitoring thousands of separate, foreign gambling sites for corruption, illegal activities or jeopardizing homeland security. Effective and strong regulations are necessary to ensure that the online gambling industry does not infiltrate millions of homes, destroy children, ruin families and mock U.S. laws prohibiting Internet gambling. "On the Internet, there is no regulation.' Nor is there any safeguard to keep people from gambling with money they don't have. - Rep. Jim Leach [Newsweek October 28, 2002] More Information · Internet Gambling Legislation Passed: A Victory For Families · Link to the entire SAFE Port Act of 2006 (see Title VIII for Internet gambling legislation) · Read the letter written by professional and amateur sports organizations encouraging strong regulations against Internet gambling · Internet Gambling: The 'Perfect Storm' of Harm · Facts compiled by Senator Jon Kyl's office · John W. Kindt, Gambling With Terrorism: Gambling’s Strategic Socio-Economic Threat To National Security · Testimony and Statement of Professor John Warren Kindt, Univ. Ill., Internet Gambling Prohibition Act of 2006: Hearing on H.R. 4777 Before the U.S. House of Representatives Subcomm. On Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security · John W. Kindt & Stephen W. Joy, Internet Gambling and the Destabilization of National and International Economies: Time for a Comprehensive Ban on Gambling Over the World Wide Web · 'Clean' NCAA Playoff Games Sought [USA Today, March 27, 2007] |
Re: Action plan for week of 5/28
[ QUOTE ]
3. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online gaming. [/ QUOTE ] Online gaming or poker? |
Re: Action plan for week of 5/28
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] 3. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online gaming. [/ QUOTE ] Online gaming or poker? [/ QUOTE ] Either/or. Whatever your game is. Poker is easiest for this, by far. I cross post this on non-poker specific sites, so I try to be inclusive. However, as poker players are driving this movement, by far, we get the lion's share of the focus. |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 5/28 & 6/4
Well, things look good. IGREA is gaining some steam. It has 19 cosponsors now. It remains to be seen if it can clear the House Financial Services Committee, but its mere existence is keeping our opponents at bay, as Frank stated in this interview. Also, HR 2140, Rep. Shelley Berkley's [D-NV] Internet gambling study bill, is progressing with 60 cosponsors. Unfortunately, as we all know, in anticipation of losing the WTO final appeal the USTR announced that the U.S. will withdraw from the gambling portion of the GATS agreement.
So, it seems there's a lot we can be doing right now. And, we really need to do it RIGHT NOW, before these politicians make up their minds. So, let's do the following: <font color="brown"> 1. If you haven't yet, please contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail <u>for each individual issue</u>. For example, if you sent a pro-IGREA letter but said nothing about the WTO decision, please send a letter about the WTO decision. Here are issues deserving of separate letters and phone calls: - Repeal UIGEA - Support/cosponsor IGREA - Protest the U.S. withdrawal from the gaming sector of GATS - Support and cosponsor HR 2140, the study bill Again, the PPA has an automailer at http://activate.pokerplayersalliance...t.php?rindex=1 . And, please tell your friends. Barney Frank asked us each to get six others to write to their congressmen. Perhaps post the PPA automailer web address in blogs (where it pertains to the topic, of course), or spam your friends and family. This isn't about specific legislation as much as it is demonstrating political support for freedom to choose to gamble online. 2. Write to President Bush, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and Treasury Secretary Paulson. Ask them not to exceed the specific mandates of UIGEA when drafting legislation. Remind them that online poker is not illegal under any federal law. Focus on the Family is asking their members to write to Paulson and Bush to request tough regulations. See http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gamb...A000004244.cfm , an effort funded by Focus. We should counterbalance this effort. Also, Sen. Kyl asked Gonzales for tough regulations during the AG Senate hearings. We should counterbalance this as well. 3. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online poker/gaming. 4. We've been focusing on the federal government to date, but there's a state component to this as well. Please write to your state representatives this week and ask him/her to sponsor a bill legalizing Internet gambling within your state. </font> Thanks everyone! |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 5/28 & 6/4
[ QUOTE ]
Engineer what do u feel will honestly happen on July 10th. My personal feel is that poker will be the same july 10th of this year next year and following years just as it is now. I honestly dont think were in for any big surprises [/ QUOTE ] I'm glad you asked. Many here think this, for some reason. Of course, last year people said the same thing about online casino and sports betting. They were wrong. So, why do you think poker will be the same ten years from now? The DOJ is actively chasing down U.S.-facing sports books. They aren't simply waiting for the CEOs to enter America, either. Rather, the DOJ is extraditing these CEOs from foreign, sovereign nations. Once they run out of sports books, you think they'll stop and allow poker? Nah...we're next. Skallagrim believes U.S.-facing poker sites are breaking federal law; UIGEA prohibits banking for gambling activities that violate state gambling laws, even misdemeanor state laws. Right or wrong, the fact that the DOJ can craft an argument that a federal law is being violated means trouble. Also, despite contrary appellate court rulings, the DOJ believes poker-only sites violate the Wire Act of 1961. So, even without legislation in our favor, we're at risk. We can no longer sit back and stay silent as we have for so long, IMO. With a great offense, we may be right where we are now in ten years. Without, I personally doubt that anything good will happen. The other risk is future legislation. HR 4411 passed the House by a wide margin. HR 4777, a bill that banned Internet poker, was cosponsored by 1/3 of the House. Without a good offense, it's hard to imagine these zealots not introducing a new bill. While social conservatives have been weakened politically and internally, they're still gung-ho to outlaw our activities. We shouldn't give them the opportunity this time. If they try another law, they should know they'll pay some political price. |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 5/28 & 6/4
My HR 2140 letter:
April 13, 2007 The Honorable Congressman United States House of Representatives Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515-1704 Dear Congressman: I'm writing to request that you vote for and cosponsor HR 2140, Rep. Shelley Berkley's Internet gaming study bill. While the opponents of online gaming have made a list of potential issues purported to be caused by online gaming, there’s never been a study that either verifies the validity of these claims or examines potential mitigations. It seems this should be done prior to even considering a federal prohibition of Internet gambling, especially as this activity is legal in much of the rest of the world. If Americans are to be less free than Europeans, perhaps we should at least have some substantiation to justify a federal power grab of this magnitude. Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely, TheEngineer |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 5/28 & 6/4
My WTO letter.
------------------------- The Honorable xxxx yyyy United States House of Representatives 0000 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515-1704 Dear Congressman xxxxx: As a Republican constituent and voter in your district, I am writing to express my objection to the United States’ withdrawal from the gaming sector (Article 21) of the GATS agreement. This unprecedented withdrawal, made in response to our loss to Antigua in a dispute heard by the WTO over Internet gambling access, will have far-reaching ramifications for the U.S. While the federal government seems to feel there is some driving national interest in legislating the moral beliefs of a few on all Americans by preventing us from playing poker online, the fact is that we need the WTO now more than ever. We have many trade disputes worldwide. We need access to markets and other trade controls. We need the WTO to deal effectively with China. Should we sacrifice this to satisfy the very few social conservatives who, despite the lack of even a single negative reference to gambling in the Bible, feel they have to tell OTHERS not to play poker in their OWN homes on their OWN computers? I think not. Please ask President Bush to rescind this withdrawal from GATS. We made the commitment, so we should stick to it. The word of the U.S. should be our bond. Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely, TheEngineer |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 5/28 & 6/4
Would you have a problem if I give this letter to the members of the NCC (Neteller Customer Coalition)? They are itching for more action and this would get over 500 more angry Neteller customers to write their congressman..
thanks |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 5/28 & 6/4
[ QUOTE ]
Would you have a problem if I give this letter to the members of the NCC (Neteller Customer Coalition)? They are itching for more action and this would get over 500 more angry Neteller customers to write their congressman.. thanks [/ QUOTE ] Please, go right ahead. Scroll up a few for some other letters as well. Also, PPA has a generic letter supporting IGREA at the link referenced in my action plan. |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 5/28 & 6/4
So July 10 is 'doomsday', or at least the day we find out what is going to happen?
I've sent the letter from the PPA, any other emails I should be sending? |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 5/28 & 6/4
[ QUOTE ]
So July 10 is 'doomsday', or at least the day we find out what is going to happen? I've sent the letter from the PPA, any other emails I should be sending? [/ QUOTE ] Thanks for writing to your congressman. Focus on the Family is having their members write to Bush and Paulson (the Treasury Secretary) to urge tough UIGEA regs. Scroll up a few posts and check it out at the Fight for Online Gaming post. I think we should all write to Bush and Paulson, plus Gonzales (the AG). |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 5/28 & 6/4
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] So July 10 is 'doomsday', or at least the day we find out what is going to happen? I've sent the letter from the PPA, any other emails I should be sending? [/ QUOTE ] Thanks for writing to your congressman. Focus on the Family is having their members write to Bush and Paulson (the Treasury Secretary) to urge tough UIGEA regs. Scroll up a few posts and check it out at the Fight for Online Gaming post. I think we should all write to Bush and Paulson, plus Gonzales (the AG). [/ QUOTE ] As of 5-11-07, the regs were still unwritten. Sam Brownback met with Paulson, the Treaury Secretary, that day to try to browbeat him into regs that likely exceeded the mandate of UIGEA. So, there's time for us to write and call Paulson and Gonzales. Here's an article from a Focus on the Family website: ------------------------------------ Treasury Department Delays Enforcement of Online Gambling Law from staff reports http://www.citizenlink.org/CLNews/A000004603.cfm Drafting of regulations has dragged on for months. The U.S. Treasury Department is dragging its feet in writing regulations to accompany a law designed to stop the use of credit cards to pay for Internet gambling. Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., went to see Treasure Secretary Henry Paulson on Thursday to ask about the delay. “Are they going to be committed to enforcing this law," Brownback asked, "and putting the personnel in place that it needs." The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act passed last year, but the Treasury Department has yet to draft the rules for enforcement. Chad Hills, gambling analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said writing them up shouldn’t be too burdensome. “We estimate that about five federal employees working on this could keep and maintain a list of Internet gambling operations,” he told Family News in Focus. Illegal Internet gambling is a $12 billion-a-year industry, and Tom McClusky of the Family Research Council said the pressure to water down the restrictions via the Treasury Department is intense. "The gambling forces seem to have some friends in those departments that might have been helping write some of those regulations," he said. “It’s almost setting up a fourth branch of government – a bureaucracy branch – that decides what laws they want to enforce and what laws they want to basically rewrite.” (Paid for by Focus on the Family Action) |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 5/28 & 6/4
I sent this to Paulson a few minutes ago, via snail mail. I'll email and snail mail Gonzales the same one:
----------------------------------------- June 2, 2007 The Honorable Henry Paulson 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20220 Dear Secretary Paulson: On behalf of millions of law-abiding Americans, I am writing to ask that you use care when drafting the regulations to implement the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, so as not to exceed the specific requirements of the Act, especially with regard to Internet poker. Many Americans oppose the UIGEA in its current form. It “passed” the Senate not by a majority vote on its merits, but by being sneaked into the Safe Ports Act, where it was safe from debate and discussion. As a result, reform measures like HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, have already been introduced, and others are sure to follow. However, the UIGEA is law, and your department is tasked with enforcing it as written. As such, I humbly ask that you to just that – write regulations that address the legislation as written. As you know, UIGEA does not make online gambling illegal. Rather, it provides legal mechanisms for enforcement of existing state and federal gambling laws. Well, Internet poker is not illegal under existing federal law. As for state laws, very few states have outlawed Internet poker. Conversely, the vast majority of states permit online “games of skill” (such as the money skill games on yahoo.com and other sites that are not affected by UIGEA), and I think we can agree that professional players like Doyle Brunson are certainly skilled. Given this, I believe the UIGEA regulations should exempt (or simply neglect to mention) Internet poker – if not nationwide, certainly for play in states where Internet poker is not expressly illegal. After all, should the federal government be in the business of enforcing ambiguous state laws? Should your department be drawn into litigation concerning interpretations of state laws? If states actually wished to ban Internet poker, it seems they would have done so in an unambiguous fashion … especially if they wished to have the federal government enforce it. Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely, TheEngineer |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 5/28 & 6/4
I updated the Wikipedia Online Poker article, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_poker, to add the UIGEA repeal/reform efforts, including ours.
[ QUOTE ] HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act (IGREA), was introduced by Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) on April 26, 2007. IGREA modifies UIGEA by providing a provision for licensing of licensing of Internet gambling facilities by the Director of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. The bill requires age verification and collection of federal and state taxes. It also requires Internet gambling facilities to verify that their sites are not used for money laundering or terrorist financing. It provides an "opt out" for states, Indian tribes, and sports leagues. If passed, online poker, as well as other online gaming, will be unambiguously legal in states and on tribal lands that do not opt out. There is currently a strong grassroots effort to repeal UIGEA. The main advocacy group is the Poker Players Alliance, with 542,731 members (as of June 3, 2007). Another major grop is at the Legislation Forum of www.twoplustwo.com. The Weekly Action Plan for the grassroots effort, authored by TheEngineer, is released every Saturday at http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...=0#Post9946416. [/ QUOTE ] |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 5/28 & 6/4
|
Re: Action plan for week of 5/28
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="brown">3. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online gaming. </font> [/ QUOTE ] For this item, if I find a site where I can post a comment, I do. I try to write an intelligent post that mentions Inernet poker in a positive light, to get out the message in a casual way. Following the post, I save it to Word. then, I can reuse the same comment on multiple sites. I don't think we'll change the world with this, but it seems painless. Here's one I posted to an article on a conservative site (this is focused on the audience...one should write a left-leaning one for a left-leaning site, etc): [ QUOTE ] The Republican Party is divided. No real surprise, given that big government social conservative CINOs have totally abandoned any pretense of limited government. After all, it’s been more than a decade since President Bill Clinton announced that the era of big government is over. Too bad Bush has resurrected it form the dead. Under Bush, government has grown far bigger and far more intrusive. It spends more, it regulates us more, and it reaches more deeply into our daily lives than it did pre-1994. This is driven by a new brand of conservatism; one that believes big government can be used for conservative ends. It is a conservatism that ridicules Barry Goldwater while embracing Roosevelt (and I don’t mean TR). These guys really do have more in common with Ted Kennedy than with Ronald Reagan. Under the guise of promoting conservatism, the "new" Republican Party is hard at work giving the federal government unprecedented power to legislate behavior. Look at the recent online poker "ban", where banks and ISPs are required to monitor American citizens at their homes for activities deemed inappropriate by the all-powerful federal government. It’s really the business of the federal government to concern themselves with people playing cards in their own homes? Look at most of Bush's initiatives. And now we have amnesty for illegal aliens. Of course Republicans are in open revolt. Perhaps the social conservatives and liberals who believe big government is wonderful should form a new pro-government party. They can jointly spend like drunken sailors on programs like No Child Left Behind, McCain-Feingold, and the prescription drug program. The limited government (i.e., true) conservatives and pro-business folks can then take back the Republican Party. We’ll give rights back to Americans while enforcing our immigration laws (we're doing the reverse now). We’ll be pro-life, as our commitment is to respect the value of all individuals, and we’ll continue to keep government out of the lives of individuals. The funny thing is that this approach will result in improved morality and values. You see, our morals don’t come from Washington. It's time for real Republicans to take the party back. Limited government is just that. There's nothing conservative about big government, regardless of how much one loves the laws it passes. Everyone: Vote for freedom. Tell your Republican congressmen that they don't have to legislate everything they personally oppose. So-called big government conservatism isn't conservative. It's statist, and giving power to the state is a loser for freedom. Perhaps, some day, we'll have a government that leaves some decisions up to the individual. [/ QUOTE ] |
Re: Action plan for week of 5/28
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] <font color="brown">3. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online gaming. </font> [/ QUOTE ] For this item, if I find a site where I can post a comment, I do. I try to write an intelligent post that mentions Inernet poker in a positive light, to get out the message in a casual way. Following the post, I save it to Word. then, I can reuse the same comment on multiple sites. I don't think we'll change the world with this, but it seems painless. Here's one I posted to an article on a conservative site (this is focused on the audience...one should write a left-leaning one for a left-leaning site, etc): [ QUOTE ] The Republican Party is divided. No real surprise, given that big government social conservative CINOs have totally abandoned .... [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] To further economize, I took that post and turned it into three letters...one to my rep and one to each of my senators. Here it is. Feel free to use it: ------------------------------------ The Honorable xxxx xxxxx United States House of Representatives xxxx Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515-1704 Dear Congressman xxxxx, The Republican Party is divided. No real surprise, given that big government social conservative CINOs have totally abandoned any pretense of limited government. After all, it’s been more than a decade since President Clinton announced that the era of big government is over. Too bad Bush has resurrected it form the dead. Under Bush, government has grown far bigger and far more intrusive. It spends more, it regulates us more, and it reaches more deeply into our daily lives than it did pre-1994. This is driven by a new brand of conservatism; one that believes big government can be used for conservative ends. It is a conservatism that ridicules Barry Goldwater while embracing Roosevelt (and I don’t mean TR). These guys have more in common with Ted Kennedy than with Ronald Reagan. Under the guise of promoting conservatism, the "new" Republican Party is hard at work giving the federal government unprecedented power to legislate behavior. Look at the recent online poker "ban", where banks and ISPs are required to monitor American citizens at their homes for activities deemed inappropriate by the all-powerful federal government. It’s really the business of the federal government to concern themselves with people playing cards in their own homes? Look at most of Bush's initiatives. And now we have amnesty for illegal aliens. Of course Republicans are in open revolt. Perhaps the social conservatives and liberals who believe big government is wonderful should form a new pro-government party. They can jointly spend like drunken sailors on programs like No Child Left Behind, McCain-Feingold, and the prescription drug program. The limited government (i.e., true) conservatives and pro-business folks can then take back the Republican Party. We’ll give rights back to Americans while enforcing our immigration laws (we're doing the reverse now). We’ll be pro-life, as our commitment is to respect the value of all individuals, and we’ll continue to keep government out of the lives of individuals. The funny thing is that this approach will result in improved morality and values. You see, our morals don’t come from Washington. It's time for real Republicans to take the party back. Limited government is just that. There's nothing conservative about big government, regardless of how much one loves the laws it passes. I urge you to vote for freedom. Congress does not have to legislate everything congressmen personally oppose. So-called big government conservatism isn't conservative. It's statist, and giving power to the state is a loser for freedom. Perhaps, some day, we'll have a government that leaves some decisions up to the individual. Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely, TheEngineer |
Re: Action plan for week of 5/28
Minor typo (in case you use it):
[ QUOTE ] The Honorable xxxx xxxxx United States House of Representatives xxxx Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515-1704 Dear Congressman xxxxx, The Republican Party is divided. No real surprise, given that big government social conservative CINOs have totally abandoned any pretense of limited government. After all, it’s been more than a decade since President Clinton announced that the era of big government is over. Too bad Bush has resurrected it from the dead. Under Bush, government has grown far bigger and far more intrusive. It spends more, it regulates us more, and it reaches more deeply into our daily lives than it did pre-1994. This is driven by a new brand of conservatism; one that believes big government can be used for conservative ends. It is a conservatism that ridicules Barry Goldwater while embracing Roosevelt (and I don’t mean TR). These guys have more in common with Ted Kennedy than with Ronald Reagan. [/ QUOTE ] |
Re: Action plan for week of 5/28
Bump since this has fallen to page two and is important. Can everyone make a few phone calls tonight for the June 8th hearing:
Here is the list of members of the financial services committee. http://financialservices.house.gov/members.html |
Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 6/11 & 6/18
Well, we're gaining some momentum! We have a long way to go, but it's great to see progress. Robert Wexler will introduce a "skills game" exception to UIGEA today. Also, IGREA is gaining some steam. The hearing is tomorrow, so there's some real progress. Also, HR 2140, Rep. Shelley Berkley's [D-NV] Internet gambling study bill, is progressing with 60 cosponsors. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has indicated his support for the study bill. Finally, the UIGEA regulations are due on 7/10. Our opponents are complaining that the regs aren't "tough" enough, so we have an opportunity there.
It seems there's a lot we can be doing right now. And, we really need to do it RIGHT NOW. So, based on our group discussions, let's do the following: <font color="brown"> 1. Please contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail and ask them to support and cosponsor the Wexler poker bill (let's wait until it's out first, so we don't look like we don't read things we endorse, of course). 2. Please contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail to praise the outcome of the 6/8 IGREA hearing and to encourage them to support the legislation. 3. Write to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Treasury Secretary Paulson. Ask them not to exceed the specific mandates of UIGEA when drafting legislation. Remind them that online poker is not illegal under any federal law. Focus on the Family is asking their members to write to Paulson and Bush to request tough regulations. See http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gamb...A000004244.cfm , a Focus site. We should counterbalance this effort. Also, Sen. Kyl asked Gonzales for tough regulations during the AG Senate hearings. We should counterbalance this as well. I realize this was an action from last time, but since then the FBI now claims online gambling is illegal in the U.S., at http://www.fbi.gov/page2/june07/gambling060607.htm , so we really should speak up for ourselves, IMHO. [ QUOTE ] If you’ve ever thought about visiting a cyber casino, here’s something you should know: it’s illegal to gamble online in the United States. “You can go to Vegas. You can go to Atlantic City. You can go to a racetrack. You can go to those places and gamble legally. But don’t do it online. It’s against the law,” says Leslie Bryant, head of our Cyber Crime Fraud unit at FBI Headquarters. [/ QUOTE ] <font color="brown"> 4. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online poker/gaming. </font> </font> Thanks everyone! |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 6/11 & 6/18
Dear Congressman xxxx:
I am writing in regard to this morning’s House Financial Services Committee hearing on Internet gambling. I was very impressed with the hearing, especially with the quality of the witnesses who testified in favor of regulated Internet gambling. I felt the expert testimony of Michael Colopy of Aristotle Inc, Jon Prideaux of Asterion Payments, and Gerald Kitchen of SecureTrading Ltd. proved that Internet gambling can be regulated effectively (and has been successfully regulated in Britain). This pleased me, as I do share your concerns for underage gambling, compulsive gambling, and other issues. Fortunately, this is an issue we can effectively address with technology and regulation, rather than with a “feel good” porous prohibition. America is far better off with effective regulation than with prohibition that relies on banks to snoop through our financial transactions and Internet service providers to snoop through our Internet usage history. Further, I concurred completely with Radley Balko of Reason Magazine (and a regular Foxnews.com contributor) that what Americans do in their own homes with their own money is their own business. As a limited-government conservative in the tradition of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, I am distressed by the amount of government intrusion in our daily lives. I think many Americans feel the same way. I imagine you will consider the validity of Mr. Balko’s points relative to our freedoms and liberties, as I know you are a man who believes in these core American values. I ask you to carefully consider the facts and to support HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007. It’s not about supporting gambling; rather, it is about supporting the right of adults to make their own decisions. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, TheEngineer ------------------------------ Dear Senator xxxxx: I am writing in regard to this morning’s House Financial Services Committee hearing on Internet gambling. I was very impressed with the hearing, especially with the quality of the witnesses who testified in favor of regulated Internet gambling. I felt the expert testimony of Michael Colopy of Aristotle Inc, Jon Prideaux of Asterion Payments, and Gerald Kitchen of SecureTrading Ltd. proved that Internet gambling can be regulated effectively (and has been successfully regulated in Britain). This pleased me, as I do share your concerns for underage gambling, compulsive gambling, and other issues. Fortunately, this is an issue we can effectively address with technology and regulation, rather than with a “feel good” porous prohibition. America is far better off with effective regulation than with prohibition that relies on banks to snoop through our financial transactions and Internet service providers to snoop through our Internet usage history. Further, I concurred completely with Radley Balko of Reason Magazine (and a regular Foxnews.com contributor) that what Americans do in their own homes with their own money is their own business. As a limited-government conservative in the tradition of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, I am distressed by the amount of government intrusion in our daily lives. I think many Americans feel the same way. I imagine you will consider the validity of Mr. Balko’s points relative to our freedoms and liberties, as I know you are a man who believes in these core American values. I ask you to carefully consider the facts and to support HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007, when it is introduced into the Senate. It’s not about supporting gambling; rather, it is about supporting the right of adults to make their own decisions. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, TheEngineer |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 6/11 & 6/18
[ QUOTE ]
I realize this was an action from last time, but since then the FBI now claims online gambling is illegal in the U.S., at http://www.fbi.gov/page2/june07/gambling060607.htm , so we really should speak up for ourselves, IMHO. [ QUOTE ] If you’ve ever thought about visiting a cyber casino, here’s something you should know: it’s illegal to gamble online in the United States. “You can go to Vegas. You can go to Atlantic City. You can go to a racetrack. You can go to those places and gamble legally. But don’t do it online. It’s against the law,” says Leslie Bryant, head of our Cyber Crime Fraud unit at FBI Headquarters. [/ QUOTE ] <font color="brown"> [/ QUOTE ] You can't believe how much this puts me on tilt. I wish I had the funds to afford the legal hassles. If I was a high stakes guy with a fat bankroll I'd be trying to get myself arrested right now. Thanks again for everything, Engineer. You're doing a great job of keeping us all informed, motivated and mobilized. |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 6/11 & 6/18
hey all, posted this under the x-post in medium stakes, but realized probably more interest here:
article from today's ny times that sounds a little hopeful http://www.nytimes.com/cnet/CNET_2100-10...70&emc=eta1 |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 6/11 & 6/18
Great article!
|
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 6/11 & 6/18
Hey, re the regulation writing process I suggest everyone contact their banks. They will actually have much more of a voice at the table than anyone else we could hope to influence. I'll have to look it up but there will also be a banking trade association representing the individual banks during the reg. process. I would suggest that people's letters not be in the tone of "I play online poker and it's none of your business or the gov'ts either. Instead, the letters should argue against burdensome government regulations that will further restrain commerce and the free flow of liquidity. We should argue that we do not want banks restricting the use of lawfully possessed funds, the account-holder is entitled to the use of their money, and if they do something illegal with them it is up to the gov't to arrest them. However, to restrict the use of their funds without prosecting any underlying criminal act is unheard of, and sets a chilling and dangerous precedence for further financial restrictions in the future.
I don't know what kind of press coordination is going on generally, but if we need mass pushes for something like this we will need the different places poker players get information to coordinate. Generally, the gaming sites, web sites and forums, pro blogs, magazines, and ideally the tournaments (Ha!), should set up a coordinated contact system so that if something happens that needs player action there will be alot of place where they hear about it, and hopefully just have to hit through a pop-up to contact whoever. I admit trying to work on these kind of things at the end of the last electoral cycle was what made decide poker players were kind of hopeless as activists, but am dipping toe back in water now. Engineer definitely seems like superstar, made me feel guilty I'm not doing anything when I actually know these people. |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 6/11 & 6/18
June 13, 2007
The Honorable Spencer Bachus 2246 Rayburn Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Bachus: I’m writing in response to last Friday’s House Financial Services Committee hearing on Internet gambling (June 8, 2007: Can Internet Gambling Be Effectively Regulated to Protect Consumers and the Payments System?). I was very impressed with quality of the hearing, especially with the witnesses who testified in favor of regulated Internet gambling. I felt the expert testimony of Michael Colopy of Aristotle Inc, Jon Prideaux of Asterion Payments, and Gerald Kitchen of SecureTrading Ltd. proved that Internet gambling can be regulated effectively (and has been successfully regulated in Britain). This pleased me, as I do share your concerns for underage gambling, compulsive gambling, and other issues. Fortunately, this is an issue we can effectively address with technology and regulation, rather than with a “feel good” unconstitutional prohibition. America is far better off with effective regulation than with a prohibition that relies on banks to snoop through our financial transactions and Internet service providers to snoop through our Internet usage history. Further, I concurred completely with Radley Balko of Reason Magazine (and a regular Foxnews.com contributor) in that what Americans do in their own homes with their own money is their own business. As a limited-government conservative in the tradition of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, I am distressed by the amount of government intrusion in our daily lives. I think many Americans feel the same way. In fact, it pains me to see our party acting as the agent of big government. I imagine you will consider the validity of Mr. Balko’s points relative to our freedoms and liberties, as I know you are a man who believes in these core American values regardless of your personal opinions concerning Internet poker. Speaking of Mr. Balko, I was perplexed by your question to him concerning Ross Boatman and his biography on the FullTilt Poker web site. You seemed very concerned that, as a youth, Mr. Boatman played poker with his brother at the kitchen table, likely for pennies, baseball cards, or valueless chips used simply to keep score. Certainly you were not suggesting passing federal legislation to prevent brothers from playing poker at the kitchen table, were you? I certainly hope not, but one never knows, given recent Congressional history. Were you suggesting that Mr. Boatman was playing on the Internet with his brother when he was twelve? Certainly you understand no site ever permitted more than one player from the same IP address to play the same game, due to collusion. I assume you do, as you claim expertise in this area. Also, as Mr. Boatman is in his 40s, he would have been twelve back in the pre-Internet 1970s. Anyway, regardless of the point you were trying to make, fortunately for Mr. Boatman this was prior to the current era of big government Republicanism. As such, he was able to play poker for pennies at his kitchen table with his brother without federal intrusion. As for the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, you noted that it does not make any gambling illegal that was not already illegal. Rather, it provides legal mechanisms for enforcement of existing state and federal gambling laws. Well, Internet poker is not illegal under existing federal law. As for state laws, very few states have outlawed Internet poker. Conversely, the vast majority of states permit online “games of skill” (such as the money skill games on yahoo.com and other sites that are not affected by UIGEA), and I think we can agree that professional players like Doyle Brunson are certainly skilled. It seems that if states wished to ban Internet poker, it seems they would have done so in an unambiguous fashion … especially if they wished to have the federal government enforce it. HR 2046 provides real regulation, rather than a porous prohibition. A regulated Internet gambling environment will facilitate age verification and collection of federal and state taxes. It will also reduce any potential vulnerability of gambling websites to being used for money laundering, drug trafficking, or terrorist financing. With regulation, potential problems can be controlled without taking freedoms from Americans. After all, Russians and Eastern Europeans can gamble online; it seems the U.S. should trust its citizens at least as much as Russia trusts theirs, right? Proponents of online gambling prohibition often mention endorsements UIGEA received from some in the religious community, some family groups, some financial services groups and some professional sports organizations. I hope you’ll consider the fact that these groups do not necessarily represent the majority of voters in our nation (or even the majority of Alabama Republicans). As for religious and family groups, there is no prohibition against gambling in the Bible, as was noted at the hearing. As a Christian, I personally find it offensive that some in the religious community are willing to give away our freedoms in pursuit of a goal not even defined in the Bible. As for financial services groups, some credit card issuers may like UIGEA (due only to the risk of losing players refusing to pay up), but I do not believe banks wish to be the enforcers of UIGEA. As a result, I think you’ll find financial services groups to be net losers as a result of UIGEA. Finally, I believe the concerns of the major professional sports organizations you mentioned relate only to sports betting. As HR 2046 permits them to opt out, this concern has been addressed. In closing, I urge you to reconsider your strong opposition to allowing Americans to make their own decisions concerning playing poker in their own homes via the Internet. Online gambling will continue to exist with or without the participation of the United States. We’re losing our opportunity to control the games via regulation as well as the opportunities for U.S. companies to operate the games both domestically and internationally. This is costing America jobs and tax revenue. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, TheEngineer Cc: My Congressman (on the Financial Services Committee) and Michael Duncan, Republican National Committee Chairman |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 6/11 & 6/18
I recently wrote my first letter to a govt official and have jut received his reply. I will post his reply and my intended reply. If anybody notices any corrections I should make i my reply before sending it would be appreciated.
Dear Mr. xxxxx: Thank you for contacting our office to express your support for H.R. 2046 the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act. I appreciate the time you took to share your views on this issue with me. As you know, language preventing the use of payment instruments, such as credit cards and fund transfers, as well as prohibiting internet gambling, was passed by both houses of Congress as part of Safe Port legislation and signed into law by the President on October 13, 2006. H.R. 2046 would provide for the licensing of Internet gambling facilities by the Director of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. The bill has been referred to the House Financial Services Committee and the Committee on Energy and Commerce where it is currently pending with no legislative consideration scheduled at this time. Please be assured that we will closely monitor the progress of this bill should it begin to move through the legislative process in the future. Again, thank you for your e-mail. Please do not hesitate to contact our office on issues of concern to you in the future or if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, John Tanner, M. C. And my planned response: Thank you for your response to my message. And yes, I am very aware and very outraged at how the UIGEA bill was passed without debate in the Senate by tacking it on to a port security bill on the final day of last years session. That action led me to vote entirely democratic ticket in the last election for the first time in my life. In the past I have always voted Republican because I expect less government interference in my day to day life. I am also aware that the UIGEA bill was in total disregard of our commitments under the World Trade Organization treaty and has potential ramifications not just with Antigua but with EU as well. I rue the day when I have to look to a Democrat for less interference in my private life, but at least his bill will be a first step toward correcting our situation in regards to the WTO. I am also aware that as a semi-professional chess player the UIGEA could be interpreted against online chess tournaments in which I have participated in the past. This is another reason I ask you to support Wexler's bill H.R. 2610. By the way you do realize UIGEA did NOT make internet gambling illegal. After all it specifically allows horse race bets and lotteries as well as fantasy sports league gambling. We need H.R. 2046 and H.R. 2610 as the first steps toward correcting the poorly worded and thought out UIGEA bill. These issues need to be defined, regulated and taxed, not prohibited or left in limbo. |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 6/11 & 6/18
Focus on the Family's new action item is to contact members of the House Judiciary Committee. Seems we should do the same for our next action item. Anyone have an opinion for or against?
[ QUOTE ] FOF: Be sure to contact House Judiciary Committee members (202-225-3951) from your state and urge their opposition to Barney Frank's bill (HR 2046). [/ QUOTE ] |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 6/11 & 6/18
Sounds good. Thanks for taking the time to write and to share your letter. That encourages others here to fight back, too.
|
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 6/11 & 6/18
Some people might find the free tools here useful.
|
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 6/11 & 6/18
[ QUOTE ]
June 13, 2007 The Honorable Spencer Bachus 2246 Rayburn Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Bachus: I’m writing in response to last Friday’s ... Sincerely, TheEngineer Cc: My Congressman (on the Financial Services Committee) and Michael Duncan, Republican National Committee Chairman [/ QUOTE ] I found the carbon copy line was a good way to send out a lot of letters while having to write only one, so I share that with you all. With many letters I can simply change the recipient's name and reuse it. Others, like this one, work better by carbon copying. I sent this letter to Bush, Gonzales, my rep, both senators, the RNC chair, the House Judiciary Committee, the House Financial Services Committee, and to Paulson at the Treasury Dept. I thought that's a bit of mileage from one letter. Here's some contact info: Bush: comments@whitehouse.gov Gonzales: AskDOJ@usdoj.gov Paulson: 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW; Washington, D.C. 20220 Rep: www.house.gov Senators: www.senate.gov RNC chair: Chairman@gop.com DNC: http://www.democrats.org/page/s/contactissues House Judiciary Committee: http://judiciary.house.gov/contact.aspx House Financial Services Committee: 2129 Rayburn House Office Building; Washington, DC 20515 |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 6/11 & 6/18
A post I've made to a few conservative blogs:
CINOs want bigger government, as usual TheEngineer June 16, 2007 The neo-pub CINOs spend like Democrats; they just don't wish to tax for what they spent. Somehow, this is supposed to be fiscally conservative. I hope we real conservatives retake the party someday. There are fissures in our party. Many Republicans, especially younger voters, are rebelling from the takeover of our party by big government, big spending social conservatives. This is no longer the party of Reagan, which celebrated limited government and optimism for America. Our party abandoned its roots, so its members are abandoning our party. It seems we conservatives have been too busy drinking our own bathwater (reading only conservative pubs, listening primarily to conservative radio, etc.) to see what's going on with our party. We were elected on the promise of LIMITED GOVERNMENT, especially at the federal level. Instead of that, we decided to spend and spend and spend some more. Then, we decided big government was fine, so long as it promoted a socially conservative agenda (one that Goldwater would not have even recognized, by the way). We don't like online poker? Rather than simply choosing to not play, we instead passed federal legislation mandating banks to comb through our financial transactions and mandating our ISPs nose in on our Internet sites (and also mandating that ISPs block access to certain sites, as is done by China and Iran). After all, we can't trust Americans to make wise choices, right? We don't like Democrat corruption? Fine, we have lots of hearings (as we should). Republican corruption? We'd better hide that and criticize reporters who mention it, then act surprised when we lose elections (and blame the liberals for our own transgressions). You want to see how bad Congressional Republicans are now with respect to limited government? The House Financial Services Committee had a hearing on June 8 to discuss the feasibility of effective regulation of Internet gaming. Hearing documents are on the committee website, at http://www.house.gov/apps/list/heari...ht060807.shtml ; the hearing webcast is at http://financialserv.edgeboss.net/wm...ring060807.wvx . However, despite the fact that the hearing clearly showed that Internet gambling can be effectively regulated (in fact, those favoring a ban on Internet gaming were embarrassed), Congressional Republicans like Spencer Bachus have decided that American adults cannot be trusted with the freedom to decide to play. Sad. Perhaps the social conservatives and liberals who believe big government is wonderful should form a new pro-government party. They can jointly spend like drunken sailors on programs like No Child Left Behind and the prescription drug program. The limited government (i.e., true) conservatives and pro-business real Americans can then take back the Republican Party. We’ll give rights back to Americans while enforcing our immigration laws (we're doing the reverse now). We’ll be pro-life, as our commitment is to respect the value of all individuals, and we’ll continue to keep government out of the lives of individuals. The funny thing is that this approach will result in improved morality and values. You see, our morals don’t come from Washington. It's time for real Republicans to take the party back. Limited government is just that. There's nothing conservative about big government, regardless of how much one loves the laws it passes. Everyone: Vote for freedom. Tell your Republican congressmen that they don't have to legislate everything they personally oppose. So-called big government conservatism isn't conservative. It's statist, and giving power to the state is a loser for freedom. Perhaps, some day, we'll have a government that leaves some decisions up to the individual. |
Re: Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for week of 6/18
Well, we're gaining some momentum! Robert Wexler introduced his "skills game" poker bill. Also, IGREA is gaining some steam. We demolished our opponents in the hearing, so there's some real progress. Also, HR 2140, Rep. Shelley Berkley's [D-NV] Internet gambling study bill, is progressing with 60 cosponsors. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has indicated his support for the study bill. Finally, the UIGEA regulations are due on 7/10. Our opponents are concerned that the regs won't be "tough enough", so we have an opportunity there.
It seems there's a lot we can be doing right now. And, we really need to do it RIGHT NOW. So, based on our group discussions, let's do the following: <font color="brown"> 1. Please contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail and ask them to support and cosponsor H.R. 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act. His approach is more consistent with existing state law. Many states ban or regulate games of "chance" but not games of "skill". In fact, one can play various "skill games" on MSN, AOL, and Yahoo for money in 36 states with no legal issues whatsoever. While many of us (me included) prefer full legalization of all online gaming simply on general principle, to be fair Wexler is sticking to existing precedent. It doesn't hurt other gaming, as it doesn't legitimize UIGEA or create additional laws. Rather, it defined poker as not being governed by UIGEA or by the Wire Act. If you're not a poker AP....it's time to learn if this bill passes, because websites will be MINTING CASH for anyone with half a brain!! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] 2. Please contact your congressman and senators by phone and by mail to praise the outcome of the 6/8 IGREA hearing (www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml; webcast archived at http://financialserv.edgeboss.net/wm...ring060807.wvx ) and to encourage them to support the legislation. 3. Write to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Treasury Secretary Paulson. Ask them not to exceed the specific mandates of UIGEA when drafting legislation. Remind them that online poker is not illegal under any federal law. Focus on the Family is asking their members to write to Paulson and Bush to request tough regulations. See http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gamb...A000004244.cfm, a Focus site. They say, "Representative Barney Frank, however, introduced dangerous legislation that would legalize Internet gambling and promote its expansion. The fight is on and we need your help to defend the family!" I think we all agree...the fight in on!!! We should counterbalance FOF's effort. Whatever they do, we should do (unless it's stupid, of course). Also, Sen. Kyl asked Gonzales for tough regulations during the AG Senate hearings. We should counterbalance this as well. I realize this was an action from last time, but since then the FBI now claims online gambling is illegal in the U.S., at http://www.fbi.gov/page2/june07/gambling060607.htm, so we really should speak up for ourselves, IMHO. 4. Now that we have bills out there, we should try to work on our public image. Let's write to newspapers, magazines, post to blogs, etc. with positives of online poker/gaming. Since we proved our position in the 6/8 House hearing, let's post that link wherever we can. I have. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I found one place that link isn't.....it's not on Spencer Bachus' web site!! </font> Thanks everyone! |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:17 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.