The earlier the text of this bill becomes public the better imo.

I remember in 2010 when we had the blackout bill sweat, that **** got people motivated, some on the "wrong" side against it, but most got behind it. But if this bill is what we think it could be, much more beneficial to the player, then places like 2p2 will see a huge increase in the number of people getting involved in trying to get the thing passed imo.

Isn't the idea that Reid will try to 'sneak' the bill through? Do we even want players getting involved writing/tweeting Congress to 'support the poker bill Reid is going to try sneaking passed you'?

GTFO!

lol, wat? So you are against the Daily action play thread? Because that's all that thread is. Obv the more voices we have fighting for us the better imo.

And it won't sneak through, FoF will see it, we'll see it, anyone who is interested will see it, unless it's a "we have to pass the bill to find out what's in it" thing.

If the bill it rides on is port securityesq, the greater public won't care about the small details like a UIGEA. Obv if it's a poker stand alone bill it will get noticed by more people, but it's clear this thing only has a chance this year being attached to something else.

The DAP, when there isn't any movement on a bill, seems harmless enough, but if it's going to be attached to another 'must pass' bill, drawing attention to it seems entirely counterproductive.

people give themselves excuses to be lazy all of the time in life.

Interesting. I would have said sentiment here was 60-40 against. Maybe it was the vociferous reaction to the 15 month blackout that made the opposition seem larger to me.

No. Just no.

I haven't been active in the DAP over the last few months but I'm going to kick it into gear...especially with this news. I think it will only help.

There's no question that a lot of people were against it. It might just be POV, but I would have thought more were for it.

Those who were against were extremely loud. There was a large NVG thread about how horrible the bill was ect.

Here's a link to the monstrosity of a thread that erupted here in the Legislation forum.

To the uninitiated, be warned that this thread will make your eyes bleed and your brain hurt.

Reid Bill to License U.S. Online Poker (failed to pass in late 2010)

The debate was heavy and divided. There were numerous such threads.

Here's a link to the monstrosity of a thread that erupted here in the Legislation forum.

To the uninitiated, be warned that this thread will make your eyes bleed and your brain hurt.

Reid Bill to License U.S. Online Poker (failed to pass in late 2010)

just delete this and close this topic and keep it on the down lo before the family groups find this and go full ******.

They already know about it.

berge itt

I'm not suggesting saying nothing, but if the idea is to keep a bill under the radar by passing it under the umbrella of must pass legislation, then shouting "support that amendment under the umbrella!" makes no sense to me.

Sending out tweets like "I won 2K playing exercising my freedom to play online poker today, sure you don't want to tax this?" makes sense, whereas tweeting "please support the Reid/Kyle (hidden) amendment to tax/regulate online poker" could backfire.

cite?

Maybe someone else can cite that they are aware of the Reid/Kyl agreement. I would be surprised if they are not already. And I am certain they will be aware by the lame duck time. They were well aware of the last Reid bill: Reid: Pushing Lame Bill Through Lame-Duck. They follow this stuff. Here is a Chad Hills post 3 months ago regarding states' efforts to legalize iGaming: Fold on Internet Gambling. Here is his post on the DOJ Letter: The Department of Justice’s Peculiar Timing.

As Berge20 noted: "And lobbying is starting to ramp up on it." He didn't say "And Reid and Kyl staffers are avoiding eye contact with other Congressional staffers until they can sneak the bill in at the last minute". Even though the bill is not likely to receive an up and down vote, a consensus still needs to form around it for it to be attached to other legislation. It's not like it's some big secret that we can hide from Chad Hills by deleting all references to the Reid/Kyl agreement on this site.

As Hills taunted when the last Reid bill seemed destined to fail: Internet Gambling: Poison Pill for Any Bill. If we remain silent, it remains poison.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/57...ehicle-1216862

FYP.

.... probably a closet rigtard also.

For all we know they may actually support UIGEA II since Kyl is in agreement with Reid for the first time. They can still save a lot of souls by supporting UIGEA II to ban many pernicious forms of gambling.

Mods can you delete this? I'm not a fan of Chad just like all of us bit this is super out of line imo.

(I'm sure he's joking but opponents do read these forums and this is a bad reflection of our community.)

was drunk guys ,sorry.

I noticed that TE and Skall both used their "one time"s up on this 2010 bill. I, on the other hand, have never used mine .... so, IF the as yet unseen 2012 Reid/Kyl bill contains a authorization for multi-state compacts and minimal protectionism for IGC bankrollers, then I may throw my "one time" into the balance.

It is puffery for anyone to feign inside knowledge simply to boost his/her own ego. If anyone claims to know what is written to date, then share the source at a minimum.

lol "puffery"