PPA DENIED Entry to the Texas State Republican Convention!

[Doc T River]

We need to leave the politics out as much as possible and focus on the actions of the Republicans.

[Thew92]

Joe Barton made this statement about the Texas Republican Convention not allowing the PPA to have a booth.

“Poker is the All American game and Texas Hold’em is a natural for Texans to play - in fact I learned to play in Boy Scouts. It is a game of skill, not one of chance. Recent rulings in Washington have set up a scenario that could open online poker to predatory overseas gambling operations.

We need to properly regulate the game online so we can we can protect players from illegal activity and create new revenue for Texas– that is why I believe it shouldn’t be against the Republican Party platform.

The Poker Players Alliance isn’t part of any gambling lobby. They are just a group of normal people working hard to restore rights to law abiding citizens who like to play poker. I think they should be allowed to have a booth at the state convention.”

[LetsGambool]

Good to see someone speak up.

I hope Joe doesnt think all overseas gambling operations are a problem though, otherwise some embedded lulz in the entirety of that statement.

[Groggy]

It sounds nice, but when the majority of your party is against it you're basically just a distraction. He's someone Republicans can look to and say, "see, we support poker too!" while in reality they are the party of no. No to everything.

[jimsbets]

Originally Posted by Groggy

It sounds nice, but when the majority of your party is against it you're basically just a distraction. He's someone Republicans can look to and say, "see, we support poker too!" while in reality they are the party of no. No to everything.

Still, the best chance we have for federally regulated online poker is a Republican bill. I'm not sure that a majority are against it, maybe a plurality.

[Groggy]

If that is the best chance we have then there might as well be no chance. You are talking about a political group that went to war with the wrong country. Do you really think they'd have a chance at comprehending something that has to do with technology and a game of skill like poker? These people say no to everything.

[DonkeyQuixote]

Originally Posted by jimsbets

Still, the best chance we have for federally regulated online poker is a Republican bill. I'm not sure that a majority are against it, maybe a plurality.

Reality check:

1. The FoF crowd will be fired up this year about getting a Prohibition Plank into the Republican 2012 Platform and likely a call for legislation to "correct" the DOJ Wire Act letter of 2011.

2. The Republican nominee has come out against internet gambling.

3. It will be at best a stalemate on the Hill, to ward off a Prohibition Bill.

4. No federal legislative action will be the best of the range of possible outcomes in 2012. The "cause" is deep in its own territory on the Hill this year; a Hail Mary pass in a tie game bears the risk of interception and being returned for a TD for the other team.

The best course for the cause of expressly legal, regulated online poker is STILL at the State level, running the ball up the middle as many times as it takes, on the most likely of the 49 State fields remaining now that Nevada is moving forward. .....

5. Remember, even Texas has a lottery.

[tamiller866]

I agree with you on the down and distance, but have you considered running a reverse? Rather than opposing a ban on internet gambling, we support it, with the minor condition that everything states have already authorized is grandfathered.

Then we get Harry Reid to insert a small IHA type clause allowing the state(s) that have passed i-poker bills to make compacts to serve other states, NV (and hopefully CA/NJ) become hubs, and all the other states just have to decide if/when they want a share of the revenue.

Remember, Nevada has single game sports betting even though there is a federal ban.

[DonkeyQuixote]

Originally Posted by tamiller866

I agree with you on the down and distance, but have you considered running a reverse? Rather than opposing a ban on internet gambling, we support it, with the minor condition that everything states have already authorized is grandfathered.

Then we get Harry Reid to insert a small IHA type clause allowing the state(s) that have passed i-poker bills to make compacts to serve other states, NV (and hopefully CA/NJ) become hubs, and all the other states just have to decide if/when they want a share of the revenue.

Remember, Nevada has single game sports betting even though there is a federal ban.

Hey, I am willing to punt and let the PPA "defense" take the field again ..... which they actually quite well on the Hill.

The issue on offense has always been one to advance on the State level on EVERY down.

The problem with your suggestion is that "interstate" player pools will almost certainly be a target of attacks in any federal carve-out. The State grandfather clause did not allow interstate transmission or taking of sports bets. So, no, I don't think a reverse is a good play to call.

[tamiller866]

All they would have to do is add a clause saying that if it's legal to wager on it in both States, then it's legal to wager on it between State's, which is precisely what they did with Interstate Horseracing.

Right now, people in States that don't even have Harseracing Tracks can place interstate wagers using the internet, so there is nothing stopping Congress from saying that States can no longer license new i-gaming, but any State that makes wagering on poker legal would be able to form revenue sharing compacts with NV (and any other State that pulls the trigger).

That's essentially what IGRA says, even State's whose constitution bars them from licensing gambling, are able to make revenue sharing agreements and derive revenue from Indian casinos.

So NV (NJ/CA) become the 'tribal lands' of internet poker, and the other states reach point of deposit style revenue sharing agreements, the conservative/family groups get their 'internet gambling prohibition' victory, and we (those in States that option in) get i-poker.

[Thew92]

The Texas GOP Convention FB page has now resorted to deleting comments made about poker and have banned those users from posting.

https://www.facebook.com/RPTcon?ref=pb

[LetsGambool]

Standard

[Thew92]

Originally Posted by LetsGambool

Standard

And of course our standard play back it to complain about censorship and freedom of speech.

[LetsGambool]

They'll ban that too at some point Im sure, we've seen it before. Im glad people let Texas know they were on notice, but if I was running that facebook page I wouldnt let it get facebook spammed indefinitely either.

Its censorship and annoying, but its not a freedom of speech issue.

[.isolated]

Originally Posted by Thew92

And of course our standard play back it to complain about censorship and freedom of speech.

And of course it won't get you anywhere.