My Letter To My Senator

[Scanner313 0]

great post -- these mirror my thoughts as well. I have voted Republican 100% for 18 years, and am really at a crossroads. Problem is Dems aren't any better, I'm really disillusioned with politics right now

There is no reason to be disillusioned. Vote Libertarian! For the love of Pete, at least check them out! www.LP.org

[LongLiveYorke 38]

Seriously folks. Do you have ANY sense of priorities? Are you so sheltered and self obsessed that you think that the average American gives a poop about the on-line gaming law?

Uh, what's your point. Because a lot of people don't care that much about the law and because it doesn't effect a lot of people, then it's okay for the government to unfairly assert control over that which it shoudl have no business controling.

Even many of us "friendly" to gaming don't think it is that bad of an idea to greatly increase US Government regulation of on-line gaming. I personally don't disagree in premise with the ban.

You agree with the premise of the ban? So you agree with banning online poker. Because that's what the premise was. It's not like they tried to regulate it and went a bit to far. Their goal is to flat out ban it.

[Scanner313 0]

i know how you feel. ive always been one to vote but when i have no interest in either party im usually at home watching tv then at the ballot box

If you normally vote, and don't want EITHER of the big parties, then how about you do something to help those of us in the fringe instead. Vote Libertarian across the board. We're probably not going to win anything this time around (unfortunately), so if you truly didn't want us to win then you're still ok. But every extra vote we get gains us (and all independent parties) more credibility and notoriety and will help open the system to alternatives that apparently MOST Americans aren't really aware of.But please, don't NOT vote just because you can't decide between the 2 parties that have done such a stellar job of running our country the last 100 years. If you're sick of the same old crap (and that's all you're going to get with the Reps or Dems) then add 1 tick to the little guys column. The more people that do this the more we have achance of actually getting something changed for the better.

If u need to play poker that bad, simple solution, move to vegas.

Yeah, I mean, why should you fight for your rights as an American anyway. It's not that important. Just pack up your life and move because some ***-wipe Congressman doesn't think you should play poker on-line. That'll learn 'em!

[Dogpatch 2]

...how is this an "abuse" of the system?

Well, let's see. Attaching a non-related bill to a "must pass" bill with no debate what-so-ever? Initiating legislation to help out campaign contributors whos business is the very thing you're passing a bill against? Sure it's not illegal, but it is wrong.

[WowThats 0]

Dumb letter... and a waste of time.

[Scanner313 0]

I recently wrote to both my state's senators and got a canned response from one, and no response from the other. I even sent a follow up to the canned reply stating my displeasure at being "blown off" and told him he had lost my vote. No reply as of yet.You know, I'm starting to wonder if there is any hope left for this country. With the divide so large and bitter between the left and right, and the common displeasure it seems most Americans have with government in general, it absolutely amazes me how many people are making posts that basically say "I don't know what to do. I don't like EITHER party. Maybe I'll just not vote."There are plenty of others here who realize that there are alternatives, so I can't be the only one who was taught in school that we DO NOT have a 2 party system in America. Yes, everything about it makes it seem that way, but it's just not the case. Hell, even national newscasters have used the term "2-party system" when referring to elections, etc., so I guess I shouldn't be that surprised that many Americans seem to think it's true. But shouldn't even the limited attention that Ross Perot and Ralph Nader got in the past few years have woken people up to this point? I don't get it.I'm starting to become really frustrated when I see stuff like this. Are we, as Americans, really so uninformed, or just so lazy that we can't spend 30 minutes on the internet researching the other party options? I'm sure there is a party out there for everyone, that fits MOST of a person's views. Why can't people wake up and realize this? How can we make people wake up to this?The more I think about this the more I think our country is doomed to forever be controlled by the 2 parties we have now, and we'll go back and forth again and again and the national debt will continue to increase because neither party gives a crap about it, neither party has any idea how to not spend more than they bring in. It makes me sick as a mid 30's guy to know that the chances for a major change occuring in my lifetime are probably slim to none. And the American people can be so easily swayed by the promise of a tax cut when it basically means we're going to add that money to your share on the country credit card. It's sickening.Are people really this complacent? Do most people truly not care about their freedoms? It's amazing that the only place I've seen any hint of hope is here, on a poker forum. Noweher else. Nobody else seems to care. They all have that one guys attitude of "It didn't effect me, so I don't care." In my opinion, it's people like these that don't deserve to be Americans.

[WowThats 0]

I don't think most people consider the ban for online poker a restriction on their freedoms nor is it in any way attempting to limit their personal freedoms.Online gambling in its current form is bad, had the online industry taken giant steps to prevent what the normal person believes is moral or right the online industry may have survived.Still think the online is worth saving read or re-read this article then decide if its worth saving!http://www.adultfyi.com/read.aspx?ID=13018

[Scanner313 0]

Dumb letter... and a waste of time.

If you truly mean that then you're an idiot who doesn't deserve any of the freedoms this country offers.

I don't think most people consider the ban for online poker a restriction on their freedoms nor is it in any way attempting to limit their personal freedoms.I don't even know what to say to this. You HAVE TO be kidding!Online gambling in its current form is bad, had the online industry taken giant steps to prevent what the normal person believes is moral or right the online industry may have survived.I don't even remotely understand what you're trying to say here. Are you suggesting that if the on-line gamblingindustry wasn't corrupt that the government wouldn't have had to step in? What "steps" should the on-line industry have taken to "prevent what the normal person believes is moral or right"? I still don't understand what that means.Still think the online is worth saving read or re-read this article then decide if its worth saving!Honest question: Why are you here? Do you play on-line poker? If not, why would you be on these boards? If you do play, how could you possibly have the opinion you hold? I'm baffled!

[finztotheleft 0]

You know, I'm starting to wonder if there is any hope left for this country. With the divide so large and bitter between the left and right, and the common displeasure it seems most Americans have with government in general, it absolutely amazes me how many people are making posts that basically say "I don't know what to do. I don't like EITHER party. Maybe I'll just not vote."I'm starting to become really frustrated when I see stuff like this. Are we, as Americans, really so uninformed, or just so lazy that we can't spend 30 minutes on the internet researching the other party options? I'm sure there is a party out there for everyone, that fits MOST of a person's views. Why can't people wake up and realize this? How can we make people wake up to this?Are people really this complacent? Do most people truly not care about their freedoms? It's amazing that the only place I've seen any hint of hope is here, on a poker forum. Noweher else. Nobody else seems to care. They all have that one guys attitude of "It didn't effect me, so I don't care." In my opinion, it's people like these that don't deserve to be Americans.

You make a lot of great observations and I'm afraid you are right about a lot of this. The wonderful thing about this country is that if you don't like something, you can fight to change it. The sad thing is most people decide to just ***** about what they don't like instead of doing something to act on it.Hblask...great letter !

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

Attaching a non-related bill to a "must pass" bill with no debate what-so-ever?

That IS the system, it happens EVERY day, and I see little wrong with it. It isn't an abuse, nor is it limited to Republicans. This particular legislation had been discussed and anticipated in congress for WEEKS. Heck, it had been anticipated and discussed on this very forum for weeks prior. There was nothing last minute about it.

You agree with the premise of the ban? So you agree with banning online poker. Because that's what the premise was. It's not like they tried to regulate it and went a bit to far. Their goal is to flat out ban it.

I feel that on-line gaming (poker being a sub-set) as an unregulated industry is wrong. In the absence of acceptable regulation, a ban is not unreasonable.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

"on what grounds? Seriously"Here are some of my thoughts (appearing in other threads on this subject)...Do I want to see on-line gaming go away? I honestly don't know. I do know I want it regulated.Despite the cynicism, representative government does in fact require a legislator to actually try and represent his/her constituency. Many, if not most, people in the US feel that Gambling is if not a "bad thing" is at least not something that they want to proliferate unchecked. On-line gambling in its current form is unregulated (and untaxed), competes with "legitimate" (sanctioned) forms of gambling, and threatens the investments of the concerns related to the "legitimate" gambling. Frankly, I do not "trust" on-line off shore unregulated Gaming corporations in terms of running clean games nor safeguarding my cash and personal information. If you have a dispute with one of these organizations it is "buyer beware" the US flag does not follow you.Additionally, because of the large amounts of dollars involved the on-line gambling, these corporations and individuals could be in any number of unacceptable "side businesses". They could be run by individuals who could not get a "legitimate" license in the USA - whether you agree with that process, it is meant to keep the industry "clean".There is little that the Government can do to directly regulate or control the off-shore industries being delivered into people's homes via the Internet. They CAN control financial institutions and transactions (despite the WTO's objections). This is their easiest form of control - and certainly NOT ther last shot.Ultimately the politicians (scumbags or not) must represent the public's points of view. Like it or not, Frist was elected and apparently continues to represent his constituency. While some may see such legislation as "dictating morality" it can also be viewed as "representing morals"When a B&M casino opens it is a HUGE undertaking. Federal, state, local, and often Tribal governments must hammer out the rules of engagement. Many deals are made to satisfy the concerns of investors, legislators, and citizens. Then comes the investment. A new casino now requires nearly a BILLION dollars of investment. This is to get the B&M in place, hire staff, and change infrastructure (ever see how much it costs to build something like an exit ramp from a freeway?). Then the dollars start to flow. The casinos begin making money AND paying taxes. This is the payback for the investment.Those constituents (both public and private) have a right to "protect" that sizable investment and the Government has a responsibility to ensure that a playing field is level - both in terms of allowing access to the industry AND in maintaining the integrity of the industry. To allow very low cost of start up ventures to threaten that investment is not in the interests of the public and private investors.Remember that the off-shore corporations are NOT represented by Frist. In some ways because I live in a region supported by some of the most profitable casinos on the planet (believe it or not - the Detroit casinos were recently the MOST profitable) - I have a reasonably direct interest in Gambling legislation. My region has made sizable investment and deserves a voice over that of off-shore corporations that may threaten that investment.

[Balloon guy 158]

Hasn't it been clear that all forms of gambling have always been regulated by the government? So why should the internet get to circumvent all federal and state laws? This law is just an attempt to enforce what has already been illegal.The end result will be either a clear legal form of online gaming with the state and federal government getting a fair share. In which case you will see all the big casinos running the best sites. They are outlawed from running a site now, so why shouldn't they get the offshore sites shut down? It's in their best interest to get gamblers into their casinos. They first fought Indian casinos, then started running them. Now they have their sights on online. You think they are just going to sit back and watch their profits go offshore without a fight?The upside is that this will give us a clear legal way to play poker, with legal recourses for cheating etc. This isn't going to stop all poker, it's just going to change the way we do it online.And yes, I am playing online and will continue. If its hypocritical, then I guess I get the stamp

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

The abuse of the system he is referring to is the pathetic, dishonest and unscrupulous conduct of Senator Frist who attached this bill to the port safety bill.

Grow up.There is nothing pathetic, dishonest nor unscrupulous about attaching a bill to unrelated legislation. Frist didn't invent this practice.

[WowThats 0]

Well said "PotOdds and Balloon Guy" now "Scanner313" can begin to understand the entire picture... no penalty for short-side vision.

[Dogpatch 2]

I know it's "business as usual" politics. I tried to make that clear. I also know it's business as usual for corporations to buy and sell politicians. This latest instance though has brought it to the forefront. I totally agree that eventually online poker will be regulated and Harrahs and all the other casinos will have their own sites. But if that was the point of the bill then that's how they should have presented it. They should not have presented it as legislating morality. I grew up in the South and I've been a competitive shooter. I've always counted on the Republicans to fight for gun rights, I just wish they could get away from the religous nuts... or at least stop pandering to them. The business of politics annoys me, but that's the way it is and I can accept it. But balls out ****ing lying and trying to be holier than thou just pisses me off to no end. If Frist had came out and said "Hey, Harrahs paid me off to get this bill pushed through." I'm sure people would've cussed him but at least he'd somewhat less of a jerk. (And if I need a SW there, then I don't know what to say, obviously that would never happen)

[Zeatrix 0]

The end result will be either a clear legal form of online gaming with the state and federal government getting a fair share. In which case you will see all the big casinos running the best sites. They are outlawed from running a site now, so why shouldn't they get the offshore sites shut down? It's in their best interest to get gamblers into their casinos. They first fought Indian casinos, then started running them. Now they have their sights on online. You think they are just going to sit back and watch their profits go offshore without a fight?

If I was a casino I'd love what the off shore internet sites have done for me. They have made millions of people into potential future customers for me, the casino. Would there have been close to nine thousand players at the WSOP ME without the internet? Nope, and who made money from this? Well Harrahs...Harrahs even made a statement that they wont expect the same number of entrants next year. Wow, guess why?

[LongLiveYorke 38]

Grow up.There is nothing pathetic, dishonest nor unscrupulous about attaching a bill to unrelated legislation. Frist didn't invent this practice.

It is actually all three. It is just an accepted practice so people have long given up thinking about how little sense it makes.

[DunkinDonuts 0]

p.s. If you ever come to visit Washington DC, don't forget to drop by our offices, we have great coffees and donuts served.

I'm gunning for you.

[cguyton 0]

hblaskI have written my congressman and senators several times on this matter, and even had one face to face meeting with my senator's chief of staff to no avail in changing any minds.... any way - may I steal your well written letter to send to my elected officials?

[hblask 1]

That IS the system, it happens EVERY day, and I see little wrong with it. It isn't an abuse, nor is it limited to Republicans. This particular legislation had been discussed and anticipated in congress for WEEKS. Heck, it had been anticipated and discussed on this very forum for weeks prior. There was nothing last minute about it.

Ah, the old "that's the way it works, so it must be moral and fair" argument.Sorry, not buying it. It's sleazy and immoral. And notice that the legislation WAS debated and discussed AND COULDN"T PASS in the light of day.

"on what grounds? Seriously"Despite the cynicism, representative government does in fact require a legislator to actually try and represent his/her constituency. Many, if not most, people in the US feel that Gambling is if not a "bad thing" is at least not something that they want to proliferate unchecked.

It is not the government's job to regulate morality. Just because it happens doesn't mean they *should* do it.

On-line gambling in its current form is unregulated (and untaxed), competes with "legitimate" (sanctioned) forms of gambling, and threatens the investments of the concerns related to the "legitimate" gambling. Frankly, I do not "trust" on-line off shore unregulated Gaming corporations in terms of running clean games nor safeguarding my cash and personal information. If you have a dispute with one of these organizations it is "buyer beware" the US flag does not follow you.

I agree that I would prefer a site that is accountable to our laws, but this law does the OPPOSITE of that, making offshore operators LESS accountable.

Additionally, because of the large amounts of dollars involved the on-line gambling, these corporations and individuals could be in any number of unacceptable "side businesses". They could be run by individuals who could not get a "legitimate" license in the USA - whether you agree with that process, it is meant to keep the industry "clean".

The same could be true of every single industry in the world. This may be the dumbest argument in history. Sorry.

Ultimately the politicians (scumbags or not) must represent the public's points of view. Like it or not, Frist was elected and apparently continues to represent his constituency. While some may see such legislation as "dictating morality" it can also be viewed as "representing morals"When a B&M casino opens it is a HUGE undertaking. Federal, state, local, and often Tribal governments must hammer out the rules of engagement. Many deals are made to satisfy the concerns of investors, legislators, and citizens. Then comes the investment. A new casino now requires nearly a BILLION dollars of investment. This is to get the B&M in place, hire staff, and change infrastructure (ever see how much it costs to build something like an exit ramp from a freeway?). Then the dollars start to flow. The casinos begin making money AND paying taxes. This is the payback for the investment.Those constituents (both public and private) have a right to "protect" that sizable investment and the Government has a responsibility to ensure that a playing field is level - both in terms of allowing access to the industry AND in maintaining the integrity of the industry. To allow very low cost of start up ventures to threaten that investment is not in the interests of the public and private investors.Remember that the off-shore corporations are NOT represented by Frist. In some ways because I live in a region supported by some of the most profitable casinos on the planet (believe it or not - the Detroit casinos were recently the MOST profitable) - I have a reasonably direct interest in Gambling legislation. My region has made sizable investment and deserves a voice over that of off-shore corporations that may threaten that investment.

So basically you are supporting crony capitalism, corporate welfare, and the "he who pays the most owns congress" theory of poliitcs. Nice.

Hasn't it been clear that all forms of gambling have always been regulated by the government? So why should the internet get to circumvent all federal and state laws? This law is just an attempt to enforce what has already been illegal.The end result will be either a clear legal form of online gaming with the state and federal government getting a fair share. In which case you will see all the big casinos running the best sites. They are outlawed from running a site now, so why shouldn't they get the offshore sites shut down? It's in their best interest to get gamblers into their casinos. They first fought Indian casinos, then started running them. Now they have their sights on online. You think they are just going to sit back and watch their profits go offshore without a fight?The upside is that this will give us a clear legal way to play poker, with legal recourses for cheating etc. This isn't going to stop all poker, it's just going to change the way we do it online.And yes, I am playing online and will continue. If its hypocritical, then I guess I get the stamp

The internet gets to circumvent law because it leaves the country. If I go to a foreign country, I am bound by their laws. If my internet connection goes to a foreign country, I am bound by those laws. And it is not Frist's business what I do in the privacy of my home.I suspect you are correct that this will lead to legalized online gambling in the US, thanks to the WTO. I suspect that is part of Frist's plan, since he has a financial interest in seeing that occur. But a moral legislator would just legalize it, instead of making this extortion-fire-sale move first.

hblaskI have written my congressman and senators several times on this matter, and even had one face to face meeting with my senator's chief of staff to no avail in changing any minds.... any way - may I steal your well written letter to send to my elected officials?

Of course....

[WowThats 0]

I'm not sure anyone on this thread realizes there been bills attached to legislation in the past that have had more far reaching affects on each American's personal freedoms then what was presented for online gambling. If you don't understand how politics work in America stop complaining, get involved to help All Americans change what the unintelligent person perceives as corruption.

[hblask 1]

I'm not sure anyone on this thread realizes there been bills attached to legislation in the past that have had more far reaching affects on each American's personal freedoms then what was presented for online gambling. If you don't understand how politics work in America stop complaining, get involved to help All Americans change what the unintelligent person perceives as corruption.

I absolutely understand that corrupt politicians have been bypassing the system for years to the detriment of the American people. I also understand that millions of people cheat on their spouses every day.I support neither, for similar reasons.

[cguyton 0]

wowthats - you are correct - it is very common to have bills attached as ammendments to other bills. You are also correct that it is not corrupt to do so. This practice, while not part of our founding fathers design, has gone on for years and is a great reason the U.S. President should have the power of a line item veto. When senators attach a bill that has been defeated (numerous times) on its on merit to a bill that is desperately needed such as the port securities bill (that the President has to sign) it is underhanded (not corrupt) but definately underhanded. imo

[WowThats 0]

hblask: Personally I don't believe most people are against online poker or gambling, what I believe most people are against are the lack of checks and balances. If a person has a complaint with a overseas or Canadian online gambling site who do you go too? The site? That's not good enough!Based on NO lawsuit filings from this article http://www.adultfyi.com/read.aspx?ID=13018 a person can only reasonably assume there has to be some truth to the article. Second on "60 Minutes" the CEO of Bally's Casino stated somewhat close to this "the day B&M casinos can offer online gambling to the world will be the day they bring legitimacy to the online world". As a somewhat intelligent person this indicates there may be problem with online poker or gambling software and or their respective online site owners, maybe both.I also believe shortly after the Department of Justice or Gaming Enforcement analyzes online poker and or gambling software the world will see many arrest warrants issued. For the record: I enjoy online poker, but not in its current form! I also hope online poker survives.

[Scanner313 0]

Well said "PotOdds and Balloon Guy" now "Scanner313" can begin to understand the entire picture... no penalty for short-side vision.

That'll be the day! I've debated PotOdds on this before, and while he is certainly entitled to his opinion, I completely disagree with them all. Off shore sites being risky? No ****! That's part of the game people. If you don't like it, then get on a plane and go to Vegas and play there. Nothing is stopping you from choosing which government sanctioned casino you want to play in. It's called personal choice, remember? If you're not willing to accept the risk then stay away. Nobody is forcing you to use their services.As for Balloonguy's point of view, he's saying that we, as Americans, shouldn't have the right to shop around to other available means of gambling. That just because there are legit casinos in the US (much more easily accessible to those in NJ, NV, etc. than to those of us in PA, mind you) that we should be forced to use THEIR locations. Complete and utter BS! If they don't like it, maybe the casinos should use their money to fight the government to legalize on-line gambling as opposed to paying off government officials to do whatever they can to stop it. Lots of people don't like Walmart because they have put smaller businesses out of business when they come into a town. Should we ask the government to make Walmart illegal because they have the means to deliver their products cheaper than the small guys? That's how the system works pal.If you feel that you need the government to keep you check, and want them to regulate everything so that we're all protected from ourselves that is fine. Just don't expect me to back you up, because I think you are wrong.