Of course, that's the ideal outcome. That's also probably a much harder vote to win than a vote on an amendment that says "hey, I am the head of the committee that wrote this bill and didnt mean this section to turn internet poker into a felony. Lets make a technical change".

The PPA told us to basically stop calling about the bill in order to make that technical correction happen. That makes it kind of hard to do anything tangible to support the Wallace amendment doesnt it?

So if we lose the vote on the Wallace amendment partly because the PPA called off the dogs, but we keep the offending language out of the bill, that's a good tradeoff IMO. That's the point I was trying to make. I will take a lower chance of the Wallace amendment passing for the certainty of the offending language being removed.

Not really. The letters and calls got there, and they made an impression. The legislature was on notice that this was not something to sneak in.

In poker terms, whoever sneaked the offending language into the bill overplayed his hand. We called the bluff on the turn, leaving our opponents pot committed. Sure, we could just check the river and win this hand without risking more. However, we're shortstacked nationally, and getting the most from this hand will really help our chip stack.

Wait, so we are risking allowing this language into the bill to pursue a skill amendment? Boy as a MA player I would disagree with that.

+1, Perma. The boon here would be tremendous. I'm glad we have a chance to take a shot at it.

No, we're not. This does nothing to affect the other. The technical corrections amendment package will still pick us up.

I guess my issue is I still have no idea what this technical corrections package is. If this is a freeroll, this is great, obviously lets take a shot at the skill amendment and I really think we should have been lobbying more strongly for it. If the language was out of the bill, we could have all supported the bill (which DeLeo and the House would have liked) and asked for the amendment to strengthen the bill IMO.

We're on the eve of the bill though, and the language is still in the bill. Last week's announcement made it seem like the language being struck was a done deal, but we still need to pass an amendment from Rep. Dempsey to get this language struck. So we need to win an up or down vote, on this amendment? Is this the technical corrections package?

I just feel in the dark about the whole process.

TE, Some of us don't understand the "technical corrections amendment" process. Does the "technical correction" require the House to vote for it, or is the language simply change before the house votes on any of the other amendments? If the members still need to vote for this "technical correction" then why tell everyone to stop calling their legislators "call off the dogs". It couldn't hurt if people would continue to write and call their state legislators, it might turn a no vote on the amendment to a yes vote.

It's a freeroll in the sense that nothing PPA is doing is impeding removal of the entire provision via the technical corrections package. Rather, we have a free shot at improving the bill.

True. Too bad tHe backers of the bill didn't see this earlier.

Nothing's stuck. The amendments go through this week, so we'll be done by Thursday.

This is good news but it's not enough. There are still many threats to the continuing legality of online poker in the US and some battles have already been lost (Washington). The way to fight this is to remember that poker is a popular game and such heavy-handed actions should not work in a democracy. Even the seemingly lost causes may be saved if poker players remain optimistic and persistent. Teach more people poker, discuss it on the radio, help your friends understand why this issue matters in general and the incredible hypocrisy (lotteries, casino interests etc.) behind it. For me, the idea that government would care or try to control what I do with my entertainment money seems repulsive. Perhaps most importantly, help people see the non-monetary benefits from playing poker, like discipline and flexible thinking. Poker is a hobby for me but chess is my biggest hobby. If poker can be viewed as a positive force in the same way chess is, all this legislation wouldn't stand a chance. The fact that it's played for money makes people blind to its qualities as a game and they need to be brought to the forefront.

To watch the House Session, http://masslegislature.tv/?l=hse_video starting in about 30 minutes. The bill to watch for is H. 4591.

Text of bill: http://www.mass.gov/legis/house/ht04591.pdf

List of amendments: http://www.mass.gov/legis/house/text..._bill_4591.pdf

So I think we all should be calling our legislators today. If we don't win this amendment, then MA will be criminalized while we stand silent. I know the PPA has said otherwise, but I dont want to be made into a criminal while I stood mute. I dont understand why we stopped calling while we need to win an amendment.

Its true that anything can happen in politics. But if the speaker of the MA House cannot get his own "technical corrections" amendment to pass regarding his own bill (an amendment which completely removes the offending section), then something really strange is afoot in the Commonwealth of MA.

Skallagrim

PS - no one is stopping you from calling. The PPA, based on assurances from the speaker and at his request, is simply not coordinating and encouraging phone calls.

Its not his amendment.

I think the problem really is a communication issue then (not directed at you, or TE as I know you are volunteers). I think the PPA employees have dropped the ball with MA members, and its not just my opinion as I have received PM's from other folks confused by what is going on.

I think so, what amendment should we be watching for? Is Amendment 7 a good one for us???

Amendment 7 is the first amendment that concerns our interests. It looks like amendment 6 has been combined with later amendments regarding the same issue (having a casino in Western Mass.)

Any other idea what other number amendments are important for us?

here is the full list http://www.mass.gov/legis/house/text..._bill_4591.pdf

216 of them, but I don't know which ones to root for.

If they're going in order the next amendment, #7, is the first one regarding the issue people in this forum care about. Others are mentioned in post 45 of this thread, along with one I forgot, amendment #62.

Been watching this for over the past hour or so. Anxious to see what happens with the next amendment. They've opposed every one so far it seems.

looks like they're skipping it.

Amendment #94 is part of a consolidating amendment, which included amendment #6.

Let's assume that after passing the House, this bill expanding legalized gaming is unfavorable to poker/internet poker. Would you suppose it can be defeated in the Senate?

Very, very unlikely. House has historically been the only anti-gaming body in MA due to an anti-gaming speaker.

The new speaker is pro-gaming and is trying to get a veto-proof majority to control the debate tih the Senate and Governor and make sure he can get slots at the track in his home district. The State Senate and Governor have both supported resort casinos in the past, but not slots at the track. If the bill fails after the House debate, that will be the reason but it is very unlikely. Speaker of the House is de facto head of the state in MA

No casinos.

http://www.masslive.com/news/index.s...efeats_pr.html

No, that was an amendment to require one casino to be located in Western MA. It was defeated. Casinos are still very much alive

Some of these amendments are hilarious.