Posted: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 - 3 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News
 PPA Praises Passage of H.R. 2267, Internet Gambling Regulation Bill

 

Washington, DC (July 28, 2010) –The Poker Players Alliance (PPA), the leading poker grassroots advocacy group with more than one million members nationwide, today applauded passage of H.R. 2267, the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, by the House Financial Services Committee.  The bipartisan 41-22 vote demonstrates that sensible regulation of Internet gaming is gaining support in Congress while prohibition continues to fail.   

 

“The fact is, online poker is not going away. Congress has a choice – it can license and regulate it to provide government oversight and consumer protections, or our lawmakers can stick their heads in the sand, ignore it, and leave consumers to play on non-U.S. regulated websites in all 50 states,” said Former Senator Alfonse D’Amato, chairman of the PPA. “I’m glad the Financial Services Committee today overwhelmingly chose to act and protect Americans as well as preserve the fundamental freedoms of adults and the Internet.”

 

Sponsored by House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA), H.R. 2267 establishes a robust licensing and regulatory regime for online gaming in the United States, providing much needed oversight on this growing industry in order to protect consumers, children and problem gamblers.  By using the most modern technologies and regulatory authority, this bill goes further than the ineffective Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) to keep children and problem gamblers off these sites, at the same time allowing for strong consumer protections for adult consumers who enjoy this recreational activity.  Additionally, licensing and regulation presents an avenue for companies to return to the U.S., providing the economy with much needed jobs and tax revenue.  The bill was further strengthened by several bipartisan amendments that provide even greater consumer protections and strong enforcement against unlicensed operators, something that the current law (UIGEA) lacks completely.

 

“We commend the lawmakers who helped make H.R. 2267 stronger through a variety of consumer protection mandates.  In particular, we thank Representatives John Campbell (R-CA), Mary Jo Kilroy (D-OH), and Melissa Bean (D-IL) for their thoughtful additions to the bill and their interest in preserving the rights of adult poker players in their districts,” said John Pappas, PPA executive director.

 

While the bill has passed out of Committee, there is still much work to be done and areas of policy in this bill that must still be addressed.  To be clear, despite the concerns of some of our members, nothing in the Committee-passed legislation precludes lawful Internet poker-only operators whom U.S. players know and trust today from the opportunity to operate under a regulated system. The PPA will work with House and Senate lawmakers to ensure that the final legislation produces the best regulated online gaming environment for the consumer.

 

“This is a great day not only for poker players, but for proponents of Internet freedom and individual liberty,” said D’Amato.  “We thank Chairman Frank for his leadership on this bill, and look forward to working with him to bring this bill through the legislative process.”

 

Key provisions of the bill include:

 

  • Thorough vetting of potential licensees and creation of an OFAC-style list of illegal operators;
  • Mandatory implementation of technologies to protect against underage gambling using the commercial and government databases used for online banking to verify age and identity
  • Requirements for operators to set daily, weekly or monthly limits on deposits and losses to monitor and detect individuals with excessive gaming habits;
  • High standards to thwart fraud, abuse and cheating to ensure fair games for customers;
  • Regulation to prevent money laundering; and,
  • Processes to prevent tax avoidance.

 

 

About The Poker Players Alliance

The Poker Players Alliance (www.theppa.org)  is a nonprofit membership organization comprised of over 1,000,000 online and offline poker players and enthusiasts from around the United States who have joined together to speak with one voice to promote the game and to protect poker players' rights.

Posted: Thursday, May 20, 2010 - 1 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News
In Washington, playing poker online is now a felony- like child pornography or heroin possession - making any resident over 18 look like a hardened criminal if they play online poker.  Sign the petition to support PPA State Director Lee Russo who is challenging the constitutionality of the law, arguing that it violates the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, which reserves to Congress the right to regulate interstate and international commerce.  Click the petition tab on the PPA Facebook page.

Also the PPA will be holding a Rally on May 27, 2010.  For more information please contact Drew@theppa.org
Posted: Thursday, April 15, 2010 - 1 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News
 Please click here to send a message to Rep. Pitts or contact via Twitter @JoePitts4PAalt



Bookmark and Share Rep. Joe Pitts Speaks Out AGAINST Poker!  

Your U.S. Congressional Representative, Joe Pitts, has made it his mission to oppose your right to play Internet poker.

On April 14th, Rep. Pitts delivered a "One Minute" speech on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives assailing Internet gaming and supporting the implementation of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA), a law which seeks to restrict your ability to use your own money to play poker and other games on the Internet.

View Rep. Pitt's "One Minute" remarks here. Rep. Pitts speech is not only an assault on your freedoms, it is filled with inaccuracies. He needs to hear from you today so that he does not continue his misguided support for failed public policy.
Posted: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 - 5 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News
 Washington, DC (April 14, 2010) –The Massachusetts House of Representatives yesterday approved a Poker Players Alliance-supported amendment to the state’s gaming legislation which removed language criminalizing playing online poker and other gaming over the Internet.  The bill should meet final passage later today.  PPA, the leading poker grassroots advocacy group with more than one million members nationwide and over 25,000 members in Massachusetts, has been working closely with Massachusetts lawmakers since 2008 to preserve Massachusetts’ citizens’ rights to play poker, whether online or in person.

"Of course, the PPA is very pleased that the House-passed gaming bill does not criminalize online poker, but I am even more proud of our members in Massachusetts who really stepped up to the plate on this issue and made their voices heard among the House lawmakers. This was grassroots at its finest,” said John Pappas, executive director of the PPA.

The PPA has been engaged in the gaming debate in Massachusetts since 2008, when a broad casino bill contained language making it illegal to play online poker, carrying a criminal penalty of up to 2 years in prison and/or a $25,000 fine. That legislation ultimately lost momentum, but was reintroduced this year. 

Notwithstanding assurances that the criminalization language would not be part of the new bill introduced this year, it was. The PPA, its members in Massachusetts, and lobbying team quickly rallied to provide an amendment, offered by State Representative Brian Dempsey, striking the criminalization provision and to communicate the wide support for legal online poker among Massachusetts citizens.

Additionally, the PPA has been working with State Representative Brian Wallace on his legislation, H4069, which would officially define poker as a game of skill in Massachusetts.

“On behalf of poker players in Massachusetts and nationwide, I’d like to thank Representative Dempsey for his effort to remove the criminalization language from the gaming bill, as well as Representative Wallace for his continued support,” said Pappas.  “We will now focus our efforts on the Massachusetts Senate to include the skill language into the bill and to ensure the criminalization provision stays out of the final package.”

For more background on the skill versus chance argument, please visit http://theppa.org/resources/skill/.

About The Poker Players Alliance
The Poker Players Alliance (www.theppa.org)  is a nonprofit membership organization comprised of over 1,000,000 online and offline poker players and enthusiasts from around the United States who have joined together to speak with one voice to promote the game and to protect poker players' rights.
 
Posted: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 - 1 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News
 Washington, DC (April 14, 2010) –The Massachusetts House of Representatives yesterday approved a Poker Players Alliance-supported amendment to the state’s gaming legislation which removed language criminalizing playing online poker and other gaming over the Internet.  The bill should meet final passage later today.  PPA, the leading poker grassroots advocacy group with more than one million members nationwide and over 25,000 members in Massachusetts, has been working closely with Massachusetts lawmakers since 2008 to preserve Massachusetts’ citizens’ rights to play poker, whether online or in person.

"Of course, the PPA is very pleased that the House-passed gaming bill does not criminalize online poker, but I am even more proud of our members in Massachusetts who really stepped up to the plate on this issue and made their voices heard among the House lawmakers. This was grassroots at its finest,” said John Pappas, executive director of the PPA.

The PPA has been engaged in the gaming debate in Massachusetts since 2008, when a broad casino bill contained language making it illegal to play online poker, carrying a criminal penalty of up to 2 years in prison and/or a $25,000 fine. That legislation ultimately lost momentum, but was reintroduced this year. 

Notwithstanding assurances that the criminalization language would not be part of the new bill introduced this year, it was. The PPA, its members in Massachusetts, and lobbying team quickly rallied to provide an amendment, offered by State Representative Brian Dempsey, striking the criminalization provision and to communicate the wide support for legal online poker among Massachusetts citizens.

Additionally, the PPA has been working with State Representative Brian Wallace on his legislation, H4069, which would officially define poker as a game of skill in Massachusetts.

“On behalf of poker players in Massachusetts and nationwide, I’d like to thank Representative Dempsey for his effort to remove the criminalization language from the gaming bill, as well as Representative Wallace for his continued support,” said Pappas.  “We will now focus our efforts on the Massachusetts Senate to include the skill language into the bill and to ensure the criminalization provision stays out of the final package.”

For more background on the skill versus chance argument, please visit http://theppa.org/resources/skill/.

About The Poker Players Alliance
The Poker Players Alliance (www.theppa.org)  is a nonprofit membership organization comprised of over 1,000,000 online and offline poker players and enthusiasts from around the United States who have joined together to speak with one voice to promote the game and to protect poker players' rights.
 
Posted: Tuesday, April 6, 2010 - 4 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News
 CLICK HERE TO TAKE ACTION TODAY. 

Please share with any poker players you know in Massachusetts. Urgent Action Needed to Prevent Criminalization of Mass Poker Players!  
alt
The assault on Massachusetts poker players continues!  Today a bill passed in the Massachusetts State House Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies that is designed expand gaming opportunities in Massachusetts, but would also make it a crime to play online poker. The bill, which is known as the Speaker's Gaming Proposal, passed by a vote of 12 - 2 and is headed to the House Ways and Means Committee for a final potential within the week.   
 
The PPA is not opposed to the Commonwealth seeking to expand casino style gambling however we do OPPOSE provisions within the bill that would make it a crime for you to play poker on the Internet. Under the provisions included in the bill an individual convicted of playing online poker will be subject to a maximum term of 2 years in prison, a fine of $25,000, or both. Ironically, this bill is a pro-casino gambling legislation, yet it makes Internet poker a crime. Not only is this double standard unacceptable, but criminalizing law-abiding citizens in this manner is unconscionable.  
Posted: Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - 1 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News
Click Here to Read the Washington Post Story. 

By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer 
Sunday, February 7, 2010

 

Poker lobbyists are ramping up an aggressive push backed by millions of dollars to legalize Internet gambling in the United States this year, hoping to overcome passionate objections from social conservatives, sports leagues and other longtime opponents.

Partly bankrolled by offshore gambling companies, the campaign has already persuaded the Obama administration to delay enforcement of a 2006 law cracking down on Internet wagers.

Rep. Barney Frank (Mass.) and other Democrats are using the six-month reprieve to push ahead with legislation that would legalize and regulate poker, mah-jongg and other online betting games -- pastimes that have exploded in popularity in a country that accounts for more than half of the $16 billion global Internet gambling market. The federal government, which rarely prosecutes online gambling, would net billions of dollars in tax and licensing revenue if it were legalized, proponents say.

The legalization push has alarmed the National Football League, Focus on the Family and other Internet gambling opponents, who say that online betting would encourage criminal activity, threaten children and dramatically increase gambling addiction. Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) has placed a hold on six Treasury Department nominees to retaliate for the delay in the anti-gambling law, legislative aides said.

But those in favor are hoping with Congress in the hands of Democrats, who have historically been less opposed to gambling than Republicans, along with the growing popularity of recreational poker, that will work to their advantage. The list of backers includes Frank, a New England liberal who says the government should not bother gamblers, and former Republican senator Alfonse M. D'Amato (N.Y.), chairman of the Poker Players Alliance, which is leading the Capitol Hill push. With 1.2 million members, the alliance is funded largely by the Interactive Gaming Council, a Canada-based trade group for offshore gambling firms. Together, the groups have spent more than $4 million on Washington lobbying over the past year, and the alliance says its members have recently sent more than 300,000 mailings and e-mails to members of Congress.

 
"I think there's a growing realization in Washington that prohibition probably isn't going to work, just like prohibitions throughout history have not worked," said John Pappas, the poker group's executive director. "There needs to be a more common-sense approach, because it's not going away."

Among the backers is former House majority leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.), a lobbyist for PokerStars, a major Internet gambling firm based on the Isle of Man. Gephardt registered to represent the firm on Aug. 4 and earned $300,000 through December, disclosure forms show. His firm declined to comment on its work for PokerStars.

Organized opposition

Those opposed to legalized gaming include all four major U.S. sports leagues and numerous religious groups. Major casinos are divided on whether online gambling is a threat or an opportunity.

Chad Hills, a gambling research analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said opponents "are just trying to fortify the vaults" against the legislation, which they think would dramatically expand gambling in the United States. "This would go outside the walls of a brick-and-mortar casino, outside the walls of a convenience store lottery, and into the living rooms and homes of all Americans," he said.

The outlook on Capitol Hill, however, is uncertain given a slate of unfinished business on health-care reform, cap-and-trade legislation and financial market regulations, not to mention nervousness among Democrats about November midterm challenges. Gambling opponents say Democrats are unlikely to muster support during such a contentious year, but proponents say that changing mores and the prospect of new tax revenue give the effort a better chance than at any other time in recent memory.

The Justice Department views all online gambling as illegal under a 1961 law aimed at mob bookies using telephone lines, but it has prosecuted only a handful of Internet betting operations. The market is run by firms operating from Antigua, Malta and other foreign sanctuaries.

Any ambiguity was meant to be eliminated by the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, which bars U.S. banks from accepting payments from credit cards, checks or wire transfers to settle online wagers. Approved by the then-GOP-controlled Congress and signed into law by President George W. Bush, the measure was scheduled to take effect Dec. 1.

But as the enactment deadline approached, gambling interests joined by banks and other financial institutions urged a delay, saying that the statute was vague and unenforceable. Thoroughbred racing organizations also joined the fray after some credit card companies refused to process online parimutuel wagers, which were supposed to be exempt from the new restrictions.

The Treasury Department and Federal Reserve granted a six-month delay in December, citing efforts by Frank and others to draft new legislation. The Obama administration is officially neutral on the issue.

 

Key player

Key to the legalization effort is Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. He has become one of the top congressional recipients of gambling interests' money, collecting nearly $100,000 from the gambling and casino sector since 2007, according to contribution data.

Frank has become an unlikely hero to the politically conservative poker community. Last summer, Frank issued the ceremonial "shuffle up and deal" command at the World Series of Poker in Las Vegas, then took in more than $50,000 at a fundraiser hosted by the poker alliance.

"It was fun for me as a politician because I was there talking to and being cheered on by a lot of people who are probably on the conservative side politically," Frank said in an interview. "I think the Republicans are misreading the politics on this. People who are not ordinarily active in politics get very active in this."

Rich Muny, 41, an engineer from Union, Ky., is an avid online poker player and a state director for the poker alliance. He is also a die-hard Republican conservative who blogs about politics and disagrees with GOP leaders on Internet gambling.

"There's a part of the party that always believes this isn't something people should do," Muny said in an interview. "But I think it behooves the party to be a little more broad-minded on this issue."

Frank's proposed bill, which is set for committee markup in coming weeks, would establish federal oversight of online gambling firms in exchange for five-year licenses and would include protections aimed at weeding out underage players, compulsive gamblers and criminal activity. Online sports betting would remain illegal.

A companion bill sponsored by Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) would levy a 2 percent tax on gambling deposits, which supporters say could bring in $42 billion in tax revenue over 10 years. Similar Senate legislation would legalize betting on online poker and other "games of skill."

Opponents remain unconvinced, saying that safeguards will not stop abuses. Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.), the ranking member on Frank's committee, vowed in a statement to oppose the efforts, saying, "Internet gambling is a threat to the youth of our country. . . . Young people are particularly at risk because if you put a computer in their bedroom or dorm room, it's a temptation that many cannot resist."

Posted: Monday, December 7, 2009 - 1 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News
 Read the Pocket Fives article here.  

By P5s Staff | Published Dec 03 2009, 04:52 PM 

altThe mandatory financial services industry compliance with the regulations of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) being delayed for six months has been at the forefront of poker news headlines this week. Accordingly, the PocketFives.com Podcast powered by the USA-friendly site Carbon Poker welcomes Poker Players Alliance (PPA) Executive Director John Pappas to the show. Pappas will break down what the delay means for players and field listener questions.

altThe PPA, two horse racing organizations, members of the House and Senate, and a variety of financial associations authored petitions to U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner (pictured at left) and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke calling for a one-year delay in compliance with the UIGEA. Last week, the two officials authorized a six-month extension. Pappas told the PocketFives.com Podcast, “The UIGEA will not go into effect for at least six months. We feel fairly confident that we should be moving in the right direction, which means that there is legislation to clarify the UIGEA within these six months. If we reach that deadline, further extensions will be granted.”

So what does a six-month extension mean for players in the United States? Will sites likePartyPoker and Paradise Poker begin flooding the U.S. market? Pappas forecasted, “It’s additional breathing room. Most importantly, it gives us a defined window in which we can establish the clarity that is needed to make sure the rights of online poker players are protected. This gives us an opportunity to establish a licensed and regulated marketplace.” The UIGEA was approved in the closing minutes of the 2006 Congressional session and tacked onto the SAFE Port Act, an unrelated port security measure.

altA hearing in the House Financial Services Committee on Thursday discussed the merits of HR 2266 and HR 2267. Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA, pictured at right) introduced both bills; the latter outlines a system for internet gambling outfits to solicit U.S. customers. On whether he expects pro-internet gambling and online poker legislation to be passed, Pappas responded, “I’ve always been a strong believer of it’s not a matter of if, it’s a matter of when. The next logical step is once [prohibition] proves to be a failure, I think they’ll license and regulate it. I think we have a very good chance, perhaps even in 2010. The onus is now on our Federal Government to do something.” As it stands now, the regulations must be followed by June 1st, 2010.

Many PocketFivers have asked whether withdrawals from online poker sites will be affected by the UIGEA. Pappas shed some light on the troublesome question: “The UIGEA should not impact any withdrawals. The regulations make it very clear that they are only seeking to prevent deposits. If your bank is doing it for some other reason, that’s an issue you’ll have to bring up with your bank and the PPA will certainly help where we can.” The PPA has its ownLitigation Network open to paid members that puts poker players in touch with local legal counsel.

Finally, the PPA has launched Tweet for Poker in recent weeks, taking grassroots political advocacy to a whole new level. What is Tweet for Poker, you ask? Pappas revealed, “This is another way to reach members of Congress. Twitter has become a very popular social networking tool. Members of Congress are beginning to engage in this medium. We know a lot of PPA members are Twitter users. What we’re doing now is cutting edge in terms of public policy.” It takes all of 10 seconds to send a Tweet to your Congressmen.

Check out the rest of this week’s PocketFives.com Podcast featuring PPA Executive Director John Pappas.
Posted: Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 0 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News
 Online Poker Bill to get hearing in US House Financial Services Committee on 12/3.  Click here to watch the hearing live or get the latest updates on the bill.  Stand up for Poker!
Posted: Saturday, November 7, 2009 - 1 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News
The PPA has launched a new site that will let Poker Players Tweet their Members of Congress.  Tweet your Rep. and Senator today and tell them to support  your right to play poker.

You can Tweet For Poker here.
 
Posted: Tuesday, November 3, 2009 - 0 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News
 Read the full article in Poker News here.

If winning the battle in the media is a prelude to success in Congress for the argument to license and regulate online poker, then two recent articles are sure to help.

Two high-profile newspapers have spoken out on the issue over the past few months, each in favor of poker's cause -- the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times.

These weren't just news articles reporting on the latest court case or bill involving poker. These articles were written by nationally respected columnists weighing in with their opinion, and both showed an understanding of the issue that many people on Capitol Hill still lack.

"It's fair to say that the American approach to Internet gambling, which is legal in much of the rest of the world, is absurd," Michael Hilztik wrote in the Times.

"Congress probably should fold its interference with Internet gambling and certainly should get its 10 thumbs off Americans' freedom to exercise their poker skills online," George F. Will wrote in the Post.

/**/"It's fair to say that the American approach to Internet gambling, which is legal in much of the rest of the world, is absurd," wrote in the Times."Congress probably should fold its interference with Internetgambling and certainly should get its 10 thumbs off Americans' freedomto exercise their poker skills online," wrote in the Post.

It couldn't have been said better if poker's advocates had written the statements themselves -- and it's no coincidence that both papers spoke to the Poker Players Alliance.

"I think we see pockets of interest from the national media on this issue," said John Pappas, executive director of the PPA. "I wouldn't say the tide is turning because it's always seemed the media understood this issue a whole lot better than Congress, that licensing and regulation is far superior than prohibition. Media has been there for a while, and we hope that it's going lead to changing minds on Capitol Hill."

The PPA is getting plenty of mileage out of these articles, keeping office-supply stores in business with how many copies it has made of each. Each time a PPA representative meets with a congressman or senator, a packet of articles is left behind.

Will is considered a Republican columnist, making his article especially useful in trying to convince Republican congressmen, the key group with which poker advocates need to make progress.

Articles in small regional papers don't get much attention nationally but can be more important in influencing an individual congressman.

"It obviously helps when you go into (government) offices and can show articles from major publications," Pappas said. "But smaller stories in hometown papers are great for congressmen because those are the papers their constituents read. A combination of both, hometown stories and national high-profile stories, works best."

Media opinion pieces usually reflect the views of the people, which is why they capture the attention of Congress. Once officials on Capitol Hill realize that the overwhelming will of the people who elect them is to have the right to play online poker, legalization will occur.

Posted: Friday, October 30, 2009 - 1 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News
Read the National Journal article here.

By Andrew Noyes

 

Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., on Thursday released an analysis by the Joint Committee on Taxation on the opportunity to generate up to $41 billion in new government revenue over the next decade through the regulation and taxation of Internet gambling. McDermott and Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank introduced companion bills earlier this year to regulate Web gaming rather than banning it entirely. The activity is currently prohibited in the United States under a 2006 law.

"I suspect that many of my colleagues, especially those on the fence, will take more interest in this issue once they see $41 billion available that they can match up with any number of worthy programs," McDermott said in a press release. "I would suspect it's only a matter of time before Congress appropriately moves to regulate the industry in order to protect consumers and reverse the flow of billions of dollars currently lost offshore as Americans gamble billions online despite attempts to prohibit the activity."

"Given the many critical government programs currently going under-funded or not funded at all, Internet gambling regulation should be given fair and immediate consideration, " McDermott said. "Prohibition in various guises has failed before and is failing once again. There is a better way." Read the Joint Committee on Taxation document here (PDF).

 

Posted: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 - 1 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News
View the Story on CNN.

 By David Daniel, CNN
October 27, 2009 2:48 p.m. EDT
Don Cheadle has been outspoken about raising awareness about the Darfur genocide.
Don Cheadle has been outspoken about raising awareness about the Darfur genocide.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • Don Cheadle visited Darfur in 2005, wanted to do something to help people
  • Cheadle has been instrumental in poker tournaments that raise money
  • Celebs rub shoulders with poker stars, "civilians" see all
  • Ante Up for Africa, Cheadle's organization, has raised more than $2.5 million

Los Angeles, California (CNN) -- "Hotel Rwanda" star Don Cheadle got a first-hand view of horror when he traveled to the devastated Darfur region of Sudan in 2005.

He saw what it's like in an area in which tends of thousands have died and many more have been rendered homeless.

He came back inspired to try to help. And this Thursday, he'll return to one of the efforts that has had the most impact.

Playing poker.

Cheadle, poker champ Annie Duke and their friend Norman Epstein founded Ante Up For Africa in 2006, hoping to raise money and awareness of issues in Sudan and bringing peace to the region. Initially, their goals were as modest as the problem is massive: They pictured a one-off celebrity poker tournament that might raise $20,000 or $30,000.

The first day's take for their new charity: $700,000. They were onto something.

"Everybody wants to give, but they also want value in return for their time," says Duke, positing that trying to beat a movie star or a pro athlete at cards is a better tool than "boring speeches" at a rubber-chicken dinner. "I think there's a variety of ways to do that that are effective, but I'm not sure anything is more effective than a poker tournament, because people come and they can genuinely hang out with celebrities and some of the famous poker players, and just have a really fantastic time while they're giving."

As incongruous as those images may be -- well-fed celebs laughing around a poker table, versus millions of subsistence farmers and nomads being killed or driven from their villages -- there's no arguing with the group's success. Ante Up For Africa has raised about $2.5 million and has spread awareness of the disaster significantly. It's had events at the World Series of Poker in Las Vegas, Nevada, and in Monte Carlo, Monaco.

On Thursday, the San Manuel Indian Bingo & Casino in California is hosting its second annual event for the group and has anted up $500,000 of its own to the charity. More comes from the hundreds of participants, and not just those who lose their $150 buy-in.

"They give what they want to give," explains Cheadle, who says the big winners routinely kick in some or all of their purses. "We ask at least 10 percent, but some people, most people actually, every year have given back everything."

Naturally, the star power is a big attraction. Celebrities can be just as awed as "civilians" by stars in another field, whether it's Matt Damon and Ben Affleck itching to sit down with the best poker players in the world, or athletes like Herschel Walker who care far less about the game than about hanging out and having fun.

And then there are those "civilians" -- about 300 members of the general public who can go one-on-one with a star at the poker table. Casey Affleck (one of last year's big winners), George Lopez, Cheryl Hines, Marlon Wayans, Ron Livingston and Mekhi Phifer are among the celebs confirmed for this year's tourney.

"Everybody that's just a regular Joe wants to have a story to tell about how they took out Annie Duke, or they took down Howard Lederer, or they took down Don Cheadle or Matt Damon at the table," says Cheadle, whom Duke calls a talented and fiercely competitive player. "I think it's part of the fun in the tournament as well. ... But everybody still ultimately understands what they're there for."

Players also learn about and fund groups like Refugees International, the Enough Project and the Darfur Peace and Development Organization, which works to create an infrastructure in the devastated region. The latter is run by Darfuri people, who, as Duke notes, are less likely to be thrown out of the country than foreign aid groups.

"One of the things as an organization we are really focused on is long-term solutions to the problem," says Duke, "and one of the ways to do that is to look at the people from within the country being able to help themselves."

Yes, there's an apparent disconnect between celebs in the spotlight and those they're trying to aid. "Brad [Pitt] is fond of saying -- and he's right about this -- he can't get out of the light, you know. And these guys can't get in the light," says Cheadle. "Some people look at that and are cynical about it and think, that's just frivolous celebrities trying to give themselves some sort of gravitas.

"But I still say, even if it is that, there is still something going on over there, and we want you to look over there. So you try and take the opportunity whenever you can."

Posted: Friday, October 23, 2009 - 1 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News
Watch PPA Executive Director John Pappas discuss the December 1, 2009 deadline for implementation of the the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIEGA).  


Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009 - 0 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News
 The Kentucky Supreme Court is hearing the online poker case today.   You can watch the hearing live on the PPA website:  www.ThePPA.org

See the Poker News Daily story below for more information:

Internet Gambling Proponents Prepare for Kentucky Supreme Court Hearing

By Dan Cypra for POKER NEWS DAILY | Posted on October 21, 2009

On Thursday, lawyers from the Interactive Media Entertainment and Gaming Association (iMEGA) will lead a contingent into Frankfort, Kentucky in a case involving the seizure and potential forfeiture of 141 internet gambling domain names. Among those prepping is Ian Ramsey from Stites and Harbison, local counsel for the Interactive Gaming Council (IGC).

Oral arguments in the case will begin at 11:00am local time. The case is the final one on the docket for the week, leaving many in the industry speculating that the proceedings could last for longer than the scheduled 15 minutes per side. Ramsey told Poker News Daily what he’s expecting to unfold: “I expect that we’re going to have a lot of questions from the bench. The parties have raised many issues and the Supreme Court is going to have to sort through them.”

Among those factors that will contribute to the Supreme Court’s decision is whether the Commonwealth of Kentucky had jurisdiction to seize the domain names on the grounds that they were “gambling devices” and whether the State bringing a criminal gambling charge to a civil forfeiture hearing will hold weight. On the question of jurisdiction, Ramsey cited a ruling by the Arizona Supreme Court on October 16th, which the IGC submitted as supplemental authority in its Kentucky case. The Arizona legal battle ended with the state’s highest judicial body ruling, “However noble the State’s purpose is, in remjurisdiction requires presence of the subject property in the state.”

The question remains as to where a domain name is located. Is it located on a bettor’s computer? Is it located on a server? Is it located overseas where the internet gambling site is based? Is it located somewhere in cyberspace? The Commonwealth of Kentucky, under the direction of Governor Steve Beshear and Justice and Public Safety Cabinet Secretary J. Michael Brown, charged that domain names were “gambling devices,” a term typically reserved for objects like roulette wheels and slot machines that you’d find in an underground casino.

Ramsey explained the far-reaching impact of the case, which has garnered worldwide attention: “The citizens of the Commonwealth of Kentucky are interested, the citizens of the United States are interested, and anyone around the world on the internet is interested in this case. We look forward to a well-reasoned, thoughtful opinion by our Supreme Court.” In January, the Kentucky Court of Appeals in Louisville ruled by a two to one margin that the State did not have jurisdiction to act. The lone dissenting opinion noted that the domain names were part of a larger gambling device.

The URLs in jeopardy belong to some of the behemoths of the industry like PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, and Ultimate Bet. Full Tilt Poker sought a backup plan by purchasing FullTilt.com last September, shortly after word broke that FullTiltPoker.com was among those domain names seized. Poker News Daily also learned that Ultimate Bet and Absolute Poker, both members of the USA-friendly CEREUS Network, had contingency plans in the event that their primary domain names were held hostage. If successful, the 141 domain names under fire would be unavailable not only in Kentucky, but also around the world.

Besides iMEGA and IGC, other organizations involved in the legal squabble include the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Electronic Frontier Foundation, eBay, Network Solutions, the Poker Players Alliance (PPA), and the Center for Democracy and Technology. In its amicus brief, the PPA argued that its one million members will suffer “immediate and irreparable harm” if the domain names are inaccessible and that poker is a game of skill and therefore not illegal gambling.

 
Posted: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - 0 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News

ESPN's Inside deal discusses the PPA letter to Treasury Secretary Geithner asking for UIGEA to be delayed one year to December 1st, 2010.


Watch Inside Deal here.


Posted: Monday, October 19, 2009 - 4 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]
Category: News

Calling America's bluff on Internet gambling

Internet poker

A man plays poker online. Although a federal ban on Internet gambling exempts "skill" games and poker aficionados contend it's a game of skill, the regulations seem to outlaw the game. (Karen Bleier / AFP/Getty Images / October 3, 2006)


To persuade ourselves that we can keep this particular sin under control, we sequestered casinos in isolated places like Las Vegas and Atlantic City reachable only by superhighways, and isolated them on riverboats where not a single card could be dealt or slot lever pulled until the vessel left the dock.

In Mississippi, the law used to say you couldn't have a casino unless it floated on water. After Hurricane Katrina forcibly relocated a few of these sin barges onto land, the Legislature, reading the disaster as a sign from God, revised the law to let them stay put. (The riverboat states, similarly, eventually allowed their floating casinos to remain dockside.)

Then there are the Indian tribes that have fewer members on their rolls than slot machines in their multimillion-dollar casinos.

Which brings us to Internet gambling.

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) have both introduced bills in Congress to lift a federal ban on much online play and clarify the law, which is even murkier than it is for physical casinos, if that's possible. Their goals include taking a piece of the action for the U.S. Treasury, on the political principle that sins always seem less deadly when there's money to be squeezed from them. The consulting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers estimated in 2007 that legalization could yield as much as $43 billion in tax revenue over 10 years if it includes sports betting, $34 billion even if it doesn't.

Another impetus is that new Federal Reserve and Treasury Department rules requiring banks and other financial institutions to block gambling transfers will go into effect Dec. 1, and the banks are screaming bloody murder about the added regulatory burden.

Internet gambling is one of those issues that shines a light on the distribution of juice in Washington.

The repeal bills delight casino companies such as Harrah’s Entertainment, which is hankering to expand its thriving poker business online and has spent about $1 million this year alone to lobby Congressfor legalization. But they also leave intact a ban on Internet sports betting, which pleases outfits like the National Football League, no slouch in the Washington lobbying game.

It's fair to say that the American approach to Internet gambling, which is legal in much of the rest of the world, is absurd. (Indeed, the federal ban placed the U.S. in Dutch with international trading partners that host online gambling companies, which have complained to the World Trade Organization that it violates trade treaties the U.S. signed.) State laws are wildly inconsistent and sometimes hypocritically excessive. "Martians might have a difficult time understanding that if you play poker online for money in the state of Washington, you're committing a class C felony," Joseph M. Kelly, a gambling-law expert at Buffalo State University in New York, told me. "That's the same as rape."

The Government Accountability Office, surveying the legal landscape in 2002, found that five states specifically outlawed Internet gambling: Illinois, Oregon, South Dakota, Nevada and Louisiana. (Washington enacted its ban in 2006.) Gambling in physical casinos was legal in every one.

On the federal level, conservatives in Congress slipped an Internet gambling ban onto the books in 2006 by quietly attaching it to an antiterrorism bill no sane lawmaker could oppose.

That federal law, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, has numerous flaws. It saddles financial institutions with the duty of enforcement by barring them from "knowingly accepting payments" derived from "unlawful Internet gambling." But it doesn't define what is unlawful.

It exempts fantasy sports and "skill" games, for example. But where does that leave the most popular online game, poker? The new regulations seem to outlaw the game, although its aficionados contend that it's a game of skill pitting player against player. They contend it's been swept into the gambling ban by lax regulation-drafting.

"This law and these regulations are simply a fraud," says Howard Lederer, a world-class poker player on the board of the Poker Players Alliance, a Washington group that claims 1.2 million members. "People who had a moral agenda wrote laws and regulations that were vague. And banks, which have the sword of Damocles hanging over their heads and no clarity, are probably going to block poker transactions."

As for other games, the Justice Department bases its position that all Internet gambling is illegal on the 1961 Wire Act, which outlaws the use of telecommunication services to place bets. But federal courts have upheld Wire Act prosecutions for sports betting alone, leaving unclear whether other online gambling is actually illegal under federal law.

Banks and credit card issuers aren't happy about having to screen billions of financial transactions for signs they're gambling-related starting a few weeks from now. An officer of the American Bankers Assn. told Congress last year that the proposed rules have "no prospect of practical success" in fulfilling the explicit rationale for the 2006 law, which was to combat money laundering.

Kelly thinks it might have the opposite effect. "You diminish reputable payment processors and replace them with those who don't leave a paper trail," he says.

It's not as though the federal ban can wipe out online play any more than Prohibition wiped out drinking. It just deprives players of the protection of a U.S.-regulated environment. Gambling sites are generally regulated by their home countries -- Britain, Ireland and Caribbean states such as Antigua among them -- but that's far to go for redress.

"If a player feels cheated, he'll stop playing on the site," says John Pappas, executive director of the Poker Players Alliance, "but without U.S. oversight, he can't file a claim in an American court." The Frank and Menendez bills would require sites serving U.S. players to accept U.S. legal jurisdiction in return for licensing.

Certainly Internet gambling has its hazards, including the prospect of addictive playing and the enticement of minors. But banning the pastime forces these problems into the shadows where they're harder to address and makes it impossible to enlist the industry in helping to fight them.

It's doubtful that Congress will act in time to put off the new regulations, especially given the more pressing issues on its plate. But next year isn't too soon for it to relearn the lesson of every attempt to enforce a morality that most people don't share. If you can't eradicate, regulate -- and take a big chunk out of the wages of sin while you're at it.

Michael Hiltzik's column appears Mondays and Thursdays. Reach him at michael.hiltzik@latimes.com, read him at www.latimes.com/hiltzik, and follow @latimeshiltzik on Twitter.