It's official POKER HEARING FRIDAY JUNE 08

[gimmetheloot]

lol @ bank-robbing donkey.

[oldbookguy]

[ QUOTE ]
Who is Asterion Payments? Google reveals nothing. From the name, I wonder if they want to be the new neteller.

[/ QUOTE ]

From what I can find they are a back end software solutions company that has made a mark in the medical field.

This may be them in answer as to how it can all be properly tracked for accuracy.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-53686396.html

Read the entire 1999 bio of the company and view it in relation to Franks bill requirements. This may be that group listed.

obg

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow! I am all over this. I will be following very closely and doing whatever I can to help. Hailing The Engineer! What should I do! gogogogogogogo!

PS-Thanks again to The Engineer for all the guidance.

[/ QUOTE ]


Thanks for the kind words. I posted a thread on this a few days ago (following an earlier post by Oldbookguy). Please see my thread at Letters to write THIS WEEK . OBG is right....let's get out the letters this week. Thanks.

I think the opportunity is there to ask why the federal government should enforce unclear state laws that may not apply to poker. We can also let them know that Americans do care about the issue. Also, as Party and others are negotiating with the DOJ, we should be showing support for the right to play, IMHO.

So, let's all write!!

--------------------

June 2, 2007

The Honorable Henry Paulson (same letter to Gonzales)
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.

That being said, 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. However, Internet poker is not illegal under existing federal law. As for state laws, 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 poker players like Doyle Brunson are certainly skilled. Conversely, very few states have passed legislation targeting Internet poker. Given this, the UIGEA regulations should exempt (or simply neglect to mention) Internet poker – if not nationwide, certainly for play in states that have not chosen to pass legislation specifically addressing this issue. After all, your department should not be drawn into litigation concerning interpretation of state laws. If states actually wished to ban Internet poker, they would have unambiguously done so … especially if they wanted the federal government to take the unprecedented step of enforcing it.

Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[Mendacious]

[ QUOTE ]


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is the witness list from the FSC website:.....


Pastor Greg Hogan
-- father of that tilted bank robber dude




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


r u [censored] kidding me?

what a joke.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually that sounds like a pretty short but diverse and balanced list.

[kidpokeher]

I wanna watch just to see if he says, "I'm Pastor Greg Hogan, the father of that tilted bank robber dude..."

[kidpokeher]

[ QUOTE ]
Not sure what it is up against, but CSPAN doesn't set a schedule far in advance, and Friday is still open at the website. Contact them and let them know you would like this aired.

PROGRAMMING QUESTIONS & SUGGESTIONS
Viewer Services: Questions about our schedule, how to buy videotapes, and for any other general comments about C-SPAN - viewer@c-span.org

Suggest Events: Submit a public event that you think C-SPAN should cover - Fax us at 202-737-6226

[/ QUOTE ]

Done. Wonder if I should fax as well? The link in OP also has a live webcast link.

[KotOD]

Balko is about the best possible witness you could ask for.

[bossplayer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow! I am all over this. I will be following very closely and doing whatever I can to help. Hailing The Engineer! What should I do! gogogogogogogo!

PS-Thanks again to The Engineer for all the guidance.

[/ QUOTE ]


Thanks for the kind words. I posted a thread on this a few days ago (following an earlier post by Oldbookguy). Please see my thread at Letters to write THIS WEEK . OBG is right....let's get out the letters this week. Thanks.

I think the opportunity is there to ask why the federal government should enforce unclear state laws that may not apply to poker. We can also let them know that Americans do care about the issue. Also, as Party and others are negotiating with the DOJ, we should be showing support for the right to play, IMHO.

So, let's all write!!

--------------------

June 2, 2007

The Honorable Henry Paulson (same letter to Gonzales)
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.

That being said, 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. However, Internet poker is not illegal under existing federal law. As for state laws, 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 poker players like Doyle Brunson are certainly skilled. Conversely, very few states have passed legislation targeting Internet poker. Given this, the UIGEA regulations should exempt (or simply neglect to mention) Internet poker – if not nationwide, certainly for play in states that have not chosen to pass legislation specifically addressing this issue. After all, your department should not be drawn into litigation concerning interpretation of state laws. If states actually wished to ban Internet poker, they would have unambiguously done so … especially if they wanted the federal government to take the unprecedented step of enforcing it.

Thanks for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[/ QUOTE ]

Third paragraph second sentence, change the 'to' to a 'do'

Anyone else feeling a momentum swing coming on?

[Vern]

I have been following the debate presented by Rep Barney Frank against the unlawful internet gambling enforcement act and would like to express my position to you, my elected official.

I do not believe that internet gambling can be effectively stopped. Since it is legal in so many parts of the world, including various forms here (lottery tickets, horse racing, and fantasy sports betting), there is no way to effectively suppress access to it without trampling on other freedoms. I do support licensing and regulation of the industry. This would permit domestic companies to enter these international markets that they currently fear because of the United States’ position. This would permit greater security for the consumer. This would permit proper tax collection, both from the consumer and from the provider. This would provide many more controls and oversight to monitor money laundering. Finally, this would permit for the industry to provide funds for those that cannot control their gambling.

A little more on the last point, problem gamblers are not being stopped by any law. Laws prohibiting internet gambling will only prevent casual consumers from participating. By regulating the industry, the industry itself could then be held accountable to identify, offer assistance, and ultimately refuse to provide the service to those identified with a problem, much like land casinos in the United States are currently required to provide.

Summary; internet gambling is not something the United States can stop. It is legal in our greatest ally (England) and the providers there are publicly traded companies enduring all the regulation and oversight required of both casinos and publicly traded companies. I think a far better position would be to license and regulate this service for the reasons enumerated above.

I see renewed interest in the topic as there is a hearing titled "Can Internet Gambling Be Effectively Regulated to Protect Consumers and the Payments System?" scheduled for June 8th before the U.S. House Committee on Financial Services. I hope you will support Rep Frank’s initiatives on this matter.

Thank you for your attention to this matter and thank you for your service to our community.

FWIW my rep is a dem but not on the FS Committee

[NoahSD]

[ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Pastor Greg Hogan
-- father of that tilted bank robber dude



[/ QUOTE ]

[censored] [censored] [censored] [censored] [censored] [censored] [censored]. That can't be good.