[Awesemo]

Just watched the video. What I thought was interesting was that the most compelling points were not about the moral implications of legalized gambling; however, that is where there was the most controversy.

The most powerful point in my opinion was the international commitment that USA is currently planning to renege. There isn't that much at stake for our country: it doesn't matter that much whether it would be legalized or not. The rejection of USA's moral argument by the WTO seems completely justified.

Most people at the hearing were speaking for their own interests and I felt there wasn't any middle ground, except the professor. There were obvious points in the hearing where this was exposed: for example, when the anti gambling proponent rejected even a study being conducted. The hearing also exposed that the UIGEA wasn't at the heart of the issue.

I would like to see more emphasis by the PPA on the international part of this issue, even though it isn't the most representative point for its interests.