PPA Update.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
When will we know if its just fluff or serious?

[/ QUOTE ]

Personally I would think by the first week of November, you should have a good feel for the new direction being taken.

The move to D.C. that was just anounced does mean some more lost time, as even office space is an issue. I imagine John will also be adding some new people, as many of the people in S.F. are not going to move. John has taken and has some very concrete ideas of how to accomplish the changes he envisions.

I say November because to have any real impact for future sessions of Congress, the PPA is going to have to show it can exercise it's grassroots muscle, and be effective. The KY Gov.'s race, IMO, will be the key. We do not have to make gambling a major issue, it already is the signature issue. A very visible effort in KY, sets the PPA up to be a factor for the whole next election cycle. It is a good place to work out the kinks of any new grassroots organizational and communication plans. Test out various uses of existing ideas and experiement with new ones.

Given that "our" candidate is ahead in the polls, and the issue ripe for us, it seems like a no brainer.

I would say if you don't see a major effort in KY then we are looking at a much longer fight than most of us would like to see.

D$D

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
When will we know if its just fluff or serious?

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess you have me on ignore, but I'll reply for the benefit of the other folks reading.

I've spoken with John Pappas three times. I believe he means what he says in the article.

When will we know? I'd say in three weeks or so.

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]
When will we know if its just fluff or serious?

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe he is completely serious. I recently spoke with John for nearly an hour. I have a much better feel for what they have in mind.

And so much for them not communicating. I don't want to hear anymore of that nonsense. [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

What you see in this interview is what they have in mind.

Working at the federal level is tough. You have to plan your actions carefully, and there are a million cross currents running at once.

My $20 is on it's way.

Tuff

[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When will we know if its just fluff or serious?

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess you have me on ignore, but I'll reply for the benefit of the other folks reading.

I've spoken with John Pappas three times. I believe he means what he says in the article.

When will we know? I'd say in three weeks or so.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um I put from on ignore.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When will we know if its just fluff or serious?

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess you have me on ignore, but I'll reply for the benefit of the other folks reading.

I've spoken with John Pappas three times. I believe he means what he says in the article.

When will we know? I'd say in three weeks or so.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um I put from on ignore.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, okay. You accidently addressed the ignore note to me, in response to my post earlier this morning. As it wasn't a "quick reply" (my post wasn't the last one), I wasn't sure what to think. I thought it seemed odd.

Cheers.

[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When will we know if its just fluff or serious?

[/ QUOTE ]

Personally I would think by the first week of November, you should have a good feel for the new direction being taken.

The move to D.C. that was just anounced does mean some more lost time, as even office space is an issue. I imagine John will also be adding some new people, as many of the people in S.F. are not going to move. John has taken and has some very concrete ideas of how to accomplish the changes he envisions.

I say November because to have any real impact for future sessions of Congress, the PPA is going to have to show it can exercise it's grassroots muscle, and be effective. The KY Gov.'s race, IMO, will be the key. We do not have to make gambling a major issue, it already is the signature issue. A very visible effort in KY, sets the PPA up to be a factor for the whole next election cycle. It is a good place to work out the kinks of any new grassroots organizational and communication plans. Test out various uses of existing ideas and experiement with new ones.

Given that "our" candidate is ahead in the polls, and the issue ripe for us, it seems like a no brainer.

I would say if you don't see a major effort in KY then we are looking at a much longer fight than most of us would like to see.

D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

If they did $1million worth of advertizing, organizing, and calling, then followed it up with a phone call, letter write, media reach-out, we would have 10k people and $2million back in two weeks. The untapped energy and outrage is there. We don't een have to all vote the same way. If we are only 2-3% of the electorate, the waves of that with friends/family (I assume you guys lobby your friends/family to call/write as well) will quickly signal to politicians to get this resolved and out of the way. I don't think the Republicans/FoF can replicate the gay marriage 04 miracle. A lot of secular homophobes went to the polls then and voted against the Dems over that. Gambling just isn't that electric an issue with "crossover appeal".

Kentucky- I think, as well as most people, that the Reps are a lost cause with the current candidate. Gambling is a last-ditch gamble. The problem might be getting credit for the victory. Maybe it translates into candidates not being afraid to be pro-gaming. I HAD hoped the Nevada primary would give us an indication, but its being diluted every day by moved up primaries. We need to sell the jobs issue(UNION jobs, as much as I LOATHE unions) to the Dems, and the education money to the Teacher's union, and that we can deliver a McConnel's head on a platter. That will be tough as states don't oust powerful Senators often, but I think we can swing 2% to Party's candidate if we get poker back. I just hope he is burning up the phones to someone at the DNC, saying you want white male voters 18-35?

Kentucky may also be important to us for morale. When I talk to more casual people on IMs they say they wrote and did all the could, and nothing to show for it. Most people think its doomed. We need inertia, badly. Maybe if Kaplan gets off. Gonzales left, but thats not rallying the troops.


Tuff- Nonsense about not communicating? Hello, McFly, your
reputation is around your untied shoelaces. The onus is squarely on the PPA. I want a damn email every day, an update every week, and I want to see his ass on TV and in the paper. I want a full page ad in USAToday for membership. I want to hear him on Savage Nation or Rush. I want FoF to demonize him as a corrupter of youth. I want to be asked to participate in massive action. Im happy things are moving, but it doesn't take much or many people. This is an issue that can be handled, lobbied for, and done with, fast. Oh, and uhm, while he is at it, get Mason's endorsement. Until I hear from them as a rank and file guy and that endorsement comes, the PPA is still an opaque, uncommunicative pipedream.

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]

.
.

Tuff-

...........I want .........I want ...........I want .........I want .......... I want ............I want .
.
.


[/ QUOTE ]

I am not sure how many people care what you want.

[img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

Tuff

[MiltonFriedman]

While I wish the pro-gambling guy in KY luck, I cannot sse that as the KEY area where poker players or their purported representatives should be active .... If the gambling guy loses, then so what ? It is not like we are the AGA or a Ky racetrack interest. If the gambling guy wins, poker would not get the credit anyway.

I am glad that PPA has new offices in DC, now they are "Inside The Beltway". So, how come they ignore the peending regulations ?

Online Poker was hit with legislation last year. The opportunity to lessen the impact OR exempt poker from pending legislation remains teh single MOST immediate area for action.

Christ Almighty, we just had a lawsuit rule that "contests" are not gambling precisely because neither the sponsor or players are betting or wagering.

There is a HUGE loophole in the UIGEA where a company that is not betting or wagering is NOT covered. Is there ANY effort to sway the pending regs to exempt poker tournaments, as the sponsor is not betting or wagering, just paying a prize and collecting a fee. (I personally would argue that NO poker site is betting or wagering.)

No, we are supposed to get frothed up about the PPA because a new guy, who is ALSO an old guy, has shifted his position within the organization. Pappas moved from being a paid consultant to Executive Director. So what ? The Emperor has no new clothes .... was he responsible or influential under the "old" PPA ?

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]

.
.
Christ Almighty, we just had a lawsuit rule that "contests" are not gambling precisely because neither the sponsor or players are betting or wagering.

There is a HUGE loophole in the UIGEA where a company that is not betting or wagering is NOT covered. Is there ANY effort to sway the pending regs to exempt poker tournaments, as the sponsor is not betting or wagering, just paying a prize and collecting a fee. (I personally would argue that NO poker site is betting or wagering.)
.
.


[/ QUOTE ]

OK Milton, I have a plan for you.

Get a poker software company to spot you some software. Get some servers, set up a poker site in a form you think has the best chance of passing muster with the courts, and go for it.

I will be the first to sign up. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Tuff

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
While I wish the pro-gambling guy in KY luck, I cannot sse that as the KEY area where poker players or their purported representatives should be active .... If the gambling guy loses, then so what ? It is not like we are the AGA or a Ky racetrack interest. If the gambling guy wins, poker would not get the credit anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's key because it sets the tone for '08. If gaming wins in a red state, it significantly weakens the FoF folks, as it exposes the fact that they can't deliver the votes they claim they can. And, as we're in the lead, it's a great dry run for us, like a tune-up fight.

And, we do have a dog in this hunt. You can bet the NRA would be involved if one candidate for governor wanted to ban guns and the other wanted to allow them. It's our issue. And, if Beshear wins, we may get poker in Kentucky (if we get gaming, we get poker). If he loses, we won't for the next four years. How's that not the concern of the PPA?

The bottom line is that I asked our community for opinions, and we decided 58-0 to support it. See 2007 Kentucky Governor’s Race – Awesome opportunity for us!!!. Once the votes were in, I asked PPA to take this on, as requested by us. It appears they will enter this race, per our request. I think that's a good thing...they listened to us.

[ QUOTE ]
Is there ANY effort to sway the pending regs to exempt poker tournaments, as the sponsor is not betting or wagering, just paying a prize and collecting a fee. (I personally would argue that NO poker site is betting or wagering.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. There's a big thread on it.

[ QUOTE ]
No, we are supposed to get frothed up about the PPA because a new guy, who is ALSO an old guy, has shifted his position within the organization. Pappas moved from being a paid consultant to Executive Director. So what ? The Emperor has no new clothes .... was he responsible or influential under the "old" PPA ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Pappas' old job was to lobby Congress. He was successful in that. The failures were elsewhere. As for Pappas, I don't think we're supposed to get "frothed up". I think we can be a bit encouraged by the progress, but we should look for results, just as always.

I did exchange a few emails with him yesterday....he's a HUGE improvement over Bolcerek. Let's just see how think look by the end of the month. Then we'll have a much clearer picture.