Goals & Objectives of a New Poker Lobbying Organization

[ChexNFX]

[ QUOTE ]
everyone GREAT JOB!!!! Lets keep it going!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

[Sniper]

Bump above the clutter...

[morphball]

Bluff - I agree with getting a movement started, but in order to succeed, any such organization will need a figurehead, some one who is clean cut, silver tongued and persuasive.

The trick, IMHO, is get a such a charismatic person on TV. The less he is associated with poker, the better. I seriously believe all these letters to Senators addressing how much money can be made at poker did more harm than good. And TV is important, because this country doesn't read so much any more, and being on TV gives something the veneer of legitimacy in the public's eyes. And let's face reality, poker can be a seedy busines, to both its casual observer and those who play it for a living. (See BrandiRose threads, etc., etc., etc.,) So, this is why I think any spokesperson who does not play poker would be a better than one who does. Of course, there may be a few persons out there who play poker, are silver tongued, and are clean otherwise. Such a person could work.

Also, the argument that poker is a game of skill does not hold water in the public eyes at the moment, and probably never will. For several reasons:

1. It's played at casinos; and

2. Most people who have played poker do indeed view it as a game of luck.

I know people will go up in arms over this statement, but every person whom I have met who has played poker on less than a serious basis believes (1) that they are good at it; and (2) the reason they lose is because of luck.

Arguing that poker is not gambling to these people, who by the way constitute the vast majority of this country, is like pissing into the wind.

We obviously think we know different, and we have our books to prove it, but aren't those books are sold next to books on slot machines, blackjack, craps and video poker, to name a few? When you go to Borders, poker books are found in the gambling section.

Poker is gambling anyways, and I see no reason why it should not be embraced as such. In reality, the good players are no different than the house in blackjack, roulette or craps, except that a good player in poker will have a much larger edge. A fish in poker is gambling against a good player the same way I gamble against the house when I play craps. So all of these arguments about poker being a game of skill and not gambling are weak. The casino has a mountain of chips to pay-off the bad bets in craps, the professional poker player has his bankroll to payoff the bad bets made by weaker players.

The issue to me, is one of personal liberty. The way to attack this anti-gambling legislation is attack it for what it is, a restriction on freedom. The message should be, if they can tell you that you can't play poker in your own living room, or at a public establishment, then what else are they going to tell you that you can't do in the future?

[jason75]

As someone who runs a 501(c)4 political non-profit, here's my personal recommendations (this is my personal opinion, and is not related to or endorsed by my organization):

Organization Activities:

1. There's always a tension between "educational" and "advocacy". In my personal experience, "educational" sounds nice, fluffy, and non-threatening and gets absolutely nothing done. Poker and poker players are under attack, and need to be organized to support advocacy (there is some education that comes with that). But the primary purpose should be advocacy.

2. What kind of advocacy? The most effective political organizations run three basic operations: 1) grassroots organizing and basebuilding, 2) "top-down" coalitional and lobbying work, and most importantly 3) FUNDRAISING.

3. Let's talk more about Fundraising: This is the most important thing the organization will do in it's first several years of existence. Outreach activities, lobbying, just having an office and a telephone take MONEY. It's often hard for folks who don't do advocacy to realize how much money it takes. It takes a lot more than you think. So start thinking about how you're going to go from $0 to $100,000 to $500,000 to $1,000,000.

4. Organizational materials: People who run ineffective organizations love to sit around and write a lot of detailed "information" for their website, pamphelts, etc . . . Here's the reality: If you have a simple mission statement ("Keep poker legal"), then the people who need to read all that stuff before they decide whether or not to support you (and we're talking donations here, baby) are bullshitters who are wasting your time. There's far too many supportive people you could be contacting instead of wasting your time on activities to give non-supporters information. Follow the KISS rule (keep it simple stupid). A simple mission statement, a brief "about us", and a short description of your political activities are all you need to get started.

Organizational Structure:
1. Hire an attorney to figure out what the structure will look like. Don't try to do this yourselves, the legal rammifications are far too great and the law far too incomprehensible for non-attorneys to do. I've got a great referral for you. He's relatively cheap, very respected, and specializes in elections law and political organizations. The setup will cost you about $3500 flat fee. PM me and I'll send you his contact info and whom to tell him sent you. He's in San Francisco, but you should just need a fax machine if you want to get started. If you're outside of CA, he can recommend you to other attorneys.

Again with the Fundraising: Ok, if you get that far, you now need to come up with a fundraising plan to put this organization together. Who do you know who has contacts in the poker world? Are you a fundraiser (if you're not sure, then you're not)? Do you know wealthy poker players who would give to this? Draw up a plan to raise $25,000 (who you're going to ask for how much) . . . remember to aim high on the asks so you settle into the range you need (and find a couple of nice surprises to offset the "call me back in 6 months" rejections).

Ok, I'll stop there for now.

[jason75]

[ QUOTE ]
Bluff - I agree with getting a movement started, but in order to succeed, any such organization will need a figurehead, some one who is clean cut, silver tongued and persuasive.

The trick, IMHO, is get a such a charismatic person on TV.

[/ QUOTE ]

I 100%, wholeheartedly, absolutely disagree. Press work will be important to the organization, but to those who don't do it for a living it has a way of being a political "mirage" - in other words they keep chasing it because they think it's so damn important.

The most important activities will be 1) Fundraising, 2) Fundraising, 3) Grassroots outreach and basebuilding, and 4) Top-down coalitional and Networking. After one positions the organization to speak for poker players, then you can start THINKING about press.

Because let me tell you this about the press: 1) They don't care about morality, they just want the story that's going to sell, 2) They're some of the most arrogant people on the planet, 3) they don't reach as many people as you think, and 4) Did I mention how elitist and arrogant they can be?

Don't go chasing the fools gold of the press before you're ready for it. And you're definitely not ready.

[BluffTHIS!]

jason,

Are you basically trying to make an argument that we should stick with the non-responsive PPA because you are just describing their organization and methodology, especially with the "top down" remark?

Also I believe you are underestimating the importance of the educational aspect, as we are dealing with 50 different states with their own legislatures as well as the federal government. It is on the state level, where many of us believe efforts need to be made in tandem with the national effort, that the information will need to be gotten out to.

I understand what you mean by saying you can just expend all your efforts on writing pretty web pages, but we aren't saying that is what we intend. Just that we need information available for education of local groups and legislators, while spending the most effort on actual fundraising and use of same for lobbying.

[hayduke]

As someone who has also led 501(c)4 advocacy organizations at the state and federal level for a number of years, I'd say Jason75 has pretty much hit the nail on the head.

[Troll_Inc]

[ QUOTE ]

Organizational Structure:
1. Hire an attorney to figure out what the structure will look like. Don't try to do this yourselves, the legal rammifications are far too great and the law far too incomprehensible for non-attorneys to do. I've got a great referral for you. He's relatively cheap, very respected, and specializes in elections law and political organizations. The setup will cost you about $3500 flat fee. PM me and I'll send you his contact info and whom to tell him sent you. He's in San Francisco, but you should just need a fax machine if you want to get started. If you're outside of CA, he can recommend you to other attorneys.

Again with the Fundraising: Ok, if you get that far, you now need to come up with a fundraising plan to put this organization together. Who do you know who has contacts in the poker world? Are you a fundraiser (if you're not sure, then you're not)? Do you know wealthy poker players who would give to this? Draw up a plan to raise $25,000 (who you're going to ask for how much) . . . remember to aim high on the asks so you settle into the range you need (and find a couple of nice surprises to offset the "call me back in 6 months" rejections).

Ok, I'll stop there for now.

[/ QUOTE ]

All great advice. I would add that one looks over 3 good choices for an attorney. Having set up a 501c3 I know that the process is quite difficult and you 100% need an attorney. (Mine did it for free so I was very lucky.)

Fundraising. I would look at the poker sites and come up with an graded amount to ask of each one based on the number of players they have. From the top ones I wouldn't take less than $200,000 each as a promise. It wouldn't have to be paid immediately and set it up so that the process moves along and their concerns are met...BUT if the poker sites aren't interested in this (they have a bigger stake), then I wouldn't waste much of my own time. It would be a non-starter.

Beyond the US government, the poker sites really have f**cked this up and are too blame. They should have done what is trying to be done now. They didn't and it is going to cost them or they will die.

[addictontilt]

troll - We cannot accept funds from poker sites - foreign corps cannot lobby congress,the money has to come from US Citizens. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but this is the way I have read the FEC regs concerning PAC's

[jason75]

[ QUOTE ]
jason,

Are you basically trying to make an argument that we should stick with the non-responsive PPA because you are just describing their organization and methodology, especially with the "top down" remark?

[/ QUOTE ]

Bluff - I'm not sure what you mean or where you're getting this from. Having spoken to Michael B. at the PPA myself and seen their efforts, I am prepared to support a parallel organization because I think they have failed in their efforts.

[ QUOTE ]
Also I believe you are underestimating the importance of the educational aspect, as we are dealing with 50 different states with their own legislatures as well as the federal government. It is on the state level, where many of us believe efforts need to be made in tandem with the national effort, that the information will need to be gotten out to.

[/ QUOTE ]

For reasons that are better to discuss in a conversation rather than post exchanges, I think this is going to be completely ineffectual. It's not that I'm challenging or questioning your desire or sincerity, it's that the "educational" approach doesn't change anything. Put it this way: when was the last time you heard that the League of Women Voters (primarily educational but also does some advocacy) passed some major reform or had a big political impact? They don't impact because they've decided they're about educational matters.

It's all in how you approach it. For instance, an educational organization would do a study on the economic impacts of online poker and distribute it to legislators and the public. That changes nothing (I could give you a laundry list of "educational" institues and orgs that promote study of political reform and have no impact whatsoever). If, on the other hand, you first fundraised and organized your base around doing the study, then did it, then ran a fundraising campaign to do lobbying to congress, then went to congress looking to lobby a congressperson to introduce a bill that would support legalization of online poker and you used your study as a tool for lobbying, and tied in your grassroots organizing into a massive "lobby congress" email/phone campaign, then that could be effective (I know someone did a study already, this is just an example).

It's a difference of approach . . .

[ QUOTE ]
I understand what you mean by saying you can just expend all your efforts on writing pretty web pages, but we aren't saying that is what we intend. Just that we need information available for education of local groups and legislators, while spending the most effort on actual fundraising and use of same for lobbying.

[/ QUOTE ]

My post was not intended as a specific criticism of any of your activities. Instead, I offer it as a general guidance based on my personal experience in political organizing. The "educational" vs. "advocacy" debate occurs within every organization, and I'm giving you my thoughts on it.