November 14th: House Judiciary Committee Hearing Thread

[Skallagrim]

Had to miss the last hour, but it seems like it went well.

I appreciate all the comments here, otherwise how would I have known about "is there any fun you are for?"

Skallagrim

[oldbookguy]

I managed to record pats only, will try and up load them some place with a link, not sure how to load video.

obg

[DerekJCEX]

wow it sounds like we did an awesome job! i really hope this gets online somewhere so i can see it.

[JPFisher55]

I think that we ought to equate all forms of gambling. The skill argument to elevate poker above gambling is a very good legal argument. However, for political purposes we ought to argue that casino gambling=horse racing=lottery=fantasy sports=all online gambling. Thus, we can argue that a state has two logical options. Permit all gambling or ban all gambling. When our foes argue that Internet gambling is worse than casino gambling, we can cite studies and technology to argue that Internet gambling is no more addictive or more susceptible to underage gambling than casino gambling. I can testify that I first played $2 blackjack at the MGM casino in Las Vegas at the age of 19. We can argue that this option, ban all or none, complies with the WTO decision. I know that this might not be true, but it is much more likely to comply than the IGREA, which only regulates some forms of Internet gambling. In addition, this argument points out the hypocrisy in the foes of online gambling and exposes their true goal to eliminate all gambling. Plus, how many states will want to give up their lottery. If forced to choose, I bet almost all the states will choose to permit all gambling rather than ban all gambling.

[JackInDaCrak]

[ QUOTE ]
wow it sounds like we did an awesome job! i really hope this gets online somewhere so i can see it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate to nitpick, but it sounds to me like the PPA and Annie Duke did an awesome job of representing poker players, not "we."

I think many posters on this board underestimate the influence they may bring by getting involved.

[PPABryan]

We have 9 audio clips from the hearing up on the PPA website right now.

PPA Audio Clips

Bryan Spadaro
Membership Relations, Manager
Poker Players Alliance

edit: listening to Cohen Part 1 right now. Might have to replay that every morning after I listen to Eye of the Tiger. "Is there any fun that your for?"......(dumb stare) McClusky: "Any What?"

[Uglyowl]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
wow it sounds like we did an awesome job! i really hope this gets online somewhere so i can see it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate to nitpick, but it sounds to me like the PPA and Annie Duke did an awesome job of representing poker players, not "we."

I think many posters on this board underestimate the influence they may bring by getting involved.

[/ QUOTE ]

When someone is excited about their sports team and proclaim "We won"; you are the smart ass who asks "what position do play?".

I think most use "we" in the side we are rooting for and having a vested interest in winning.

Also on a stricly literal level, my credit card bill says "we" maybe ok here.

[oldbookguy]

I have added 4 videos from a few minutes to 30 long in order of the hearing, sorry, I missed the rest, kept dropping connection.

Each is longer than the previous.

I will add detail as to clip contents later.

www.wvgeneralstore.com/gaming

obg

[Berge20]

I'm guessing the committee will ultimately host it (probably in the next 24-28 hours) on their website if it's not up sooner.

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]

.
.I think that we ought to equate all forms of gambling.
.
.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think WE ought to do anything of the sort.

"Poker is a game of skill" is one of our better arguments we have for getting legalized POKER .

Tuff

PS: Annie Duke talked really fast in our meeting with Represntative Berman also. She can definitely cover a lot of ground in a very short time. I do agree that it makes her sound a bit nervous.