Isn't that the real problem here ? A "Govt for the people by the people" was what was written, they are supposed to listen to what we want...

They are. That's the problem for us.

It's easy for us to assume everyone agrees with us. It's like the famous quote after the 1984 Presidential election: "how did Reagan win...no one I knew voted for him." Unfortunately, we have many opponents. This is compounded on the Hill by the fact that our opponents have more accessibility to lawmakers than we do (there is no U.S. based site currently offering poker, no major religious denominations feel a need to require poker access, etc).

For us to get the best bill, we all have to tell Congress where we stand. The more of us who do this, the better the legislation will be. Regardless, there will still be many who oppose us, whose opinions will be heard on the Hill too.

The PPA is an organization dedicated to passing Federal legislation licensing and regulating online poker. Its in their mission statement. If you are looking for anything else besides that and some legal help when appropriate, the PPA isnt where you should be looking. UIGEA repeal, intrastate poker licensing, rake issues etc, etc....if you want to take it on, form your own group.

Debating whether the PPA should fight for Federal licensing and regulation is like debating about whether Fairplay should support Harrah's interests. Federal licensing and regulation is the reason they exist.

^+1. Which is why I think supporting the PPA to make poker better for players is a terrible idea, and I see this backfiring big time.

Here is the actual PPA mission (not the made-up one):

The federal solution has been and continues to be the best solution to licensed and regulated i-poker in the US. The PPA also supported the original NV state bill, and participates in other states to determine if the proposed bills are good or bad for players. Plus there is all the court work the PPA does which aligns with its mission.

PX, I included court work in my post. Im not "making up" what the organization's mission is.

I did forget that the PPA did support the NV state bill, although given it was written by FT and PS for FT and PS I dont really give it a lot of predictive value going forward.

What % of the current operating budget is going towards promoting Federal legislation? Id be very surprised if its under 80%.

I cant imagine any objective look at the PPA not concluding the organization is devoted to a) passing Federal legislation and b) to a lesser extent, providing legal services when it furthers the mission.

The PPA is currently, AFAIK, supporting zero intrastate poker initiatives. The PPA has no plans to challenge or try to repeal the UIGEA. Not really controversial statements, and not saying they are wrong, just that players who have those goals in mind should look elsewhere.

AFAIK, the PPA is dedicated to "establishing favorable laws for poker players", which at the moment equates to mostly being dedicated to passing federal legislation obv. The former is the organizational mission; the latter is the current primary goal to accomplish that mission. There is a distinction.

Fair enough. I expect close to zero resources to be devoted to intra-state legislation or UIGEA repeal so the substance of my statement, that players who are looking to pursue those ends, shouldn't look to the PPA. Resources are currently being focused on Federal legislation and key legal fights, not UIGEA repeal efforts and intrastate legislation. The battlegrounds arent open to player input or discussion.

They most certainly are open to discussion. In fact they are discussed all the time.

And player input is always welcomed and considered.

The fact remains, however, most PPA members (who have voiced an opinion) recognize that a Federal bill would provide the best solution and so agree that that fight should be the number one priority.

Your previously expressed opinion that nothing will happen federally for years and years is your opinion. Others who have that same opinion and therefore want to advocate for single state poker laws probably should indeed develop their own state advocacy groups. The PPA, a national organization, does not see passing laws in a small number of states as the result its members want. Most members want international play, are willing to settle for national play with international play to come later, and really do not look forward to a future of only playing poker against people in the same state.

That said, the PPA does recognize the importance of the states in this process and does seek to organize in the individual states as the PPA also anticipates upcoming fights over opting in or out of a Federal Licensing scheme.

But it is important to get a Federal Licensing scheme first. And while I disagree with your "years and years" prediction, I do agree that getting a Federal Bill is still a struggle.

The contention you have otherwise made that getting poker in a single state will advance the Federal effort is highly speculative. At this point the PPA believes that it is more effective to concentrate on Congress directly.

Other than its effect on Congress, I see little reason for a national organization like the PPA to outright support (rather than simply not oppose) a decent single state law that only affects the players in that single state. PPA will continue to oppose single state laws that actually harm players (like CA's).

Of course you are free to disagree and if you convince enough PPA members of the benefits of an alternate strategy the strategy will change.

Skallagrim

Right Skall, that's pretty much all that Im saying. The PPA isnt active on the intrastate front or the UIGEA repeal front. I disagree (to some extent, mostly because I think we could shift resources from the Federal level and get more bang for the buck fighting for intrastate and laying the groundwork for opt ins when/if a Federal bill passes down the road) on the former front and agree the latter front is likely fruitless and not worth resources. My broader point is that players who want to be active on those fronts shouldn't be looking to the PPA.

As you just laid out, the PPA has been very honest about where their priorities lie.

Disagree here somewhat. The PPA hasnt, and maybe couldnt, operate as a member-driven/grassroots/democratic organization with regard to strategy. Its much closer to a (very) benevolent dictatorship.

I'm glad the DoJ agreed with me that poker is not a crime.

http://theppa.org/press-releases/201...tion-12232011/

You might think that after this the PPA would fight to just have poker declared legal.

Just getting it declared legal but not regulated still leaves us (US poker players) in the same boat as we were when it comes to possible fraud.

I've read this thread, and I have to ask -- do you want to be able to play or not?

Given the cards we have been dealt and the existing circumstances, the PPA is making the efforts to make sure you have the ability to play freely. Right now, you don't. No other advocacy group has, or will, put forth the efforts on Capitol Hill the PPA is putting forth. Think you can do better? Go for it. Think you can convince our lawmakers to bow out altogether? Be my guest. Never gonna happen.

Consumer protection is, and should be, toward the top of the discussion board when it comes to licensing and regulation. Without it, another Ultimate Bet situation would almost be inevitable at some point. Licensing and regulation would ensure, among other things, that the sites that operate in the U.S. are providing a safe and fair place to play. The potential economic boost -- not just for government tax revenue, but also for job creation -- that comes with licensing and regulation cannot be ignored.

As far as companies coming to the U.S. market that would be willing to pay license application fees, licensing fees, and applicable taxes, no problem there. A line is already being formed.

So, I ask again -- would you rather be able to play freely in a safe and fair environment, or just continue to not be able to play freely at all?

And by the way -- online poker has never been illegal. The UIGEA made it illegal for the financial institutions to process online gambling-related transactions. It's never been illegal to play online poker, except in the state of Washington, where for some dumbass reason it's a felony.

Let me introduce you to Bernard Lawrence "Bernie" Madoff, the admitted operator of a Ponzi scheme that is considered to be the largest financial fraud in U.S. history. Bernie defrauded people of BILLIONS of dollars over a period of years, all while being licensed and regulated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

This is not about ensuring a safe and fair place to play.