17 replies to this topic

[Highlow16]

I sent an email to my congressman a couple days ago to express my feelings about online gaming. Here was his response and my rebutal. I think it sheds light on a misconception that some may hold about the online gaming industry, or maybe just an excuse to validate their moral objections. It was probably written by an aid but whateverDear GAMBLING ADDICT: Thank you for getting in touch with me to share your concerns about legislation dealing with Internet gambling. I appreciate your taking the time to write, and I apologize for the delay in my response. With the massive growth in the Internet gambling industry over the last several years, we have also seen an increase in opportunities for consumer fraud, largely stemming from offshore gambling sites. This is why I recently voted for H.R. 4411-also known as the Internet Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act. I think it will help protect consumers from illegal activities stemming from these offshore gambling sites by giving the Department of Justice sufficient resources to investigate and prosecute them. I also believe that this legislation struck the right balance between fighting the negative impact of illegal Internet gambling enterprises and continuing to promote electronic commerce. Thanks again for contacting me. To do my job well, I need to hear from my fellow Coloradans. For more information, please visit my website at www.house.gov/markudall . Congressman Udall,Thank you for the response. I understand the need to protect consumers from fraud but the most effective way to protect our citizens would be to regulate and tax within our own borders, thus eliminating issues of offshore gambling sites defrauding US citizens. Prohibition has never worked in the past and it wont today or tommorow. Placing a stick in the middle of a river hoping to stop the water from flowing is not a proper way to solve the problem. You build a dam, harness the power of the water for better use. In my opinion this would be the most sucessful way of protecting people like myself from harm. Furthermore, I think you may be misinformed as to the extent of fraud that goes on with offshore gambling sites. Many of the most popular sites are publicly traded companies on the london stock exchange who have enjoyed great sucess. These companies must protect the interest of their stock holders, thus run a reputable business. Why not take the aproach that many european countries have taken with regulation and taxation? Thank you

[GeneralGeeWhiz]

Interesting. Good read.

[finztotheleft]

I would add that none of the online gambling sites that I have had transactions with have fraudulantly tried to take my money, but now that the US government is involved, I am unable to access my own cash.

[GeneralGeeWhiz]

finztotheleft, on Thursday, February 1st, 2007, 10:25 PM, said:

I would add that none of the online gambling sites that I have had transactions with have fraudulantly tried to take my money, but now that the US government is involved, I am unable to access my own cash.

QFT

[TosasFinest]

Did you sign it "Gambling Addict"? Or did he just call you that? LOL.

[wildspoke]

Highlow16, on Thursday, February 1st, 2007, 11:15 PM, said:

With the massive growth in the Internet gambling industry over the last several years, we have also seen an increase in opportunities for consumer fraud, largely stemming from offshore gambling sites. This is why I recently voted for H.R. 4411-also known as the Internet Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act. I think it will help protect consumers from illegal activities stemming from these offshore gambling sites by giving the Department of Justice sufficient resources to investigate and prosecute them. I also believe that this legislation struck the right balance between fighting the negative impact of illegal Internet gambling enterprises and continuing to promote electronic commerce.

That answer is classic. I especially like the line - I also believe that this legislation struck the right balance between fighting the negative impact of illegal Internet gambling enterprises and continuing to promote electronic commerce. Translantion the horse lobby and the lottery lobby were smart enough to kick in enough dough so we wouldn't snuff them out too.

[Highlow16]

TosasFinest, on Thursday, February 1st, 2007, 11:39 PM, said:

Did you sign it "Gambling Addict"? Or did he just call you that? LOL.

I just changed my name to that

[Highlow16]

We need to do SOMETHING to raise awareness. The PPA is doing a little but our government responds to numbers (cash and people). Since we dont have the cash our only choice is to get all 20 million american poker players to stand up for our rights. The EU trade thing is good news but we need more.

[terradawg]

something that i would add in reply...look at the effect of the legislation. the gaming companies that would be considered safer in their eyes, i.e. the publicly traded ones, all abandoned the US market. we are left with companies with no regulatory oversight. so that argument that they are making this a safer industry is easily rebuttable. goob job writing udall though. everyone should write their congressman.

[Socrates]

Does anyone want to stand up to get the Davis-Bacon Act back in place first? What about illegal wire tapping, anyone want to touch on that first or is playing .10/.20 limit online your primary concern? Unless you are making your living from online poker than I see no reason to have this at the top of your political hit list and even then... We wonder why our country is so screwed up. I'm willing to bet most of you don't even vote and from the sounds of it all it would take to get elected would be to have a platform of "you can play minbet millions all day everyday" and you'd be all over it. Who cares if that same person is for lowering medical care standards or protecting our right to free speech. Damn it, all you need to be able to do is sit at home in the dark and MMM.

[terradawg]

Socrates, on Friday, February 2nd, 2007, 8:41 AM, said:

Does anyone want to stand up to get the Davis-Bacon Act back in place first? What about illegal wire tapping, anyone want to touch on that first or is playing .10/.20 limit online your primary concern? Unless you are making your living from online poker than I see no reason to have this at the top of your political hit list and even then... We wonder why our country is so screwed up. I'm willing to bet most of you don't even vote and from the sounds of it all it would take to get elected would be to have a platform of "you can play minbet millions all day everyday" and you'd be all over it. Who cares if that same person is for lowering medical care standards or protecting our right to free speech. Damn it, all you need to be able to do is sit at home in the dark and MMM.

that's a bit presumptious, don't you think? not only do i vote, i also participate heavily in elections by canvassing neighborhoods to get out the message of the person who is best for the job. not to say that the issues you address are not not important, but last time i checked, this is a poker forum.

[Socrates]

terradawg, on Friday, February 2nd, 2007, 9:48 AM, said:

that's a bit presumptious, don't you think? not only do i vote, i also participate heavily in elections by canvassing neighborhoods to get out the message of the person who is best for the job. not to say that the issues you address are not not important, but last time i checked, this is a poker forum.

Considering more US citizens watched the super bowl than voted in the last presidential election. No I don't believe that's a bit presumptious.

[rgold79]

Socrates, on Friday, February 2nd, 2007, 10:41 AM, said:

Does anyone want to stand up to get the Davis-Bacon Act back in place first? What about illegal wire tapping, anyone want to touch on that first or is playing .10/.20 limit online your primary concern? Unless you are making your living from online poker than I see no reason to have this at the top of your political hit list and even then... We wonder why our country is so screwed up. I'm willing to bet most of you don't even vote and from the sounds of it all it would take to get elected would be to have a platform of "you can play minbet millions all day everyday" and you'd be all over it. Who cares if that same person is for lowering medical care standards or protecting our right to free speech. Damn it, all you need to be able to do is sit at home in the dark and MMM.

Socrates, on Friday, February 2nd, 2007, 11:14 AM, said:

Considering more US citizens watched the super bowl than voted in the last presidential election. No I don't believe that's a bit presumptious.

You're making posts like this in many threads addressing poker and politics. This is an internet forum dedicated specifically to the topic of POKER. It is, therefore, a perfectly appropriate place for people to vent on the issue of poker as it relates to the current political environment. You may find it condemnable or laughable that it's such an important issue to some people, but they are perfectly entitled to feel however they want about anything, and this is the perfect place for them to express that view.

[terradawg]

Socrates, on Friday, February 2nd, 2007, 9:14 AM, said:

Considering more US citizens watched the super bowl than voted in the last presidential election. No I don't believe that's a bit presumptious.

consider this. the person you accuse of not even voting has taken the time to write his congressman about an important issue to him, something most people never do. that's intelligent.

[Jdr999]

Socrates, on Friday, February 2nd, 2007, 8:14 AM, said:

Considering more US citizens watched the super bowl than voted in the last presidential election. No I don't believe that's a bit presumptious.

This is wrong. Last Superbowl had 78 million viewers. 2004 Presidential Election had over 122 million voters.

[Shizzmoney]

finztotheleft, on Thursday, February 1st, 2007, 10:25 PM, said:

I would add that none of the online gambling sites that I have had transactions with have fraudulantly tried to take my money, but now that the US government is involved, I am unable to access my own cash.

Solid Gold post - you should send that to the Congressman.

[Scanner313]

Just vote Libertarian people. And all the freedom issues are addressed. Simple as that.

[bombsaway]

Socrates, on Friday, February 2nd, 2007, 8:14 AM, said:

Considering more US residents watched the super bowl than voted in the last presidential election. No I don't believe that's a bit presumptious.

FYP as best as possible. Also, note that those under the age 18 cannot vote. Furthermore, it looks like someone refuted your claim with figures.