Throw the "Hail Mary" - Poker Carve-Out in the Lame Duck Session (PPA)

[PPA President]

Bluff,
This is exactly what we are focused upon now. There is no other option other than giving up, and the PPA is not leaving the fight. We always have pressed for a Poker carve out, while opposing the bill at large.

Here is a letter that we are sending to members of the PPA

Dear Members,

As you may already know, the U.S. Congress approved an online poker prohibition late Friday evening. The ban was snuck into the Port Security Act during a back room deal and following extensive political strong-arming by the Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) and the Speaker of the House, J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL). This tactic discouraged debate on the bill and allowed it to pass without any public discussion. Why a poker ban was included in the Port Security Act is beyond me and most poker players and should be of concern to every American. It was a “bad beat” but we are still at the table.

This is no time to panic, but rather we must learn and build from this loss. The Poker Players Alliance is not leaving the fight, although now it is going to take an even greater effort from poker players and our organization to achieve our objectives.

What do we want to do now?

Poker Exemption

We continue to demand that poker receive separate treatment from other forms of gaming. It is a game of skill, where performance is merited, and a community game, where the house is not your competition. These are real and significant differences. Our desire is to achieve the same type of exemption from legislation that other interests have received (Horseracing, Lotteries, and Fantasy Sports). We will continue to push forward to obtain this separate treatment when Congress comes back from the elections and into the next legislative session. Between now and when the new bill becomes effective (3 to 9 months) poker has an opportunity to achieve the same exemption. This is our most immediate short-term goal.

License, Regulate and Tax

Regulation is the best public policy solution for both the federal government and the American poker player. Prohibition of on-line poker will only drive the game underground and build distrust and misunderstanding amongst the 70 million Americans who enjoy the great game of poker. I spent the better part of the year engaging members of the House and Senate about the idea of regulating Internet poker. This has raised interest from both Democrats and Republican’s alike. There has even been legislation introduced that seeks to establish a Congressional commission that would examine the best way to regulate this industry. Early this summer the PPA commissioned an economic analysis of the potential tax revenue that could be raised through regulation. Members of Congress have been receptive to this study and the $3.3 Billion that could be raised annually for the federal government. This is our ultimate goal and the PPA will drive this agenda.

What should you do know? First, every member of the PPA should be registered to vote in the upcoming state and federal elections. If you are not yet registered there is still time, click here to find out about how to register in your state. https://ssl.capwiz.com/congressorg/e4/nvra/
Second, be sure to vote on Election Day, Tuesday, Nov. 7th. We must put our vote where our voice is and establish a poker voting block. While the Port Security Act which included the prohibition legislation was passed near unanimously in both the House and the Senate, the House did have a clean vote on the poker prohibition in July. A list of how House members voted in July is available on our Web site.. Finally, the PPA needs your help to spread the word about our organization. Please tell at least nine friends who might not know about the Poker Players Alliance to join the fight. We need to be 1 Million strong going into 2007.

Very soon a brief analysis of the Internet Gambling Prohibition Amendment will be posted on our website. Please return to www.pokerplayersalliance.org soon so you can learn how this legislation will affect you.

Again, I want to thank you for your support, and hope that you will continue that support as the Poker Players Alliance enters the next level of commitment. This is not over.

Regards,
Michael Bolcerek
President
Poker Players Alliance

[MasterLJ]

[ QUOTE ]
Damn someone should've done a filibuster.

[/ QUOTE ]

You need to have the majority to have a chance at doing this.

[Burno]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Damn someone should've done a filibuster.

[/ QUOTE ]

You need to have the majority to have a chance at doing this.

[/ QUOTE ]

No you don't, unless they are going to go nuclear on you. Frist loves to threaten it, but it hasn't been done in 20 years.

All beside the point anyways, as this bill was a "must-pass" and a filibuster stood little chance in our position's current state.


I'm sort of breaking Bluffthis's request here, but for the life of me I can't figure out why Party, Stars, or the PPA didn't buy themselves a congressman or two. OR WHY THEY DON'T NOW.

It's not like most aren't clearly for sale.


Maybe Bush will go chill back in Crawford for a week and a half and forget all about it.

[spidey74]

Any idea how we can find out who was behind the successful the horse-racing carve-out?? We need to find those lobbyist and get them to work for poker as well. Whatever route they took, it worked!! What does horse-racing have that poker doesn't?

Spidey74

[Gabe DV]

[ QUOTE ]
Any idea how we can find out who was behind the successful the horse-racing carve-out?? We need to find those lobbyist and get them to work for poker as well. Whatever route they took, it worked!! What does horse-racing have that poker doesn't?


$$$$ sir, and lots of it.

[BluffTHIS!]

PPA Prez,

Hi,

I am glad to see you agree this is the best way to go right now. This seems the best way to get what we want. However, you might also review my other thread, PPA- Take the Battle to the States, which encourages you to also fight a longer term state by state battle, but with targeting only a few states first.

Regarding the carve-out way, I would like to know if you agree with my OP here and followup posts, regarding casting aside our alliances with sports betting and casino interests? I would imagine you do and that you agree with the sentiments above of mine that we just can't carry their weight and allow them to sink us.

However, I think you and most of us realize the chances of a carve-out in this particular lame duck session are very small. In fact one of our insiders said that to me in a PM in response to a question I put to him by PM. Nonetheless, that tactical strategy is valid, can be tried infinite times, and is the one used to bring about this law we are fighting. So even if we don't succeed in the lame duck session, I hope you will just keep your lobbyists looking for opportunities to get it attached in the next and subsequent sessions.

However, the "it", i.e. the carve-out language, has to be written and ready to go. There I would encourage you to use this forum, and the lawyers and other knowledgeable individuals we have here to craft such language as soon as possible so that it is sitting on the shelf ready to be used at a moment's notice.

Finally, my atttitude toward you and your organization has always been generally supportive, but with reservations. I would also like to take this opportunity to urge you and the PPA to meet the reservations of others, including the toughest ones posed by Mason, and take all measures that are practical and don't reveal confidential contacts and strategies, to be more open and transparent, especially about expendiures, and to be more informative as well, by seeking qualified volunteers to update your website and us here more often with news of what you are doing.

Thanks for your efforts and keep up the good work to make our historic American game of poker legal in B&M venues and online from sea to shining sea.


P.S. There is a catch here. And that is that if the legal analysis of TruePoker CEO is correct, and the definition of accepting a bet or wager doesn't apply to poker sites because congress poorly worded the legislation, then some consideration has to be given to just not rocking the boat. I am going to talk about that interpretation at greater length in another thread.

[TruePoker CEO]

Mike, you write: "Why a poker ban was included in the Port Security Act is beyond me"

That development was the subject of a lot of discussion in THIS forum before it happened. That it happened should NEVER have been a surprise to you. Who the Hell is advising you on lobbying matters, Nrog ? In the future PLEASE, "Listen to Mr. K., he knows of that of which he speaks".

Secondly, please do NOT attempt ANYTHING in the Lame Duck Session. Why even THINK of subjecting the industry to further attacks by the current Senate Leadership ?

Rather, get on the stick and SPEND SOME MONEY on issue ads in key races and motivating these hundreds of thousands of memebers you have, presumably from Party, which just left the building.

Do you have a membership list for lobbying or not ? If so, use it for this election cycle.

[highland]

[ QUOTE ]

What should you do know? First, every member of the PPA should be registered to vote in the upcoming state and federal elections.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does the PPA, or anyone else, supply information about the candidates views on online gaming and poker in particular? I've contacted several congresspeople and 1 candidate via email. Only 1 of them admitted their position, and it was for hr4477. Most describe the bill to me and say they will keep my view in mind (without even parroting what my view is). I'm sure I could get 15 or 20 people to get out and vote for someone who was pro regulation of poker, but I don't know who in my district is, if anyone.

cheers,
-highland

[Jay Cohen]

Wow, every man for himself is in part how they got this bill through. You mock the exemptions for bingo, lotteries, and horse racing but now you want to throw the others affected to the wind for your own exemption.

Back in 1997 the billl actually went after horses as well and the NTRA was lobbying against it. Once they got their exemption they were all for it.

There are those who can argue that handicapping and picking winners in sports is a skill game, it's certainly more of a skill than picking lottery numbers.

On the other side of the industry there are some that argue that poker was not only the target of this but the driving force behind them wanting to stop it. The poker companies really pushed this industry, online gambling, into the mainstream. True or not, stories of college kids obsessed with the game spread through the media.

What they did with this bill was wrong. Getting a poker exemption while selling sports and casino players down the river won't make it any better. It's too bad that all gaming interests couldn't stick together all along. Maybe we wouldn't be in this position today.

Of course if all of the people posting about this these days had picked up the phone when it mattered we may not be here either. Not to mention all of the operations who had their heads in the sand.

[scarr]

I think Horse Racing was exempted because it is currently taxed by the states. There is a revenue stream coming from Horse Racing, there is no revenue for the government from Online Gambling.

I don't know how the card rooms in CA are taxed by the state. But I know that placing a bet on a horse race in another state, will show up as tax revenue in the state hosting the race.