November 14th: House Judiciary Committee Hearing Thread

[TheEngineer]

Witness List

Panel I:

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] The Honorable Shelley Berkley
U.S. House of Representatives Nevada, 1st District
[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] The Honorable Bob Goodlatte
U.S. House of Representatives Virginia 6th District

Panel II:

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] The Honorable Catherine Hanaway
United States Attorney
Eastern District of Missouri
U.S. Department of Justice
[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Joseph Weiler
New York University
School of Law
[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Tom McClusky
Vice President of Government Affairs
Family Research Council
[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Valerie Abend
Deputy Assistant Secretary
Critical Infrastructure Protection and Compliance Policy
U.S. Department of the Treasury
[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Annie Duke
Los Angeles, CA
[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Michael Colopy
Aristotle

[oldbookguy]

Very good, they have added it!

At least if C-span is covering other things we can watch.

obg

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]

At this time is is not a Web Cast and I see no listing on C-span, though that may change Monday.

We should, I already have, used the contact link asking the committee to Web Cast it and added a comment as well.

Contact:
http://judiciary.house.gov/Contact.aspx

The great thing here is you do not have to have a rep to contact them, this is the committee itself.

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, please try to get letters to the committee via the contact link, at http://judiciary.house.gov/Contact.aspx. Goodlatte's on that committee, so we can be sure it won't be the cakewalk the last one was. That's okay -- it means we're being taken seriously now.

Please write and post your letter here or on the Action Item thread. It only takes a few minutes. Anyone who doesn't do this (especially you guys who think our #1 problem...surpassing even FoF...is the PPA board makeup) will not be taken seriously here for quite a while. I know I'll disregard such posters.

Thanks. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[TheEngineer]

Additional House Judiciary Committee Contact Info:

2138 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-3951

Let's try to call once before the hearing. Thanks.

[oldbookguy]

Todays was a short, brief note that will be followed up with tomorrow in more detail and with a phone call.

Addressed to Chairman Conyers:

I am very interested in the hearing Wednesday on Internet Gambling.

I am disappointed it is not being offered via web cast.

Additionally, I support the efforts of many in Congress to un-do the absurd, unworkable UIGEA passed last fall. It is nutty for our government to even be entertaining thoughts of sacrificing American jobs via trade sanctions in an effort to satisfy the misplaced morals of a few.

More importantly, to the world, we are being seen as no better than China. I watched last week with fascination as Chairman Lantos berated YAHOO! for helping China deny citizens access to information on the Internet, now my OWN country is doing the same, denying American citizens access and freedom to enjoy an open and free Internet.

In closing, Sir, please, fix this.

obg

BTW, Glad you are back in action my friend!



[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

At this time is is not a Web Cast and I see no listing on C-span, though that may change Monday.

We should, I already have, used the contact link asking the committee to Web Cast it and added a comment as well.

Contact:
http://judiciary.house.gov/Contact.aspx

The great thing here is you do not have to have a rep to contact them, this is the committee itself.

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, please try to get letters to the committee via the contact link, at http://judiciary.house.gov/Contact.aspx. Goodlatte's on that committee, so we can be sure it won't be the cakewalk the last one was. That's okay -- it means we're being taken seriously now.

Please write and post your letter here or on the Action Item thread. It only takes a few minutes. Anyone who doesn't do this (especially you guys who think our #1 problem...surpassing even FoF...is the PPA board makeup) will not be taken seriously here for quite a while. I know I'll disregard such posters.

Thanks. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Todays was a short, brief note that will be followed up with tomorrow in more detail and with a phone call.

Addressed to Chairman Conyers:

I am very interested in the hearing Wednesday on Internet Gambling.

I am disappointed it is not being offered via web cast.

Additionally, I support the efforts of many in Congress to un-do the absurd, unworkable UIGEA passed last fall. It is nutty for our government to even be entertaining thoughts of sacrificing American jobs via trade sanctions in an effort to satisfy the misplaced morals of a few.

More importantly, to the world, we are being seen as no better than China. I watched last week with fascination as Chairman Lantos berated YAHOO! for helping China deny citizens access to information on the Internet, now my OWN country is doing the same, denying American citizens access and freedom to enjoy an open and free Internet.

In closing, Sir, please, fix this.

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice letter.

By the way, I hope it was obvious that my original post was addressed to everyone. Too bad this site doesn't have an option to reply to "all" or "everyone". I'd mention it to Mason, but I don't think he's interested in my opinion at the present time. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
BTW, Glad you are back in action my friend!

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]

Nice letter.

By the way, I hope it was obvious that my original post was addressed to everyone. Too bad this site doesn't have an option to reply to "all" or "everyone". I'd mention it to Mason, but I don't think he's interested in my opinion at the present time. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]



[/ QUOTE ]

Is a nice letter.

That might just be the problem. When you reply to anyone in an open forum you are replying to all.

Either this was an unnessecary jab or you do not understand the medium you are using to communicate.


D$D

[Hock_]

Here's my letter, cribbed from the letter above:

I am very interested in the hearing Wednesday on Internet Gambling.

I support the efforts of many in Congress to un-do the unworkable, immoral UIGEA passed last fall. I find it offensive that the government would try to regulate voluntary activities Americans take in the privacy of their own homes, in particular an activity engaged in by so many law-abiding citizens, and which presents no real potential of harm to others.

Even aside from the flawed policy underlying the UIGEA, the manner in which the legislation attempts to end some forms of on-line gaming (some types are specifically excluded) is misguided. History is bound to repeat itself, and much like prohibition, the number of Americans who participate in on-line gaming suggests that it is here to stay. Rather than driving the activity "underground", as the poorly drafted and ambiguous UIGEA is bound to do, the only sensible approach is to regulate and tax.

Finally, it is absurd for the federal government even to be entertaining the possibility of sacrificing American jobs via trade sanctions (because of the repeated rulings of the WTO on this specific issue) in an effort to satisfy the misplaced morals of a few.

I hope that the clear error of the last Congress will be reversed before additional harm is done.

[KEW]

OBG,

Nice letter I hope you do not mind I sent a copy to "Dutch" my MD Rep.

[JPFisher55]

I emailed the House Judiciary Committee to urge them to examine the proper way of compliance with the WTO decision and to draft legislation complying with the decision before the entire WTO process and global trading system unravels over this dispute over online gambling. I hope that they listen because the Bush Administration will not listen.