Proposed internet poker ban in MA

[TheEngineer]

You MA guys should all write to Barney Frank and other congressmen who are supporting IGREA. I know contacting Congress for a state matter is counterintuitive, but these folks are powerful in the state political structure and are likely to assist us.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
From oberservation I would bet that the % of PPA members from Mass is higher than % of population of Mass makes up the entire USA. Any idea Engineer what % of PPA members are from Mass? Mass. had 2.16% of the nations population in 2005 (probably went down a bit since).

[/ QUOTE ]

Just over 2% of the PPA members are from Mass.

[Uglyowl]

Thanks Engineer.

By the way here is a list of your local rep/senator:

http://www.mass.gov/legis/citytown.htm


Also a list of all reps and e-mail addresses (may come in useful at somepoint, but not as a mass e-mail from each of us?):

http://www.mass.gov/legis/memmenuh.htm

As stated before, it is probably the easiest to try and get the whole thing killed since it still has lots of opposition as opposed to trying to "fix it"

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
This proposal is no good for us and I believe there is 0.000 interest in fixing it for online poker players. We either get casinos and lose Internet poker or we try to kill the whole thing and hope there's a status quo to return to. That's why I think the calls we make should be to kill this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, strangely the anti-gambling folks could be our ally in saving online poker in Mass.

[Skallagrim]

Thats what gets me, this is the Governor's proposal. He knows its going to be a close call, so he includes a provision that is guaranteed to drive away a substantial portion of those who would other wise be his natural support? Maybe the money interests talked, but its still bad politics.

I dont think its wise, at this point, to just call and say you are against it. Maybe you can use this opportunity to get a specific internet poker carve out? Tell him its either that or you are voting, and urging your reps to vote, with the anti-gamblers.

Id give it a try, anyway.

Skallagrim

[Skallagrim]

Use these points, if you think it will help.

Internet poker is not like other gambling, its a competition of skill between players, not one of chance between the player and the house. It should be treated different.

Internet poker actually helps keep poker popular, and is what has increased attendance at card rooms in recent years, not decreased it.

Poker rooms are far from the big money makers at a casino, mostly they are used as another draw, even a loss-leader. Having internet poker is not going to effect potential revenues. Banning internet poker will decrease revenues, however, by making a lot of people who would otherwise be patrons mad and by just lowering the status of the game overall.

You can still ban online slots, blackjack and other casino games which might compete and do have real potential for addiction and abuse.

If poker is gone, how will it be possible to play any game on the net for money? Whats the distinction?

You cant enforce it anyway, why make 10s of thousand of otherwise law abiding citizens criminals?

More ideas?

Skallagrim

[Tomcruise]

Guys, I went to BC, and play poker over the internet now full time. Obv. this scares the living hell out of me, and I plan on calling my local rep...I'm curious though, the state of Washington made it illegal and all the good washington tourney players. ie. Atimos/Colson10 are all still playing online poker out of their state and they are famous for it, I mean, how will they possibly enforce a law like this? I'll probably move to Portsmouth New Hampshire if anything like this ever happened i guess?? But realistically give me a break gov. patrick, how are you going to stop me ?

[downrange]

I thought there was some banned list of states U.S. serving poker sites voluntarily observed? That go away or something otherwise how can Washington where it's clearly illegal still play online?

I really could care less what MA thinks about what I do and if they made it illegal that's not going to stop me. But my one and only fear in all of this is that by them doing so sites like ftp and stars and whoever put MA on a list of states they refuse access from.

Especially if the sites sense legalized poker or UIGEA being reversed/modified in the not-too-distant future I would expect those sites to be on their best behavior and to me that means observing laws where online poker has been made explicitly illegal.

So MA can make all the stupid laws they want; it's being refused access from the online sites that has me terrified.

[Uglyowl]

You are right, they won't be able to stop it's residents if they want to play, but it will certainly limit our choices. Highly hypocritical from the lottery capital of the country.

This site has a pretty good summary of where things stand with states and sites: http://www.compatiblepoker.com/usa.php

Many sites have issued an 11 state ban not allowing players only from the following states.

Illinois
Indiana
Louisiana - felony to play online poker for real money in the US
Michigan
Nevada
New Jersey
New York
Oregon
South Dakota
Washington - felony to play online poker for real money in the US
Wisconsin

[downrange]

Great link.

I might be getting carried away but I've been very concerned MA is even just talking about making online poker illegal; I can think of a couple reasons stars/ftp would block access from MA BEFORE this thing is settled. If they left maybe there's still some podunk sites that don't leave but if stars and ftp bail IMM online poker is over in MA.

Obviously that's doomsday stuff and total speculation on my part but I'm pretty worried that it's actually written down anywhere that "online poker is illegal". So I would like to find out quickly that 1) there's a good possibility we can be accommodated in his proposal or 2) we don't stand a chance.

I don't know the procedure for a proposal; I gather this hasn't been introduced yet since the pdf I looked at has no bill number? So do you know how it works? He introduces it and it's assigned to a committee? Then some date scheduled for consideration? If we know we stand no chance with the proposal is the committee where us/other anti's try to stop it? How? A handful of phone calls doesn't sound very powerful. Who assesses the landscape and says where the effort to stop it should be directed? I'm going to start some reading on that stuff but if you/others know how it works could you say so?

I rarely post here but I read the forum all the time and admire how much effort you guys like Engineer have put in the past few months - so what are you guys saying we should do and who says what the plan is? Does the ppa have anything to do with this or are we waiting to hear what they say?

If Patrick is dead set against online poker I'd like to do my part as quickly as is possible to stop this thing before any online sites get nervous.