You can be excused for thinking that once the November Nine was set and the WSOP went on hiatus till autumn that poker would enjoy a bit of downtime. Bu that wasn’t the case–the Poker Players Alliance declared July 19-25 “National Poker Week” and took the fight to legalize online poker to Washington, D.C. Thirty of the PPA’s state directors and seven poker players (UltimateBet’s Annie Duke, Howard Lederer, Andy Bloch, Greg Raymer, Dennis Phillips, Linda Johnson and Jan Fisher) went to the seats of power in America and spoke directly to members of Congress to make the case for online poker.
And it would seem that elected officials are a bit more inclined to listen to the case for online poker. As Annie Duke said in an interview:
It’s definitely different than a year and a half ago. Then, it was a lot of education and telling people what the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act is. Now, I think people are much more familiar with the legislation’s problems. They realize that it’s a piece of legislation that doesn’t work. It’s fortuitous timing with the health care reform because you get to talk about how it’s going to get paid for. When you point out that internet gambling can bring in a conservative estimate of $3 billion per year, they listen.
The events of the week generated quite a bit of interest in your traditional poker news sources, and as several of my poker-media friends were in Washington it was quite amusing to hear about them putting on power suits and trying to tie a Windsor knot for the first time in a decade before marching on the Capitol. But in addition to poker-centric outlets National Poker Week got a lot of play in the mainstream media as well. To start with, PPA Chairman Alphonse D’Amato went on the Howard Stern show and, after chatting with Stern about why he’s so passionate about poker, Howard announced on the air that he’d become a member of the PPA. After the show D’Amato had this to say about Stern signing on:
“I can’t think of a more fitting way to kick off National Poker Week than having my friend, Howard Stern, become a member of the PPA. I thank him for having me on his show this morning and for supporting the PPA’s efforts to protect the freedom of American citizens to play the great game of poker at the time and place of their choosing – a freedom Congress voted to take away… With Howard Stern as a member of the PPA, it shows Congress and the public that protecting Internet poker is about more than just poker – it’s about protecting Internet freedom and personal responsibility.”
But that wasn’t the only time that National Poker Week earned the attention of a major news outlet. On Wednesday PPA Executive Director John Pappas appeared on CNBC, and here’s how host Mark Haines introduced the segment:
“Washington is cracking down on fun! I guess that’s nothing new…”
Pappas appeared opposite Les Bernal, who fronts for an organization called “Stop Predatory Gambling”. As if someone out there is advocating predatory gambling, sheesh. Pappas did some rhetorical ju-jitsu to start with, saying that we need online gaming legalized so that children aren’t preyed upon by unscrupulous operators and adults can play on sites that are regulated and safe. Which left Bernal in a bit of a predicament because his argument is that online poker should NOT be legalized and regulated because that’s the best way to protect the children. That argument didn’t make sense before and Bernal didn’t make it any better during this interview. Bernal also seemed to think that poker players wager money against the house, not against other players, and then he made the bizarre claim that some USB study showed that the online poker business model is “unsustainable…that short-term they made money but long-term they did not”. Uh, what? I searched the Google for that study but found nothing, but to refute Mr. Bernal’s claim I would like to introduce him to…UltimateBet, which is celebrating it’s 10th Anniversary this year. And every year more and more people around the world play online poker. Bizarre. If you’d like to see the bizarreness first hand here’s the segment, with Pappas scoring a decisive TKO:
Greg Raymer did a chat on with the readers of the Washington Post (he had a great line when asked when we could expect a repeal of the UIGEA–”Predicting this stuff is always tough, as politicians are difficult animals to deal with. Animal trainers have it much easier.”). And there was a piece on Newsweek’s site as well. But while generating a lot of media buzz is a good thing, it doesn’t necessarily translate into legislative success. There’s still no guarantee that Congress is going to repeal the UIGEA and legalize online poker, but as you can see the balance of the discussion has definitely swung in our direction. Now it’s the opponents of online poker who are being grilled about why they think law-abiding Americans shouldn’t be allowed to play, it’s Washington who wants to keep Americans from having fun. Members of Congress who perhaps were content with opposing online poker to placate a small number of vocal social conservatives now have to deal with the 1.2 million-member Poker Players Alliance and fed-up constituants who have had enough with the federal government dictating how they can and cannot spend their time and money. Dan Michalski at Pokerati published some numbers from National Poker Week to show how the PPA was able to mobilize it’s membership:
Poker-related letters sent to members of Congress in July 2009: > 150,000
Poker-related letters sent to Congress in 2008: 77,000
Issues other than health care reform that have generated more letters to Congress in 2009 (including war in Iraq, recession, and gas prices): 0
Meetings scheduled between PPA representatives and Congressional offices in a two-day period: 110
At the end of National Poker Week there was a $100 charity tournament to raise money for the USO and wounded veterans. Around 180 people played, including 31 wounded veterans and seven members of Congress. It was a rebuy tournament and many of the professional poker players there rushed around the room re-buying for the soldiers who’d busted out (Annie apparently out-rebought her brother Howard by a 15-10 score). The tournament raised around $35,000 for the USO, people had a great time, and a veteran named Bret Chevalier won the tournament and a trip to Las Vegas. Many of the soldiers who played in the event won their seats in tournaments held at Walter Reed Hospital. Wounded soldiers playing poker in the hospital…a charity tournament to raise money to help them…folks sitting around a poker table having a great time…and there are people who think this is wrong? That the federal government should BAN it? It beggars belief.
But though the passage of the UIGEA was not a shining example of democracy in action, we at least have the opportunity to fight for a repeal of that bad law. Poker players can band together, lobby Congress, and get poker legalized as it should be. Unlike, say, in Russia, where Vladimir Putin the Russian government shut down casinos across the nation this week. At first it was thought that poker, which was classified as a sport in Russia, would be exempted. Ah, nyet–all the poker rooms in Russia were ordered shuttered as well. The government says that this was done because of the pervasive influence of organized crime in the thousands of casinos scattered throughout the country, though one wonders if the Russian Mafia will have any compunctions about opening (even deeper) underground casinos and cardrooms.
The Russian government decreed that gambling will only be permitted in four zones…one of which is in Siberia, while another is near the North Korean border. Those places sound…lovely. And these areas have none of the infrastructure in place to host casinos, the roads, airports, power stations, whatever you need for a major tourist attraction. It’s estimated that 400,000 people were put out of work by this decree, some of whom probably would’ve worked the first stop on this year’s European Poker Tour, which was to be begin August 18th in Moscow. But no more–yesterday it was announced that the tournament has been moved to Kiev, Ukraine.
So perhaps this is an argument that can be used here in the United States–you want to ban poker? That’s what they do in Russia. Jingoistic to be sure, but to get online poker legalized it’ll probably take every arrow in the quiver. The House bill Representative Barney Frank has introduced won’t come up for discussion again until the Congress returns from vacation in September, and then it faces a very crowded legislative docket. In case you haven’t heard there’s talk about national health insurance, the economy still teeters and totters, there are wars in Iraq and Afghanistan…legalizing online poker is still way down on the list of priorities. But National Poker Week no doubt did a lot to keep it ON that list, and in these difficult times one would hope that Congress will take a more reasonable and pragmatic look at legalizing the game we love.
The Poker Players Alliance held a press conference this morning to announce some new initiatives and discuss the current legislative state of affairs. PPA Executive Director John Pappas discussed three recently-launched websites that should help further the PPA’s grass-roots recruitment of poker players to the cause:
The PPA announced that July 19-25 will be National Poker Week. At least 35 PPA State Directors and several well-known poker players (including Annie Duke, Howard Lederer, Linda Johnson, Jan Fisher and Dennis Phillips) will be in Washington, D.C. to visit with member of Congress and ask them to support the legalization of online poker. There will also be a charity poker tournament (benefitting the USO and Walter Reed Hospital) and other poker-related activities. So if you have some free time in mid-July, or happen to find yourself in our nation’s capital during that time, mark your calendars.
During National Poker Week PPA representatives will also deliver a petition to President Barack Obama, which you can sign yourself at PokerPetition.com. All you need to do is enter your name, email, and address, and your name will be added to the petition. Pappas said they’re hoping the number of signers is in six-figures–maybe seven–when the petition is presented to the President.
If you’d like to make a more personal statement about poker you can visit My Poker Story and upload a video describing why you play and love the game. A lot of people are passionate about the game (and passionate about their right to PLAY the game) and a brief video explaining how that fervor came to be adds a personal touch to this unnecessarily contentious issue.
Pappas said that there may be additional legislative initiatives introduced before the start of National Poker Week; he said that Senator Robert Menendez may re-introduce his bill to legalize online poker (his is a more narrowly-defined bill than Representative Barney Frank’s House bill). Rep. Frank may hold a hearing on H.R. 2267, the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, & Enforcement Act of 2009 (whew) which would give online poker’s legislative defenders a chance to debate their opponents in public. And further sway public opinion in poker’s direction.
PPA Chairman Alfonse D’Amato was at the press conference (and as we speak he’s playing in today’s Senior’s Event, his first WSOP tournament) and said that the legislative effort is going forward and that while Rep. Frank’s bill might need “some tweaking” before it comes out of committee he’s confident that they have a piece of legislation that will eventually end up on the President’s desk for signature. And while it may seem odd that poker players need to pull the levers of government in order to get the government to treat us fairly, that’s politics for you. “Big Brother government should not tell you what you can do online,” D’Amato said emphatically. “We should be allowed to do what we want online without the arm of the government intervening.”
D’Amato’s words were echoed by U.S. Representative Shelley Berkley, who serves Las Vegas in the House. “That legislation (the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act) was an affront to every freedom-loving American,” she said. She also said that it’ll take more than a handful of politicians to wipe the UIGEA off the books. “The only way (Rep. Frank’s) legislation will pass is if we stand up and get involved. Politics is not a spectator sport”.
And there are ways for you to get involved in the process. Sign the petition (I just did, it takes ten seconds). Upload a video, if you have mad camcorder skillz. Rep. Berkley recommended sending your Congresspeople emails in lieu of a written letter (will arrive instantly and is far more likely to be read). And ask your poker-playing friends (or friends who think that adults should be free to live without onerous goverment interference) to do the same. The UIGEA passed in large part because a small group of very vocal people convinced a handful of politicians to subvert the legislative process. To defeat them we need an army of freedom-loving citizens to stand up and be counted. Do your part, and stand up.
As expected there was a lot of reaction after the verdict was read yesterday in the South Carolina poker case. While the five defendants were found guilty of violating the state’s anti-gaming laws, the fact that the judge decided that poker is a game of skill seemed to be what most folks were focusing on. Including the defendents themselves, who were “ecstatic” that the judge said poker is a game of skill. Judge J. Lawrence Duffy said in his ruling that the existing law (written in 1802, for heaven’s sake) did not give him the latitude to find the defendents not guilty, despite his concession that poker is a game of skill and not chance. The verdict will be appealed and, perhaps, overturned. Or maybe the South Carolina legislature will look at this case and decide it needs to update the law so that the provisions are less vague. Or maybe both.
If you’d like to see what Poker Player Alliance executive director John Pappas had to say about yesterday’s ruling, make yourself some popcorn and watch it right now:
Last week I wrote that a South Carolina judge, deciding the fate of five men charged with running a poker game from their home, said at the conclusion of the trial that he believed poker is indeed a game of skill. That concession came after WPT host Mike Sexton and a statistics professor testified to that effect, and the judge’s statement seemed to bode well for the defense. That’s because the South Carolina law says that it’s illegal to run a game of chance from one’s home, and if poker is a game of skill that law might not apply.
The judge was to announce the verdict today and just a few moments ago he did just that, finding all five defendents guilty. My friend Brad Willis, who lives in South Carolina (and is a blogger for PokerStars) was in the courtroom during the trial and just posted the judge’s official ruling. In that ruling Judge J. Lawrence Duffy again stated that poker is a game of skill, and referred to other rulings in Pennsylvania, California, Missouri and Nebraska that also agreed that poker is a game of skill. However, as Judge Duffy wrote, “If this Court knew that this State follows that test in this factual circumstance the decision would be simple. But it is not.”
It’s not simple because one of the other people arrested in this case earlier pleaded guilty to operating a gaming house. And the South Carolina law says that “If any person shall play…in any house used as a place of gaming…at any games with cards or dice…upon being convicted thereof, before any magistrate…”. Which means, I think, that because because this house was already defined as a “place of gaming” when that other person pleaded guilty, the law applies regardless of whether poker is a game of skill or chance. I’d like to point out that I’m not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but that’s my back-of-the-envelope interpretation.
An interpretation I think is supported by Judge Duffy then writing, “There is no definition by the Legislature as to what will or will not constitute a house as a place of gaming.” Which, again, renders the skill vs. chance argument somewhat moot–the law doesn’t specifically say what exactly gaming is. Previous rulings quoted by Judge Duffy show that South Carolina courts have said that the Legislature prohibits “any game with cards or dice”, and since poker is played with cards, well…
The judge concludes by stating that the Court “…thus is compelled, since it has no clear guideline from the Legislature or from the majority of this Supreme Court to find the defendants guilty…” And so, because the law is vague (perhaps deliberately so), the judge had to rule in that way. Some people getting together for some $20 sit-n-goes, with the folks hosting the game taking a few bucks out to pay for pizza and drinks, and it all ends up in a court of law. It all sounds a bit absurd, but only to someone who hasn’t been paying attention to America in the 21st century.
There will be more information and reaction to this as the day goes on and I’ll try to update later on. I got the scoop on this via Twitter, by the way, following along to Brad’s tweets as well as the feed from the Poker Player Alliance. Yes, the PPA is on Twitter, too, as are all the cool kids these days (and the UB blog itself).
Every week seems to bring fresh news about a potential change in the government’s stance toward poker, and the past seven days was no exception. Earlier this week the Financial Timespublishedthreearticles about online gaming and how governments (both in the United States and abroad) are changing their attitude toward the industry.
The biggest news from the three pieces is that Barney Frank, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, plans to introduce a bill “in the next few weeks” to regulate online gaming. Frank tried to get a bill passed last year but it never got to a vote. But this is 2009, President Obama is far less likely to veto a bill should it pass, and there is growing sentiment within Congress (and the public at large) that regulation, not prohibition, is how online gaming should be approached.
Two other statements from Frank should be of interest to poker players. One, the Congressman said that he “expected anti-gambling regulations, rushed through in the dying weeks of the Bush administration, to be included among the measures Congress will look to rescind.” That’s something I wrote about a few weeks ago, that the Congressional Review Act could be used to reverse the anti-gaming rules enacted by the Bush Administration shortly before they left office. It’s perhaps a bit overly optimistic to expect that to happen, but how long has it been since the words “optimism” and “online gaming regulations” were used in such close proximity?
Frank also said that he “expects the Obama (Department of Justice) to be less zealous about locking people up. These outrageous arrests in transit – they should be stopping that stuff.” It’s not just the DOJ who’s less-than-enthusiastic about going after online gaming operators. The financial services industry, who have had, um, a bad time of late, are among those clamoring the loudest for a change in the regs. The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) put much of the onus for identifying and reporting online gaming transactions on banks and other financial institutions, and these days they have enough on their plate without burrowing into their customers’ records and trying to deduce what they should and shouldn’t allow.
There are other political and cultural forces that seem to be tilting the field in online gaming’s favor. On a purely practical level, governments around the world need to find ways of generating revenue. Right now the Senate is putting the finishing touches on a $780 billion stimulus bill–no matter how you slice it, that’s a lot of bread. And at the same time the Obama Administration wants to cut taxes on 95% of Americans. Government at every level will be grabbing up every nickel they can scrounge–it does not take a cynic to see that regulating online gaming might be a very attractive option to tax-starved legislators.
I personally take a civil liberties stance on why online gaming should be legal. People should be free to do what they want with their own time and money. Playing poker is legal in Vegas, in cardrooms around the country, you can play at home with your buddies…why should online play be forbidden? OK, if the government regulates the industry they’re gonna take their rake in some kind of tax, that’s just the price of doing business. But I don’t think revenue-generation should be the primary goal of regulation–as I said, people should be free to do what they want with their time and money. And, perhaps, the end of the Bush Administration’s policy of “surrender your rights and we’ll keep you safe, promise” will bring a new spirit of personal freedom (and personal responsibility) that’s been lacking the last eight years. And Barney Frank seems to agree with that. From the FT analysis piece:
Online gambling is a fundamental freedom, Mr Frank maintains, and attempts to make it illegal smack of a rightwing puritanical zeal that led to Prohibition in the 1920s and 1930s.
“It is often the case in politics that the people who want change get energised,” says Mr Frank, adding that the political momentum in the US is coming from poker players. “This is impinging on their freedom and they are fighting back.”
Once upon a time (say, 2006) it was the religious right who were energized, who saw an opportunity to remake the world as they saw fit. That time, thankfully, has passed. But there are still harmful artifacts of those dark ages, one of them being the UIGEA. It’s not enough to sit back and wait for Barney Frank to weave his legislative magic and repeal the UIGEA. People who believe they should decide how best to live their lives (instead of Bill Frist and James Dobson) need to step up and make their voices heard. Write to your Congressperson, your Senator. The Poker Players Alliance provides pre-written letters you can send to your representatives, or you can take pen in hand (or keyboard in lap) and write your own.
When the UIGEA passed in 2006 a lot of people asked why no one spoke out against it beforehand. Well, it’s never too late to make your voice heard. The Financial Times analysis piece (written by the awesomely-named Roger Blitz) says the following about the online gaming regulation:
But the tide has shifted: this year is set to mark the moment when gambling online reaches a measure of acceptance and respectability its detractors on both sides of the Atlantic have long fought to prevent.
Online gaming’s detractors fought in the past and they’ll fight in the future. Maybe the tide has shifted, but that’s the funny thing about tides–they shift back. To keep that from happening will require poker players to fight just as hard, for just as long. It’s taken two-and-a-half years just to get to this spot, and there’s a long way to go before we enjoy anything like a true victory. If you love poker, if you value your personal freedom, keep yourself informed on this issue, and make sure your voice is heard. That’s some change we can believe in.
