Poker Players Alliance Action Plan
Related Topics
"lawho ...@HiWAAY.net" <lawho
The following message was emailed to members of the PPA (Poker Players Alliance) on October 1, 2006. This "action plan" was signed by Mr.
Michael Bolcerek, President of the PPA.
Alan C. Lawhon Huntsville, Alabama
----------------------------
Dear Members, As you may already know, the U.S. Congress approved an online poker prohibition late Friday evening. The ban was snuck into the Port Security Act during a back room deal and following extensive political strong-arming by the Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) and the Speaker of the House, J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL). This tactic discouraged debate on the bill and allowed it to p*** without any public discussion. Why a poker ban was included in the Port Security Act is beyond me and most poker players and should be of concern to every American. It was a "bad beat" but we are still at the table.
This is no time to panic, but rather we must learn and build from this loss. The Poker Players Alliance is not leaving the fight, although now it is going to take an even greater effort from poker players and our organization to achieve our objectives.
What do we want to do now?
Poker Exemption We continue to demand that poker receive separate treatment from other forms of gaming. It is a game of skill, where performance is merited, and a community game, where the house is not your competition. These are real and significant differences. Our desire is to achieve the same type of exemption from legislation that other interests have received (Horseracing, Lotteries, and Fantasy Sports). We will continue to push forward to obtain this separate treatment when Congress comes back from the elections and into the next legislative session. Between now and when the new bill becomes effective (3 to 6 months) poker has an opportunity to achieve the same exemption. This is our most immediate short-term goal.
License, Regulate and Tax Regulation is the best public policy solution for both the federal government and the American poker player. Prohibition of on-line poker will only drive the game underground and build distrust and misunderstanding amongst the 70 million Americans who enjoy the great game of poker. I spent the better part of the year engaging members of the House and Senate about the idea of regulating Internet poker. This has raised interest from both Democrats and Republican's alike. There has even been legislation introduced that seeks to establish a Congressional commission that would examine the best way to regulate this industry. Early this summer the PPA commissioned an economic analysis of the potential tax revenue that could be raised through regulation. Members of Congress have been receptive to this study and the $3.3 Billion that could be raised annually for the federal government. This is our ultimate goal and the PPA will drive this agenda.
What should you do now? First, every member of the PPA should be registered to vote in the upcoming state and federal elections. If you are not yet registered there is still time, click here to find out about how to register in your state.
https://ssl.capwiz.com/congressorg/e4/nvra/ Second, be sure to vote on Election Day, Tuesday, Nov. 7th. We must put our vote where our voice is and establish a poker voting block. While the Port Security Act which included the prohibition legislation was p***ed near unanimously in both the House and the Senate, the House did have a clean vote on the poker prohibition in July. A list of how House members voted in July is available on our Web site too, click here. Finally, the PPA needs your help to spread the word about our organization. Please tell at least nine friends who might not know about the Poker Players Alliance to join the fight. We need to be 1 Million strong going into 2007.
Very soon a brief analysis of the Internet Gambling Prohibition Amendment will be posted on our website. Please return to www.pokerplayersalliance.org soon so you can learn how this legislation will affect you.
Again, I want to thank you for your support, and hope that you will continue that support as the Poker Players Alliance enters the next level of commitment. This is not over.
Regards, Michael Bolcerek President Poker Players Alliance
"lawho ...@HiWAAY.net" <lawho
While not everyone may agree with the PPA's "approach" to this problem, the one merit [to their plan] is that they actually have a plan - as opposed to all the moaning, groaning, and unorganized bitching of all those who have no plan.
The one thing that Michael Bolcerek is correct about is the need for poker players to band together into an organized (and united) lobby.
Politicians DO respect numbers, especially large numbers. Without the "clout" of a million-member lobbying organization, ambitious politicians such as Senator Frist and Congressman Goodlatte will listen to (and side) with people who hold "strong moral objections" to poker and gambling. As long as we remain unorganized, those who oppose our game will hold sway over politicians like Bill Frist.
Also, Mr. Bolcerek's suggestion that every poker player go to the polls and vote is good advice. In the upcoming mid-term elections, many of these races are now very close. Political operatives for both parties (as well as news media organizations) will be doing extensive "exit polling" on election day - especially in the close races. I have been "quizzed" by an exit poller (who was working for ABC News) when I voted in the 1986 election. I remember answering a series of about 10-12 questions centering on why I did (or did not) vote for certain candidates. If exit voters are specifically asked, (especially in the close races), if their vote was in any way influenced by this [new] Internet Gambling Prohibition Enforcement Act, the answers to that question will be tabulated and carefully analyzed by the winning (as well as the losing) candidates. If a substantial "trend" is evident either way, that will be noted by our elected representatives. If we don't band together and unite around an organization such as the PPA, then those who adamantly oppose internet poker will prevail.
People who are complacent or fail to act in their own self interest get run over - just like at the poker table. That's just the way the "political game" works in this country. Even if you disagree with the PPA and their approach toward addressing the problem, hold your nose and consider supporting them anyway. Right now, getting organized is our one best hope for turning this abomination around.
Alan C. Lawhon Huntsville, Alabama
"Olemite" msolso...@yahoo.com
There aren't 1 million people that regularly play on-line poker in the US let alone 70 MILLION that he states in his letter!
Also, the PPA will never get 1 million members charging $20 to get in.
Why not let people join for free, and let the rich websites and their employees fund the effort?
Ole
"Edward" edwardr121...@aol.com
WOW, you are really on the ball. But you might want to reread the bill so that you can point out where this bill can be determined to be a prohibition on ONLINE POKER.
Performance is merited? Tell that to Poker Stars so maybe they can cut down on the bad beats.
They would be more interested if you could show them how to do this without repealing the Wire Act and how they're going to handle the biggest group of lobbiest ever gathered in one place that will fight it tooth and nail.
We've seen all the analysis. Will the bill change in some way because yoou post an analysis?
It's obvious that a huge membership may have some (very little) power to sway the thinking of a few (very few) politicians to think as we do. Maybe if you made membership free the PPA would get the numbers necessay. BTW, can you post an expence report so that those who have already given you $20.00 can see exactly what you did with that money.
I think I noticed a "Michael Bolcerek" playing in the $1000/2000 limit holdem game on Fulltilt. How did you do in the game :)
"Lynx" a1...@webnntp.invalid
Yes. There's been a lot of loose talk about "regulating" (and taxing) lately. I may be guilty of that myself. Just to clarify, I don't think that we can realistically regulate the flow of information over the internet. I was thinking more along the lines of English companies that provide online poker.
By legalizing such institutions within the U.S., the U.S. companies that did emerge, would be responsible to U.S. laws and taxation, as are other U.S. companies. Presumably, there might be ways of providing incentives and benefits as well, so that they could compete with offshore entities.
-----?
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
"Lynx" a1...@webnntp.invalid
It certainly won't happen under the current administration. Individual states would still have the ability to illegalize various forms of gambling, inlcuding online poker. It could require an exemption in the wire act, although I think not. My interpretation is that the wire act doesn't really pertain in this case.
I was thinking along these lines, what if, instead of p***ing a bill that attempts to illegalize deposits to online gaming sites, congress had p***ed a bill that stated in order for such deposits to continue legally, said gaming companies must have U.S. offices? (They would not have to be exclusively U.S. companies, only have some offices in the U.S.) They would then have be subject to U.S. laws, U.S. taxes, and presumably hire at least some U.S. residents. In exchange for this they get to go on having their transactions with U.S. clients unmolested.
That would not make it legal in all parts of the U.S. Individual states wold maintain that power.
I think this would have been a much more sensible way to go.
--------?
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
| To Top |