Poker Players Alliance: "Heads are Going to Roll" Says One Washington Insider "They promised 15 Republicans would be supporting H.R. 5767, then it was down to 10, 7, and when the vote finally came in on Wednesday, there was just ONE Republican who voted for the measure," said ************* authoritative Washington insider, whose eyes and ears are everywhere on Capital Hill. He referred to the powerful million plus member strong Poker Players Alliance, and its ineffectiveness at mustering up enough support among Republicans in the House.
H.R. 5767 - the ?Payment Systems Protection Act,? by a vote of 32-32 - was a measure that looked to stop the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act regulatory process - in essence, the online gambling prohibition would be placed on hold for at least a few months.
"The smart operators know not to waste their time on lobbyists," said our insider. "They (the lobbyists) are experts at getting people's money and they will suck these operators dry like vampires."
The PPA - while their intentions are good - has been behind the ball on many issues - specifically pushing worthwhile causes such as the Ron Paul Presidential campaign and The Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association's Supreme Court challenge against the Constitutionality of the UIGEA.
"Poker Players Alliance members should be iMEGA members and vice versa," said Payton O'Brien, Operations Manager for the **********website.
iMEGA members tend to be more on the sports betting side, something PPA heads thumb their nose at without realizing that the vast majority of sports bettors are also poker players. Likewise, the influential sports betting industry has a good five year leg up on the PPA when it comes to dealing with legislative affairs and online gambling. They were, after all, the industry pioneers. Many online sportsbooks have "friends" inside Washington that do not take a single dime from lobbyists. It was they who worked behind the scenes with the Clinton Administration to "quietly" self-regulate the industry.
"Just don't rub it in our faces," then Attorney General, Janet Reno, was quoted as saying during her visit in Costa Rica.
"Either ban all gambling on the internet or allow all gambling on the internet!" exclaimed Jay Lakin, who spoke to our Jenny Woo last week.
The problem is that when politicians bring up the idea of "gambling being immoral", there is not enough of a concerted effort to fight back with a response to the anti-online gambling zealots the likes of Spencer Bachus "Why would you support a measure that legalizes online horse racing when you are so concerned over children betting on the Web?"
The UIGEA, when it was passed, ensured a provision to make online horse racing legal. This exemption has made it difficult for banks to determine the difference between "good online gambling vs. bad online gambling transactions".
iMEGA, which got reamed by *********** for its perceived reckless spending on public relations firms, announced they will no longer be utilizing the services of Ogilvy and thanked ***********for enlightening them with sound rationale.
"I'll try not to feel completely hosed by some of the comments," growled the normally jovial Joe Brennan, Jr., founder of iMEGA.org, which last week also decided to spend money on real hosting for its oft hijacked website. "We reorganized our spending to focus on the area where we believe iMEGA can make the biggest difference. That is our appeal in the Third Circuit, asking the Court to overturn UIGEA."
An appeal the Poker Players Alliance has done little if nothing to support.
Brennan Jr, to his credit, applauds Barney Frank (author of H.R. 5767) for his efforts in helping Internet gambling.
"We have stated our support for Rep. Barney Frank's legislation (HR 2046 and HR 5767), but rather than just be another voice in the crowd on that issue, we're focusing our resources on our litigation (iMEGA v. Gonzales, et al) instead of lobbying. To do otherwise weakens our effort in the Courts.
"iMEGA's members and supporters have always believed that the best way to defeat UIGEA was in Federal Court. In "Round One" of our fight, the Court recognized our standing (which most of the industry and their attorneys said we'd never get). Our case was dismissed, but the Judge never addressed our arguments - that's why we're headed to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals."
Brennan Jr. points to two main facets of iMEGA's efforts.
"One, iMEGA's challenge has been accepted by the Appeals Court, and the Court has established our standing to bring suit on the behalf of our members and the i-gaming industry. And two, all i-gaming legislation in the US Congress has stalled, with no clear way forward. On balance, we feel good about where we're heading with our strategy."
H.R. 5767 - the ?Payment Systems Protection Act,? by a vote of 32-32 - was a measure that looked to stop the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act regulatory process - in essence, the online gambling prohibition would be placed on hold for at least a few months.
"The smart operators know not to waste their time on lobbyists," said our insider. "They (the lobbyists) are experts at getting people's money and they will suck these operators dry like vampires."
The PPA - while their intentions are good - has been behind the ball on many issues - specifically pushing worthwhile causes such as the Ron Paul Presidential campaign and The Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association's Supreme Court challenge against the Constitutionality of the UIGEA.
"Poker Players Alliance members should be iMEGA members and vice versa," said Payton O'Brien, Operations Manager for the **********website.
iMEGA members tend to be more on the sports betting side, something PPA heads thumb their nose at without realizing that the vast majority of sports bettors are also poker players. Likewise, the influential sports betting industry has a good five year leg up on the PPA when it comes to dealing with legislative affairs and online gambling. They were, after all, the industry pioneers. Many online sportsbooks have "friends" inside Washington that do not take a single dime from lobbyists. It was they who worked behind the scenes with the Clinton Administration to "quietly" self-regulate the industry.
"Just don't rub it in our faces," then Attorney General, Janet Reno, was quoted as saying during her visit in Costa Rica.
"Either ban all gambling on the internet or allow all gambling on the internet!" exclaimed Jay Lakin, who spoke to our Jenny Woo last week.
The problem is that when politicians bring up the idea of "gambling being immoral", there is not enough of a concerted effort to fight back with a response to the anti-online gambling zealots the likes of Spencer Bachus "Why would you support a measure that legalizes online horse racing when you are so concerned over children betting on the Web?"
The UIGEA, when it was passed, ensured a provision to make online horse racing legal. This exemption has made it difficult for banks to determine the difference between "good online gambling vs. bad online gambling transactions".
iMEGA, which got reamed by *********** for its perceived reckless spending on public relations firms, announced they will no longer be utilizing the services of Ogilvy and thanked ***********for enlightening them with sound rationale.
"I'll try not to feel completely hosed by some of the comments," growled the normally jovial Joe Brennan, Jr., founder of iMEGA.org, which last week also decided to spend money on real hosting for its oft hijacked website. "We reorganized our spending to focus on the area where we believe iMEGA can make the biggest difference. That is our appeal in the Third Circuit, asking the Court to overturn UIGEA."
An appeal the Poker Players Alliance has done little if nothing to support.
Brennan Jr, to his credit, applauds Barney Frank (author of H.R. 5767) for his efforts in helping Internet gambling.
"We have stated our support for Rep. Barney Frank's legislation (HR 2046 and HR 5767), but rather than just be another voice in the crowd on that issue, we're focusing our resources on our litigation (iMEGA v. Gonzales, et al) instead of lobbying. To do otherwise weakens our effort in the Courts.
"iMEGA's members and supporters have always believed that the best way to defeat UIGEA was in Federal Court. In "Round One" of our fight, the Court recognized our standing (which most of the industry and their attorneys said we'd never get). Our case was dismissed, but the Judge never addressed our arguments - that's why we're headed to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals."
Brennan Jr. points to two main facets of iMEGA's efforts.
"One, iMEGA's challenge has been accepted by the Appeals Court, and the Court has established our standing to bring suit on the behalf of our members and the i-gaming industry. And two, all i-gaming legislation in the US Congress has stalled, with no clear way forward. On balance, we feel good about where we're heading with our strategy."
