Hi all,

I've hosted a weekly webcast over the past few years to help get out the message on poker advocacy. Please be sure to tune in to Poker Advocacy with Rich Muny, which airs live each Tuesday at 8 PM ET / 5 pm PT. The show features plenty of discussion about the Poker Legislation & NVG forums and the broader advocacy effort.

You can find information on the program at www.ontiltradio.com/ppa. Subscribe to free downloads on iTunes at http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/o...er/id502875902. Thanks! I hope you all find it interesting and informative.

Listen live at www.ontiltradio.com

On this week's Poker Advocacy with Rich Muny webcast, poker player, author, and publisher Mason Malmuth returned to the program to discuss the fight for poker, the presidential race, and all the latest at 2+2. You won't want to miss this!

- http://podcasts.ontiltradio.com/play...eb-16-2016.mp3
- https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/...cy/id502875902 (iTunes)

When talking about the presidential race there was lots of vague assumptions you made based on the ideology of candidates that I was wondering if i could get some clarification on. When you talk about those who legislate based on the "social good" when it came to the far-left, you said they would oppose gambling because of that? Correct me if I'm wrong but liberals who legislate based on the "social good" are in favor of legalizing gambling because individuals can go to regulated institutions to gamble as they choose as opposed to underground unregulated places where they don't have any laws and are vulnerable to be taken advantage of. I am under the assumption that those on the far-left would accept that gambling is a reality of our society whether they like it or not and the prohibition of gambling will only hurt those who will inevitably part-take in gambling even if it is not legalized and regulated. This seems like a more accurate assumption you could make in my opinion. And if you don't agree with this assumption, then why do countries in Europe who are considered much farther left than the U.S. have legalized i-poker and we don't? Also, any notion that someone like Ted Cruz who is a "strict constitutionalist" who may be opposed to I-poker personally but would leave the decision up to the states and wouldn't hurt future I-poker legislation is a falsehood to say the least. Last time i checked Ted Cruz was not a libertarian, and his non-factual interpretations of the constitution are simply just convenient subjective opinions that he makes in order to phrase his positions in a way that make them seem more plausible. Anyways I was just adding my 2 cents, but I think making any assumptions based on where someone may seem ideologically is going to be counter-intuitive to further I-poker initiatives in my opinion. But i can say this that we need people in office who will look at this issue from an intelluctual, realistic, and logical standpoint, and not the other way around.

I have to be honest, and I have said it before, I am all for The PPA's efforts; but it seems that there is still no united front for what poker players should be in favor of. Seemingly the idea of state by state regulation has been endorsed as the best we can do. What if "the best we can do" is not even worth the time and effort? Isn't I-poker legislation really an all or nothing situation for players? The time and effort needs to go towards an avenue which will have one outcome that all PLAYERS can benefit from and not being diluted into a million different battles and players don't benefit from any of them. I don't know if that is through the courts or federal legislation being pushed once again. I just think any real light at the end of this tunnel is soooo far in the future that the issue is irrelevant to many players. Any comment you would have on this would be nice, because I am quite confused on what actually all U.S. players should be endorsing at this point in terms of GOOD I-poker legislation that is near fruition. And just for the record I am not trying to be cynical, I think i am voicing the opinions of a lot of players who have just become indifferent to the situation because there is no proposed path to an outcome that is really any good for players in the near future. I suppose the time has passed for trying to pursue an ideal scenario which i understand, but is there any silver lining? I dont know i guess it is just frustrating for all the effort that is put into individual states and still not much traction and even if there is traction the outcome isnt too great for players anyways. Not to mention the fact we may never see legalized online poker in all 50 states. I guess that it just the times we live in.

Thank you for taking the time to listen to the webcast!

Yes, we made some vague assumptions. Like poker, this is a game of incomplete information.

Some are, but some are not. For example, former Rep. Barney Frank was a staunch backer of our right to play, while Sen. Dianne Feinstein is a staunch opponent. Many on the left in Congress are somewhere in between, but few are particularly vocal in their support.

The states' rights implications of RAWA make this more interesting, as many conservatives in Congress claim fidelity to this. We've seen many who don't support poker oppose RAWA on Tenth Amendment grounds.

Europe is completely different from the U.S. on issues of gaming and poker. I think a lot of that comes from our long history of religion-based gambling bans.

I don't know where he'll come down on this. We've seen many object strongly to usurping the states. For some, it's fidelity to the Constitution. For others, it's the fact that a strong federal government may affect other stuff they do care about. Regardless, some conservatives oppose RAWA and some cosponsor it. Again, we're dealing with incomplete information.

We can affect some elections, especially very close ones but, for the most part, we have to win over the lawmakers who are there, against a strong headwind of Sheldon Adelson, entrenched interests, and other barriers.

*** Poker Advocacy with Rich Muny webcast ***
*** Tuesday, February 23rd at 8 pm ET / 5 pm PT at www.ontiltradio.com ***

On tonight's show, poker histories, writer, and player Johnny Hughes returns to the webcast to discuss his new novel, "A Texas Beauty, Smart and Strong," and anything else on his mind. You won't want to miss this!

For more on Johnny's novel, be sure to visit www.johnnyhughes.com.

On this week's Poker Advocacy with Rich Muny webcast, Kevin Mathers returned to the webcast to discuss the American Poker Awards and the fight for poker. You won't want to miss this!

- http://podcasts.ontiltradio.com/play...Mar-1-2016.mp3
- https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/...cy/id502875902 (iTunes)

On this week's Poker Advocacy with Rich Muny webcast, PPA FL State Director Donna Blevins, activist Mike Exinger, activist James M. Ray and I discussed the presidential race, focusing on that evening’s primaries, and the fight for poker. You won't want to miss this!




- http://podcasts.ontiltradio.com/play...Mar-8-2016.mp3

- https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/...cy/id502875902 (iTunes)

On this week's Poker Advocacy with Rich Muny webcast, PPA MN State Director Mike Qualley, PPA CO State Director Robin Jones and I discussed the presidential race and the fight for poker. You won't want to miss this!

- http://podcasts.ontiltradio.com/play...ar-15-2016.mp3
- https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/...cy/id502875902 (iTunes)

*** Poker Advocacy with Rich Muny webcast ***
*** Tuesday, April 19th at 8 pm ET / 5 pm PT at www.ontiltradio.com ***

On tonight's show, WSOP Media Director & poker writer Nolan Dalla returns to the show for a discussion on the upcoming World Series of Poker, the presidential election, and the fight for poker. Please be sure to tune in!

On this week's Poker Advocacy with Rich Muny webcast, WSOP Media Director & poker writer Nolan Dalla returned to the show for a discussion on the upcoming World Series of Poker, the presidential election, and the fight for poker. Please be sure to check it out.

- http://podcasts.ontiltradio.com/play...pr-26-2016.mp3
- https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/...cy/id502875902 (iTunes)

On this week's Poker Advocacy with Rich Muny webcast, Libertarian Party presidential candidate Austin Petersen joined me for a discussion on his campaign for the presidency, Sheldon Adelson's pledge of $100M+ to GOP presumptive nominee Donald Trump's campaign and its implications regarding Adelson's lobbying for a shutdown of state-authorized poker websites, civil asset forfeiture, and other matters of liberty. This was followed with a poker panel chat featuring PPA MN State Director Mike Qualley and PA activist & poker coach Lucky Carmello. Please be sure to check it out!

- http://podcasts.ontiltradio.com/play...ay-24-2016.mp3
- https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/...cy/id502875902 (iTunes)